text
stringlengths 4
2.78M
| meta
dict |
|---|---|
---
abstract: 'To study the singularities that appear in mean curvature flow, one must understand *self-shrinkers*, surfaces that shrink by dilations under mean curvature flow. The simplest examples of self-shrinkers are spheres and cylinders. In 1989, Angenent constructed the first nontrivial example of a self-shrinker, a torus. A key quantity in the study of the formation of singularities is the *entropy*, defined by Colding and Minicozzi based on work of Huisken. The values of the entropy of spheres and cylinders have explicit formulas, but there is no known formula for the entropy of the Angenent torus. In this work, we numerically estimate the entropy of the Angenent torus using the discrete Euler–Lagrange equations.'
address: 'Washington University in St. Louis'
author:
- 'Yakov Berchenko-Kogan'
bibliography:
- 'meancurvature.bib'
title: 'The entropy of the Angenent torus is approximately $1.85122$'
---
Introduction {#sec:intro}
============
Mean curvature flow is a well-studied geometric flow; see the survey paper [@cmp15]. Under mean curvature flow, a hypersurface $\Sigma\subset\mathbb R^n$ evolves in time in such a way as to decrease its area as quickly as possible. Some surfaces, such as spheres or cylinders, evolve under mean curvature flow by dilation; such surfaces are known as *self-shrinkers*. Self-shrinkers are key to understanding the singularities that develop under mean curvature flow: Just before a singularity forms, the surface resembles a self-shrinker near the singular point. Colding and Minicozzi proved in [@cm12] that for a generic singularity, the corresponding self-shrinker will be a sphere or a cylinder. However, other self-shrinkers are possible. Angenent proved the existence of the first nontrivial self-shrinker in [@a92]; it has since been named the *Angenent torus*. While Colding and Minicozzi’s result prohibits the Angenent torus from appearing in the limit for a generic singularity, for a generic finite-dimensional family of singularities, it is expected that nontrivial self-shrinkers such as the Angenent torus may appear.
To prove their result, Colding and Minicozzi defined a quantity called the *entropy* of a surface, based on Huisken’s $F$-functional [@h90]. For a self-shrinker, entropy remains constant during mean curvature flow; for any other surface, the entropy is monotonically decreasing. As such, the initial entropy of a surface limits the kinds of self-shrinkers that may appear at singularities as the surface evolves under mean curvature flow: such a limiting self-shrinker must have smaller entropy than that of the initial surface.
Self-shrinkers are critical points for the entropy. For a self-shrinker that will collapse to the origin after one unit of time, Colding and Minicozzi’s entropy coincides with Huisken’s $F$-functional, which for surfaces $\Sigma\subset\mathbb R^3$ is the weighted surface area $$\frac1{4\pi}\int_{\Sigma}e^{-{\left\lvert{x}\right\rvert}^2/4}\,d\text{Area}.$$ The Angenent torus is thus seen as a critical surface of this weighted area functional. The Angenent torus is rotationally symmetric about the $z$-axis, so we can understand it by understanding its cross-section, a closed curve $\gamma$ in the $(r,z)$-plane. After reducing by the rotational symmetry, the $F$-functional becomes the weighted length $$\frac12\int_\gamma re^{-(r^2+z^2)/4}\,d\text{Arclength}.$$ The cross-section of a rotationally symmetric self-shrinker is a critical curve for this weighted length funcional, or, equivalently, a geodesic with respect to the Riemannian metric $$\label{eq:g}
g = \frac14\left(r^2e^{-(r^2+z^2)/2}\right)(dr^2+dz^2).$$ Angenent proved the existence of his self-shrinking torus by showing that the plane with this metric had a closed geodesic. Computing the length of this geodesic gives the entropy of the Angenent torus, which, as described above, places a lower bound on the entropy of an initial surface that can develop an Angenent torus singularity.
To numerically compute the location of this geodesic in the plane in a way that will let us accurately measure its length, we use Lagrangian mechanics. The intuition for using mechanics to attack this problem is that if a particle is given some initial velocity, it will travel along a geodesic with constant speed. The length of the geodesic is simply the product of the particle’s speed and its travel time. With this approach, instead of seeking unparametrized closed curves that are critical points of length, we seek parametrized closed curves $q(t)$, $0\le t\le T$, with velocity $\dot q(t)$, that are critical points for the *action* $\mathfrak S(q)=\int_0^T\frac12{\left\lvert{\dot q}\right\rvert}^2\,dt$. Such critical curves will be geodesics parametrized by a constant multiple of arclength. In the 1960s and 1970s, numerical analysts developed *variational integrators*, a new class of methods for numerically computing trajectories in Lagrangian mechanics, with excellent theoretical properties, such as preservation of conserved quantities. See Marsden and West [@mw01] for a complete treatment. The key idea of this method is to discretize the action. Instead of seeking closed curves $q(t)$ that are critical points for the action $\mathfrak S(q)$, we instead seek discrete curves, that is, sequences of points $q_0,q_1,\dotsc,q_{N-1},q_N=q_0$ that are critical points for a *discrete action* $\mathfrak S_d(q_1,\dotsc,q_N)$. For a particular choice of $\mathfrak S_d$, called the *exact discrete action* and denoted $\mathfrak S_d^E$, a critical sequence $q_k$ for $\mathfrak S_d^E$ coincides with a critical curve $q$ for $\mathfrak S$ in the sense that the $q_k$ are equally spaced points on the curve $q$, and $\mathfrak S_d^E(q_1,\dotsc,q_N)=\mathfrak S(q)$. In practice, however, the exact discrete action cannot be computed numerically, so we instead work with a discrete action $\mathfrak S_d$ that approximates the exact discrete action $\mathfrak S_d^E$. We compute the critical discrete trajectory for $\mathfrak S_d$, giving us an approximation for the exact trajectory and the exact length.
In Figure \[fig:angenentcylindersphere\], we present the cross-section of the Angenent torus that we computed numerically with $2048$ points, with the cylinder and sphere for comparison. The entropy of the Angenent torus as estimated from the length of this curve is $1.8512186$, and numerical convergence evidence suggests that this value overestimates the true entropy by about $0.0000019$.
![Cross-sections of three self-shrinkers that become extinct in one unit of time: the Angenent torus, the cylinder, and the sphere.[]{data-label="fig:angenentcylindersphere"}](angenentcylindersphere.pdf)
Our results are consistent with work of Drugan and Nguyen [@dn18], who proved that the entropy of the Angenent torus is less than $2$, and with the work of Chopp [@c94], who numerically computed a graph of the Angenent torus cross-section using level set methods but did not provide its length. There are many directions in which to continue this work; see Section \[sec:futurework\].
Motivation: mean curvature flow
===============================
Mean curvature flow describes the evolution of a surface in an ambient manifold via the negative gradient flow of area. It describes, for example, the evolution of soap films. For the purposes of this exposition, we will restrict our attention to hypersurfaces $\Sigma\subset\mathbb R^{n+1}$. See the survey paper [@cmp15] for a more detailed treatment.
The *mean curvature* $H$ at a point $x$ on a surface $\Sigma\subset\mathbb R^{n+1}$ is the trace of the second fundamental form at $x$. Equivalently, the mean curvature is the sum of the principal curvatures of $\Sigma$ at $x$.
Note that in this convention we do not divide the sum of the principal curvatures by $n$ when computing the mean curvature, so it is more a curvature sum than a curvature mean. The sign convention for $H$ is such that the mean curvature of the sphere is positive.
A family of surfaces $\Sigma_t\subset\mathbb R^{n+1}$ is said to evolve by *mean curvature flow* if the points $x(t)\in\Sigma_t$ move with speed $H$ in the inward normal direction.
For closed surfaces, this flow will develop a singularity in finite time. For example, a round sphere of radius $r$ will shrink to a point in $\frac{r^2}{2n}$ units of time. The sphere is an example of a surface which evolves under mean curvature flow by dilations. Informally, one could call any such a surface a self-shrinker, but in the literature and in this article we fix the location of the singularity in space and time and use the term *self-shrinker* to refer to a surface that evolves under mean curvature by dilations about the origin and shrinks to a point after one unit of time.
A family of surfaces $\Sigma_t\subset\mathbb R^{n+1}$ for $t<0$ evolving under mean curvature flow is a *self-shrinker* if $$\Sigma_t=\sqrt{-t}\Sigma_{-1}.$$ We will also use the terminology *self-shrinker* for the surface $\Sigma_{-1}$ at time $-1$.
The $n$-dimensional sphere $S^n_{\sqrt{2n}}$ of radius $\sqrt{2n}$ is a self-shrinker, as is the plane $\mathbb R^n$. We also have self-shrinking cylinders $S^k_{\sqrt{2k}}\times\mathbb R^{n-k}$ for every $k$ in between. The earliest nontrivial example of a self-shrinker is a rotationally symmetric $S^1\times S^{n-1}$ proved to exist by Angenent in [@a92]. Since then, many other self-shrinkers have been found [@cmp15].
However, if we restrict our attention to self-shrinkers with $S^{n-1}$ rotational symmetry, Kleene and Møller [@km14] show that the sphere, the plane, the cylinder $\mathbb R\times S^{n-1}$, and the doughnut $S^1\times S^{n-1}$ are the only complete embedded self-shrinkers, with the caveat that they do not rule out the existence of additional doughnuts other than Angenent’s example.
Singularities of mean curvature flow are modeled by self-shrinkers, in the sense that if we take a general surface that develops a singularity as it evolves by mean curvature flow and zoom in at the singular point at just before the singular time, the surface we will see will be close to a self-shrinker. See [@cmp15] for a more thorough discussion of this topic.
Huisken [@h90] analysed the singularities of mean curvature flow using a monotonicity result for a Gaussian-weighted area called the $F$-functional.
For a surface $\Sigma\subset\mathbb R^{n+1}$, the *$F$-functional* $F(\Sigma)$ is the weighted area $$F(\Sigma)=(4\pi)^{-n/2}\int_\Sigma e^{-{\left\lvert{x}\right\rvert}^2/4}\,d\text{Area}.$$ We can, of course, also center the $F$-functional at a different point $x_0$ and time $t_0$ to define $$F_{x_0,t_0}(\Sigma)=(4\pi t_0)^{-n/2}\int_\Sigma e^{-{\left\lvert{x-x_0}\right\rvert}^2/(4t_0)}\,d\text{Area}.$$ With this notation, $F=F_{0,1}$.
One motivation for this definition is that the critical points of $F$ are self-shrinkers. That is, if we perturb a self-shrinker, the value of $F$ will remain constant to first order. If we translate and dilate a self-shrinker so that the flow becomes extinct at $x_0$ in time $t_0$, then it will be a critical point for $F_{x_0,t_0}$. The scaling factor $(4\pi)^{-n/2}$ is chosen so that the $F$-functional of a plane through the origin is one.
Colding and Minicozzi [@cm12] took this definition one step further and defined the entropy of a surface as the supremum of the $F$-functionals.
The *entropy* of a surface $\Sigma\subset\mathbb R^{n+1}$, denoted $\lambda(\Sigma)$, is the supremum $$\lambda(\Sigma)=\sup_{x_0,t_0}F_{x_0,t_0}(\Sigma).$$
The motivation for this definition is that the entropy is nonincreasing as a general surface evolves under mean curvature flow, and this remains true in the limit as we approach a singularity, in the sense that the self-shrinker that appears when we zoom in at the singular point just before the singular time must have an entropy that is less than or equal to the entropy of the initial surface. Again, see [@cmp15] for a more detailed exposition.
For a self-shrinker, $\lambda(\Sigma)=F(\Sigma)$. The Angenent torus, being a self-shrinker, is a critical point for $F$, and our task is to compute the corresponding critical value.
Background: the discrete Euler-Lagrange equations {#sec:del}
=================================================
In Lagrangian mechanics, we consider the motion of a particle in a configuration manifold $Q$. For our purposes, $Q$ will be the half-plane $\{(r,z)\mid r>0\}$. The physics of the system are described by a function $L\colon TQ\to\mathbb R$ called the *Lagrangian*, representing the kinetic energy minus the potential energy. In our case, our Lagrangian is the kinetic energy of a particle of unit mass, with no potential energy term. This Lagrangian is $$L(q,\dot q)=\tfrac12{\left\lVert{\dot q}\right\rVert}^2_g,$$ where $g$ is the Riemannian metric in . We then integrate the Lagrangian over a parametrized curve.
For a curve $q(t)$ parametrized by $t\in[0,T]$, the *action* $\mathfrak S(q)$ is defined to be $$\mathfrak S(q)=\int_0^TL(q,\dot q)\,dt.$$
The motivation for this definition is that the curves that describe the motion of a particle in this system are the critical points of $\mathfrak S$ with respect to variations that fix the endpoints. That is, if we perturb the critical curve while leaving the endpoints fixed, the value of $\mathfrak S$ should not change to first order. Such critical curves satisfy a system of differential equations called the Euler–Lagrange equations.
The *Euler–Lagrange equations* are $$\label{eq:el}
{\frac{d{}}{d{t}}}{\frac{\partial{L}}{\partial{\dot q}}}={\frac{\partial{L}}{\partial{q}}}.$$
For our choice of Lagrangian, solutions to the Euler–Lagrange equations are geodesics with respect to the Riemannian metric $g$, parametrized with constant speed with respect to $g$-arclength.
We now turn to the question of computing these solutions numerically. While one can certainly apply a standard ODE solver to the Euler–Lagrange equations, there are many advantages to the variational approach, such as preservation of conserved quantities. See the survey paper [@mw01] for a more thorough discussion.
The main idea of this approach is to discretize the action. Namely, we split the time interval $[0,T]$ into $N$ small equal time intervals $[t_{k-1},t_k]$ of length $\tau$, and write $$\mathfrak S(q)=\sum_{k=1}^N\int_{t_{k-1}}^{t_k}L(q,\dot q)\,dt.$$ We then approximate $\int_{t_{k-1}}^{t_k}L(q,\dot q)\,dt$ based on the location of the endpoints $q(t_{k-1})$ and $q(t_k)$.
A *discrete Lagrangian* is a function $L_d\colon Q\times Q\to\mathbb R$, chosen so that $$\int_{t_{k-1}}^{t_k}L(q,\dot q)\,dt\approx L_d\left(q(t_{k-1}), q(t_k)\right).$$
In our case, we will make a fairly standard choice of $L_d(q_0,q_1)$. Given a curve $q$ going from $q_0$ to $q_1$ in time $\tau$, we can approximate the position $q$ by the average position $\frac12(q_0+q_1)$, and we can approximate the velocity $\dot q$ by the average velocity $(q_1-q_0)/\tau$, giving us the discrete Lagrangian $$\label{eq:discreteLagrangian}
L_d(q_0,q_1)=\tau L\left(\frac{q_0+q_1}2,\frac{q_1-q_0}\tau\right).$$ We can then write the corresponding action.
For a sequence of points $q_0\dotsc,q_N$, the *discrete action* $\mathfrak S_d$ is the sum $$\mathfrak S_d(q_0,\dotsc,q_N)=\sum_{k=1}^NL_d(q_{k-1},q_k).$$
By design, if $q$ is a curve and we pick $q_k=q(t_k)$ to be equally spaced points on the curve, then $\mathfrak S_d(q_0,\dotsc,q_N)\approx\mathfrak S(q)$. Thinking of the sequence of points $q_0,\dotsc,q_N$ as a discrete curve, we proceed as in the continuous curve setting and seek a discrete curve that is a critical point for $\mathfrak S_d$ with respect to variations that fix the endpoints $q_0$ and $q_N$. A computation shows that such critical discrete curves satisfy a nonlinear system of equations called the discrete Euler–Lagrange equations.
The *discrete Euler–Lagrange equations* are $$\label{eq:del}
D_1L_d(q_{k-1},q_k)+D_0L_d(q_k,q_{k+1})=0,\qquad 1\le k\le N-1,$$ where $D_0L_d$ denotes the derivative of $L_d(q_0,q_1)$ with respect to the $q_0$ variable and $D_1L_d$ denotes the derivative of $L_d$ with respect to the $q_1$ variable. Equivalently, $D_0L_d$ is the gradient of the map $q_0\mapsto L_d(q_0,q_1)$, and $D_1L_d$ is the gradient of the map $q_1\mapsto L_d(q_0,q_1)$.
Because $\mathfrak S_d$ is an approximation for $\mathfrak S$, solutions to the discrete Euler–Lagrange equations will be approximations for solutions to the Euler–Lagrange equations, in the above sense. There is, however, a particular choice of discrete Lagrangian, called the exact discrete Lagrangian, such that solutions to the discrete Euler–Lagrange equations lie exactly on solutions to the Euler–Lagrange equations.
\[def:exactDiscreteLagrangian\] The *exact discrete Lagrangian* $L_d^E(q_0,q_1)$ for two nearby points $q_0$ and $q_1$ is defined by $$L_d^E(q_0,q_1)=\int_0^\tau L(q,\dot q)\,dt,$$ where $q$ is the solution to the Euler–Lagrange equations going from $q_0$ to $q_1$ in time $\tau$. We will call the corresponding discrete action the *exact discrete action* and denote it $\mathfrak S_d^E$.
For our situation, this curve $q$ is the constant-speed geodesic joining $q_0$ and $q_1$. Its speed is therefore $d(q_0,q_1)/\tau$, where $d$ denotes the distance with respect to the metric $g$. Thus, $L(q,\dot q)=\frac12\left(\frac{d(q_0,q_1)}{\tau}\right)^2$, constant in $t$, and so $L_d^E(q_0,q_1)=\tau L(q,\dot q)=\frac{d(q_0,q_1)^2}{2\tau}$.
Whereas the critical discrete curves for the discrete action $\mathfrak S_d$ lie approximately on the critical curves for the action $\mathfrak S$, the critical discrete curves $\{q_k\}$ for the exact discrete action $\mathfrak S_d^E$ lie *exactly* on the critical curves $q(t)$ for the action $\mathfrak S$, in the sense that $q_k=q(t_k)$. While the exact discrete Lagrangian $L_d^E$ generally cannot be computed numerically, one can estimate the accuracy of the trajectories obtained from a chosen discrete Lagrangian $L_d$ by estimating how close $L_d$ is to $L_d^E$. See [@mw01 Section 2.3].
Computational methods
=====================
Let $\Sigma\subset\mathbb R^3$ be a self-shrinker that is rotationally symmetric about the $z$-axis. As discussed in Section \[sec:intro\] and in [@a92; @dn18], the cross-section of $\Sigma$ is a geodesic in the $(r,z)$ half-plane with the Riemmanian metric $g$ given by . Figure \[fig:angenentcylindersphere\] illustrates three such geodesics, corresponding to the Angenent torus, the cylinder, and the sphere. As discussed in Section \[sec:del\], geodesic curves are the solutions to the Euler–Lagrange equations using the Lagrangian $L(q,\dot q)=\frac12{\left\lVert{\dot q}\right\rVert}^2_g$. In our numerical analysis, we construct discrete geodesics, that is, sequences of points $q_0,\dotsc,q_N$ in the $(r,z)$ half-plane that approximate the geodesic curves. We do so by solving the discrete Euler–Lagrange equations with the discrete Lagrangian in . Since the path along which a free particle travels does not change if its velocity is scaled, the choice of time step $\tau$ in will not affect the discrete trajectories. Thus, for simplicity, we set $\tau=1$.
As with differential equations, to solve the discrete Euler–Lagrange equations, we must specify boundary conditions or initial conditions. We will make use of three such setups.
- We can fix the endpoints $q_0$ and $q_N$ and solve for the discrete geodesic joining them. That is, we can solve the system of $N-1$ vector equations $$D_1L_d(q_{k-1},q_k)+D_0L_d(q_k,q_{k+1})=0,\qquad 1\le k\le N-1,\label{eq:open}$$ for the $N-1$ vectors $q_1,\dotsc,q_{N-1}$.
- We can solve for a closed geodesic by setting $q_0=q_N$, $q_1=q_{N+1}$ and solving the system of $N$ vector equations $$D_1L_d(q_{k-1},q_k)+D_0L_d(q_k,q_{k+1})=0,\qquad 1\le k\le N,\label{eq:closed}$$ for the $N$ vectors $q_1,\dotsc,q_N$.
Note that this system of equations must be degenerate because a closed geodesic can always be reparametrized by moving the starting point; that is, solutions are not isolated and instead come in one-parameter families. However, this degeneracy does not appear to cause any difficulties.
- We can specify two initial points, $q_0$ and $q_1$. Then, given $q_{k-1}$ and $q_k$, we can recursively solve $$D_1L_d(q_{k-1},q_k)+D_0L_d(q_k,q_{k+1})=0,\qquad 1\le k\label{eq:shoot}$$ for $q_{k+1}$. Doing so corresponds to setting an initial position of $(q_0+q_1)/2$ and an initial velocity of $q_1-q_0$, and then computing that geodesic forward in time. Unlike the previous two procedures, this procedure is fast, as it does not require solving a large system of equations.
To find the cross-section of the Angenent torus, we solved the system for a closed geodesic using SciPy’s `fsolve` routine for solving a nonlinear system of equations. To supply a starting estimate for the closed geodesic required by `fsolve`, we iteratively solved for an open geodesic with initial data $q_0$ and $q_1$ chosen to be close enough to points on a closed trajectory. Specifically, we chose $q_0=(3.3, -8.5/N)$ and $q_1=(3.3, 8.5/N)$. To find these values, we first experimentally sought a value of $r$ so that a discrete geodesic with initial position at $(r,0)$ and vertical initial velocity appeared to pass by close to its starting point after one time around. Then, we determined the appropriate Euclidean initial speed so that the discrete geodesic completed approximately one cycle after $N$ iterations of . See Figure \[fig:angenent2048withInitialGuess\] for a plot of the open geodesic used as our starting estimate alongside the closed geodesic found using that starting estimate.
![The cross-section of the Angenent torus (solid line), computed using $2048$ points, along with the open geodesic (dashed line) used as the starting estimate for the nonlinear solver. Note that the starting estimate trajectory is off from the correct $r$-intercept, and note that it stops slightly short of making it all the way around.[]{data-label="fig:angenent2048withInitialGuess"}](angenent2048withInitialGuess.pdf)
To compute the entropy of the Angenent torus, that is, the length of this geodesic, we estimated the distance $d(q_{k-1},q_k)$ between two consecutive points $q_{k-1}$ and $q_k$. Let $g_{\text{mid}}$ be the value of the metric $g$ at the Euclidean midpoint $(q_{k-1}+q_k)/2$ of these two points. Then we can estimate $$d(q_{k-1},q_k)\approx{\left\lVert{q_k-q_{k-1}}\right\rVert}_{g_{\text{mid}}}.$$ Of course, ${\left\lVert{q_k-q_{k-1}}\right\rVert}_{g_{\text{mid}}}$ is precisely the same as $\sqrt{2\tau L_d(q_{k-1},q_k)}$. Indeed, from the discussion following Definition \[def:exactDiscreteLagrangian\], we have that $$\frac{d(q_{k-1},q_k)^2}{2\tau}=L_d^E(q_{k-1},q_k)\approx L_d(q_{k-1},q_k).$$ Recall that we can set $\tau=1$ for simplicity. Thus, once we have our discrete closed geodesic $q_0,q_1,\dotsc,q_N=q_0$, we can estimate the entropy of the Angenent torus by computing $$\lambda(\text{Angenent torus})\approx\sum_{k=1}^N\sqrt{2L_d(q_{k-1},q_k)}.$$
Results
=======
![The cross-section of the Angenent torus. The plotted curve was computed using $2048$ points, but, at the resolution of this page, the curves computed using $128$, $256$, $512$, $1024$, and $2048$ points would all appear identical.[]{data-label="fig:angenent2048"}](angenent2048.pdf)
Using $N=128$ points was sufficient for this method to successfully find a closed discrete geodesic. We also performed this computation using $256$, $512$, $1024$, and $2048$ points. See Figure \[fig:angenent2048\] for the result. The torus crosses $z=0$ at $r=0.4371$ and at $r=3.3147$. It reaches a maximum $z$-value at $(r,z)=(2.05, 0.92172)$.
For each of these values of the number of points $N$, we used the closed discrete geodesic we found to estimate the entropy of the Angenent torus. The results are plotted in Figure \[fig:Fvalues\]. All five values are just above $1.851$. The observed rate of convergence suggests that our estimates for the entropy converge quadratically. That is, as the number of points doubles, the accuracy of the estimate appears to improve by a factor of four, which is consistent with [@mw01 Example 2.3.2]. See Figure \[fig:FvaluesLog\]. Our most accurate estimate for the entropy, using $2048$ points, is $1.8512186$, and this numerical error analysis suggests that it overestimates the true value by about $0.0000019$.
![A log-log plot of the estimated error in the entropy value versus the number of points on the trajectory. The slope of the fit line is $-1.998$, suggesting a quadratic rate of convergence.[]{data-label="fig:FvaluesLog"}](Fvalues.pdf)
![A log-log plot of the estimated error in the entropy value versus the number of points on the trajectory. The slope of the fit line is $-1.998$, suggesting a quadratic rate of convergence.[]{data-label="fig:FvaluesLog"}](FvaluesLog.pdf)
We also applied our method to the sphere and the cylinder, whose entropy values were computed by Stone in [@s94]. Using $N=256$ points, we estimated the entropy of the sphere to be $1.471528$, whereas the true value is $\frac4e\approx 1.471518$. Using $N=1024$ points, we estimated the entropy of the cylinder to be $1.5200$, whereas the true value is $\sqrt{\frac{2\pi}e}\approx1.5203$. Neither of these cross-sections are closed curves in the $(r,z)$ half-plane, so we specified boundary conditions, solving Equations instead of Equations . For the sphere, we specified boundary conditions on the $z$-axis. For the cylinder, we specified boundary conditions at $z=\pm\infty$. Note that the metric $g$ goes to zero at the $z$-axis and at infinity. Thus, near the $z$-axis or near infinity, changes in the discrete curve have only a very small effect on the curve’s length, and hence only a very small effect on the value of the discrete action. As a consequence, we saw a numerical loss of accuracy in the computed discrete geodesics as they approached the $z$-axis or infinity, but this loss of accuracy did not affect our estimates for the geodesics’ length. We do not encounter these issues with the Angenent torus, as its cross-section stays away from the $z$-axis and from infinity.
To place our numerical result of $1.85$ in context, we present it alongside the entropy values of the sphere and the cylinder computed by Stone [@s94]. $$\begin{aligned}
\lambda(\mathbb R^2)&=1,\\
\lambda(S^2)&\approx1.47,\\
\lambda(S^1\times\mathbb R)&\approx1.52,\\
\lambda(\text{Angenent torus})&\approx1.85.\end{aligned}$$ Thus, the entropy of the Angenent torus is larger than that of the cylinder, as we expect from the fact that we can perturb the Angenent torus to a surface that develops a cylindrical singularity under mean curvature flow. We also see that the entropy of the Angenent torus is smaller than that of two planes, as we know from [@dn18].
Future work {#sec:futurework}
===========
There are several further directions for this work.
In this paper, we consider the two-dimensional Angenent torus, but Angenent’s work applies in any dimension. By adjusting the metric $g$ appropriately, a geodesic in the $(r,z)$ half-plane will give the cross-section of a self-shrinking surface $S^1\times S^{n-1}\subset\mathbb R^{n+1}$. What are the entropies of these surfaces? What value does the entropy approach as $n$ becomes large?
An important question in the study of self-shrinkers is their index. Generic perturbations of a self-shrinker will have larger entropy, but if we perturb it in particular ways, the entropy may decrease. The *index* of a self-shrinker is the dimension of this space of perturbations that decrease the entropy. Work of Liu [@l16] shows that the index of the Angenent torus is at least three, but its exact value is unknown.
This question is amenable to numerical experimentation. The Hessian of the discrete action at the critical curve is a finite-dimensional matrix, and the eigenvectors of this matrix with negative eigenvalues represent perturbations of the cross-section that decrease the entropy, once we take dilations and translations into account. These perturbations of the cross-section yield rotationally symmetric perturbations of the Angenent torus, but one can also use perturbations of the cross-section to understand non-rotationally symmetric perturbations by making use of a result of Liu [@l16] that says that it suffices to consider perturbations of the torus of the form $ue^{ik\theta}$, where $u$ is rotationally symmetric.
In this article, we numerically assessed the accuracy of our value for the entropy by looking at its rate of convergence as the number of points on the trajectory grows. This evidence suggests that our value is within $2\times10^{-6}$ of the true value. One would like to rigorously prove such an error bound. One approach would be to first bound the $C^1$ difference between the discrete Lagrangian and the exact discrete Lagrangian from Definition \[def:exactDiscreteLagrangian\]. At its core, this step amounts to understanding how well the distance between two nearby points with respect to $g$ is approximated by the Euclidean distance times the conformal factor. Then, using the Hessian of the discrete action, one could bound how far the critical curve and critical value can move when the discrete action is replaced by the exact discrete action.
Acknowledgements
================
I would like to thank Jacob Bernstein for proposing this problem at the Geometric Analysis Conference at Rutgers. I would also like to thank Bill Minicozzi and Ari Stern for their comments on this work.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: |
We deal with the following closely related problems: (i) For a germ of a reduced plane analytic curve, what is the minimal degree of an algebraic curve with a singular point analytically equivalent (isomorphic) to the given one? (ii) For a germ of a holomorphic function in two variables with an isolated critical point, what is the minimal degree of a polynomial, equivalent to the given function up to a local holomorphic coordinate change? Classically known estimates for such a degree $d$ in these questions are $\sqrt{\mu}+1\le d\le \mu+1$, where $\mu$ is the Milnor number. Our result in both the problems is $d\le
a\sqrt{\mu}$ with an absolute constant $a$. As a corollary, we obtain asymptotically proper sufficient conditions for the existence of algebraic curves with prescribed singularities on smooth algebraic surfaces.
author:
- |
E. Shustin[^1] [^2]\
School of Mathematical Sciences\
Tel Aviv University\
Ramat Aviv, 69978 Tel Aviv, Israel\
E-mail: [email protected]
title: Analytic order of singular and critical points
---
Introduction {#introduction .unnumbered}
============
We work with algebraic curves, hypersurfaces, functions over the complex field ${{\mathbb C}}$, though main results hold for any algebraically closed field of characteristic $0$ by the Lefschetz principle.
[**Statement of the problem and formulation of main results**]{}. A classical question is how many and what types of singular points can occur on a plane algebraic curve of a given degree. The well-known bound $$n\le\frac{(d-1)(d-2)}{2}$$ is necessary and sufficient for the existence of an irreducible plane curve of degree $d$ with $n$ nodes [@Se]. Even the case of cusps appears to be much more difficult (see [@Hi; @HI; @Sh1]), so that one cannot expect a complete answer. However, we can ask for a reasonable sufficient existence conditions which cover arbitrary degrees and singularities. Namely, the inequalities $$\mu_0\le(d-1)^2,\quad{{\delta}}_0\le\frac{(d-1)(d-2)}{2}$$ are necessary for the existence of an irreducible plane curve of degree $d$ with given singularities having the total Milnor number $\mu_0$ and the total ${{\delta}}$-invariant ${{\delta}}_0$. The main result of [@GLS] (refined later in [@Lo]) states that the condition $$\mu_0\le\frac{1}{46}(d+2)^2\label{e90}$$ is sufficient for the existence of an irreducible plane curve of degree $d$ with given singularities prescribed up to [*topological*]{} equivalence. Asymptotically it coincides with the necessary condition up to a constant factor, and, thus, is called [*asymptotically proper*]{}.
However, (\[e90\]) does not apply to singularities defined up to [*analytic*]{} equivalence[^3]. Our first result (Theorem \[t3\] and Remark \[r2\], section \[sec6\]) is that the inequality $$\mu_0\le\frac{1}{9}(d^2-2d+3)$$ is sufficient for the existence of an irreducible plane curve of degree $d$ with arbitrary singularities prescribed up to [*analytic*]{} equivalence and with the total Milnor number $\mu_0$. This not only covers a wider range than (\[e90\]), but is concerned with a stronger equivalence relation for singular points. In the case of one singularity represented by a curve germ $(C,z)$ we estimate the [*analytic order*]{} $d(C,z)$ of this germ, i.e., the minimal degree of a plane curve having a singular point analytically equivalent to $(C,z)$, as $$d(C,z)\le 3\sqrt{\mu(C,z)}-1$$ (Theorem \[t2\] and Remark \[r2\], section \[sec6\]). A closely related question: given a germ of a holomorphic function $f:({{\mathbb C}}^2,0)\to({{\mathbb C}},0)$ with an isolated critical point, what is the [*analytic order*]{} $d(f)$ of this germ, i.e., the minimal degree of a polynomial equivalent to $f$ up to a local holomorphic coordinate change (so-called [*right*]{} equivalence)? We refine the classical bounds $$\sqrt{\mu(f)}+1\le d(f)\le\mu(f)+1$$ with our upper bound $$d(f)<4\sqrt{\mu(f)}-1$$ (Theorem \[t5\], section \[sec3\]).
These questions can be generalized in two directions. First, one can look for curves with prescribed singularities in given linear systems on smooth algebraic surfaces. We provide a sufficient numerical condition for the existence of an irreducible curve with singularities prescribed up to analytic equivalence in a given linear system on a smooth algebraic surface (Theorem \[t4\], section \[sec4\]). It is stronger than a similar sufficient existence condition which was found in [@KT] and concerned only the topological equivalence of singular points. Another way is a higher-dimensional generalization. For example, for holomorphic function germs $f:({{\mathbb C}}^n,0)\to({{\mathbb C}},0)$, it is known that $$\sqrt[n]{\mu(f)}+1\le d(f)\le\mu(f)+1\ .$$ We conjecture that $$d(f)\le a_n\sqrt[n]{\mu(f)}$$ with $a_n>0$ depending only on $n$, and we prove this for germs of type $A_k$, $k\ge 1$ (Theorem \[t6\], section \[sec7\]).
[**Idea of the proof**]{}. Similarly to [@GLS; @Sh2] we introduce certain zero-dimensional schemes $Z\subset{{\mathbb P}}^2$ associated with singular and critical points, whose degree (length) is bounded by a linear function of the (total) Milnor number, and such that, for $$d=\min\{n\ge 1\ :\
H^1({{\mathbb P}}^2,{{\cal J}}_Z(n))=0\},\quad{{\cal J}}_Z={{\operatorname{Ker}}}\left(
{{\cal O}}_{{{\mathbb P}}^2}\to{{\cal O}}_Z\right)\ ,$$ there is a curve (polynomial) of degree $d$ with singular (critical) points of given types (Lemmas \[l5\](2), section \[secnew1\], Lemma \[l8\], section \[secnew2\],and proof of Theorem \[t5\], section \[sec3\]). In principle, $d$ may be as large as $\deg
Z-1$. We, however, can choose $Z$ to be [*generic*]{} in ${{\operatorname{Iso}}}(Z)$, the set of zero-dimensional schemes isomorphic to $Z$ as subschemes of ${{\mathbb P}}^2$, and then establish our principal bound (Proposition \[p3\], section \[sec5\]) $$d<\frac{4}{\sqrt{3}}\sqrt{\deg Z}-2\quad\text{as}\quad
\deg Z>2\ ,\label{enew1}$$ which provides the main estimates for the analytic order of a singular or critical point.
In [@GLS] an upper bound like (\[enew1\]) is obtained for irreducible zero-dimensional schemes of cluster type, generic in their deformation class (which can be rather larger than the isomorphism class). The proof was based on the so-called “Horace method" suggested by Hirschowitz [@H]. It consists in an inductive procedure, where on each step one specializes a zero-dimensional scheme (in its deformation class) on a given line, then passes to the residue scheme. However, this approach fails in our situation. The main obstacle (besides many technical ones) is that, starting with a zero-dimensional scheme $Z$ generic in ${{\operatorname{Iso}}}(Z)$, we have to specialize it in certain way, and then obtain a residue scheme which is no longer generic in its isomorphism class, thus, induction assumption does not apply.
To obtain (\[enew1\]), we exploit a different idea, which is similar in a sense to that in [@Xu1], where $h^1$-vanishing for some zero-dimensional schemes in the plane is deduced from the ampleness of some divisors of the blown-up plane by Kodaira’s theorem. Namely, we start with estimating the minimal degree of a curve, containing a scheme $Z$ generic in ${{\operatorname{Iso}}}(Z)$, from below by $\sqrt{\deg Z}/2$ (Proposition \[p1\], section \[sec5\]). For, we observe that, deforming $Z$ in ${{\operatorname{Iso}}}(Z)$ so that the curve of minimal degree through the scheme changes, one obtains that either an intersection of $Z$ with a close element of ${{\operatorname{Iso}}}(Z)$ is of a (relatively) large length, or $Z$ determines a singularity with large invariants so that the curves through close schemes have many intersections in neighborhood of singularities, and then the desired estimate comes from Bézout’s theorem. A combination of such arguments can be found in [@Xu1] when zero-dimensional schemes define ordinary singular points; in general case we use estimates from [@GS]. Next, instead of exploring ampleness which seems to be not easy to apply in our problem, we use the Castelnuovo function theory (see [@D; @GLS1]). The latter argument appears to be quite simple and transparent. The graph of the (positive) Castelnuovo function of a zero-dimensional scheme $Z$ has width $d-1$, where $d$ is from (\[enew1\]), its height equals the minimal degree of a curve through $Z$, which is $\sim\sqrt{\deg Z}$, and the area of its convex hull is $\deg Z$. Thus, one obtains $d\sim\sqrt{\deg Z}$ when getting rid of long horizontal segments of the graph. The latter can be done by Davis’ lemma [@D] (see details in the proof of Proposition \[p3\], section \[sec5\], and in [@GLS1]).
Finally, we notice that one could similarly treat zero-dimensional schemes $Z\subset{{\mathbb P}}^n$, $n\ge 3$. Indeed, it is not difficult to show that the minimal degree of a hypersurface through a scheme $Z$ generic in ${{\operatorname{Iso}}}(Z)$ is $\sim\sqrt[n]{\deg Z}$. However, the lack of an appropriate Castelnuovo function theory prevents to make step to $h^1$-vanishing bounds.
One may ask what is the minimal possible coefficient of $\sqrt{\deg Z}$ in (\[enew1\]). An example of two “fat"[^4] points of equal multiplicities shows that it cannot be less than $2$ which is close to our value $4/\sqrt{3}=2.30...$
The Harbourne-Hirschowitz conjecture [@H] (see a survey and bibliography in [@CM]) states that, for the scheme $Z$ of “fat" points in general position in the plane, $h^1({{\mathbb P}}^2,{{\cal J}}_Z(d))=0$ as far as $h^0({{\mathbb P}}^2,{{\cal J}}_Z(d))\ge 0$ and $d$ is greater or equal to the sum of any three multiplicities, i.e., $d\approx\sqrt{2\deg Z}$ in (\[enew1\]). It is not clear what should be an analogue of this conjecture for arbitrary schemes if any. A reasonable conjecture can be an analogue of the Alexander-Hirschowitz theorem [@AH]: for any $k\ge 1$ there exists $N(k)\ge 1$ such that $h^1({{\mathbb P}}^2,{{\cal J}}_Z(d))=0$, provided, $d\ge N(k)$ and $h^0({{\mathbb P}}^2,{{\cal J}}_Z(d))\ge 0$, for any scheme $Z\subset{{\mathbb P}}^2$ with irreducible components of length $\le k$ and which is generic in ${{\operatorname{Iso}}}(Z)$.
[**Acknowledgements.**]{} I would like to thank G.-M. Greuel and C. Lossen for very useful remarks and comments which allowed me to correct mistakes and improve the presentation.
Zero-dimensional schemes associated with singular and critical points
=====================================================================
Zero-dimensional schemes: cluster schemes, numerical invariants, deformation and isomorphism classes
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Throughout the paper, we work with zero-dimensional schemes $Z$ that are contained in a smooth algebraic surface ${{\Sigma}}$. The corresponding ideal sheaves will be denoted by ${{\cal J}}_{Z/{{\Sigma}}}\subset{{\cal O}}_{{{\Sigma}}}$. Moreover, we denote $$\deg Z=\sum_z\dim_{{\mathbb C}}\hat{{\cal O}}_{{{\Sigma}},z}/({{\cal J}}_{Z/{{\Sigma}}})_z\,, \qquad {{\operatorname{mt}}}(Z,z)=\max
\left\{n\in
{{\mathbb Z}}\ :\ ({{\cal J}}_{Z/{{\Sigma}}})_z\subset {{\mathfrak m}}_z^n \right\}\,,$$ with $\hat{{\cal O}}_{{{\Sigma}},z}$ the analytic local ring at $z$ and ${{\mathfrak m}}_z\subset\hat{{\cal O}}_{{{\Sigma}},z}$ the maximal ideal.
Let $z$ be an isolated singular point of an algebraic curve $C
\subset{{\Sigma}}$. Denote by $T^{\infty}(C,z)$ the complete (infinite) embedded resolution tree of the singular point $(C,z)$. The root vertex of $T^{\infty}(C,z)$ is $z$. Among the other vertices of $T^{\infty}(C,z)$ there are finitely many which are not nodes of the union of the exceptional locus with the corresponding strict transform of $(C,z)$. All these vertices of $T^{\infty}(C,z)$ together with $z$ are called [*essential infinitely near points*]{} of $(C,z)$. They are vertices of a subtree $T^*(C,z)\subset T^{\infty}(C,z)$.
Define the [*multiplicity*]{} of $C$ at $z$ as $${{\operatorname{mt}}}(C,z)=\max\{n\ge 0\ :\ C\in{{\mathfrak m}}_z^n\}\ .$$ Correspondingly, for any vertex $q\in T^{\infty}(C,z)$, by the multiplicity ${{\operatorname{mt}}}(C,q)$ of $C$ at $q$ we mean the multiplicity of the respective strict transform of $C$ at $q$. For example, $${{\operatorname{mt}}}(C,q)=1,\quad q\in T^{\infty}(C,z)\backslash T^*(C,z)\ .$$
Given a finite subtree $T\subset T^{\infty}(C,z)$ such that $T\supset T^*(C,z)$, we define a [*zero-dimensional cluster scheme*]{} $Z=Z(T)$ by the ideal $I(Z)\subset\hat{{\cal O}}_{{{\Sigma}},z}$ generated by all germs $f\in\hat{{\cal O}}_{{{\Sigma}},z}$ satisfying $${{\operatorname{mt}}}(f,q)={{\operatorname{mt}}}(C,q)\stackrel{\text{\rm def}}{=}{{\operatorname{mt}}}(Z,q),\quad q\in T\ .$$ Such schemes were introduced in [@GLS] as “generalized singularity schemes". The above generators $f$ of the ideal $I(Z)$ are called generic elements of $I(Z)$.
\[l3\] [([@GLS], Lemma 2.4)]{} (1) The vertices of $T=T(Z)$ form the base point set of the ideal $I(Z)$.
\(2) Almost all germs $f\in I(Z)$ are generic.
A reducible zero-dimensional scheme $Z\subset{{\Sigma}}$, concentrated at points $z_1,...,z_p$, whose irreducible components $Z_{z_1},...,Z_{z_p}$ are cluster schemes, is called a cluster scheme as well, and $T(Z)$ is defined as the disjoint union of the trees $T(Z_{z_i})$, $i=1,...,p$.
Let $Z$ be an arbitrary irreducible zero-dimensional scheme in ${{\mathbb P}}^2$. There exists a unique maximal cluster subscheme $Z_{cl}\subset Z$. Namely, $T(Z_{cl})$ is the tree of infinitely near base points of the ideal $I(Z)$, and ${{\operatorname{mt}}}(Z_{cl},q)$, $q\in
T(Z_{cl})$, are the corresponding multiplicities of a generic element of $I(Z)$; more precisely, a generic element in the linear space spanned by (finitely many) generators of $I(Z)$. If $Z$ is reducible, then $Z_{cl}$ is the union of the maximal cluster subschemes of the components of $Z$.
Put $$M_2(Z)=\sum_{q\in T(Z_{cl})}({{\operatorname{mt}}}(Z_{cl},q))^2\ .$$ We claim that $$\deg Z\le M_2(Z)=\deg Z_{cl}+{{\delta}}\ ,\label{e38}$$ where ${{\delta}}$ is the ${{\delta}}$-invariant of a generic member of $I(Z)$. The equality in (\[e38\]) follows from the formulas in [@GLS], Lemma 2.6. For the inequality suppose that $Z$ is concentrated at point $z$. Then take two distinct generic elements $f,g\in I(Z)$, and obtain $$Z\subset f\cap
g\quad\Longrightarrow\quad \deg Z\le(f\cdot g)_z=\sum_{q\in
T(Z_{cl})}({{\operatorname{mt}}}(Z_{cl},q))^2=M_2(Z) \ .$$ Note that (\[e38\]) implies $$M_2(Z)<2\cdot\deg Z\ .\label{e73}$$
For a zero-dimensional scheme $Z$ with $p$ irreducible components, its isomorphism class ${{\operatorname{Iso}}}(Z)$ is fibred over the space of $p$-tuples $(z_1,...,z_p)\in({{\mathbb P}}^2)^p$ with fibre being an orbit of the action of the group $\prod_{i=1}^p{{\operatorname{Aut}}}(\hat{{\cal O}}_{{{\mathbb P}}^2,z_i}/{{\mathfrak m}}_{z_i}^n)$, where $n$ is sufficiently large. If $Z$ is a cluster scheme then one can naturally define the set ${{\operatorname{Def}}}(Z)$ of schemes $Z'\subset{{\mathbb P}}^2$, deformation equivalent to $Z$. This is a smooth irreducible quasiprojective variety [@GLS1], section 2. Clearly, ${{\operatorname{Def}}}(Z)\supset{{\operatorname{Iso}}}(Z)$.
A zero-dimensional scheme is called [*nonsingular*]{}, if the generic elements of the ideals of its components are nonsingular, and is called [*singular*]{} otherwise. We notice that a nonsingular zero-dimensional scheme is always a cluster scheme.
Zero-dimensional schemes associated with topological types of singular points {#secnew1}
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Let $z$ be an isolated singular point of a curve $C\subset{{\Sigma}}$. The [*equisingularity ideal*]{} introduced in [@Wa] (see also [@DH; @GL; @GLS; @GLS1; @Sh]) is defined as $$I^{es}(C,z)\,:=\,\bigl\{\, g\in \hat{{\cal O}}_{{{\Sigma}},z}\ :\ f+\varepsilon g \text{
is equisingular over Spec}\,({{\mathbb C}}[\varepsilon]/\varepsilon^2)\, \bigr\}\ ,$$ where $f\in\hat{{\cal O}}_{{{\Sigma}},z}$ is a germ induced by $C$. The zero-dimensional scheme defined by $I^{es}(C,z)$ is denoted by $Z^{es}(C,z)$.
The notion of the cluster scheme directly relates to the topological equivalence of germs. Namely, [@GLS], Lemma 2.4, implies
\[l4\] For any irreducible deformation equivalent cluster schemes $Z$ and $Z'$, generic elements $f\in I(Z)$, $f'\in I(Z')$ are topologically equivalent.
Let $(C,z)\subset({{\mathbb P}}^2,z)$ be a reduced curve germ. We associate three zero-dimensional schemes with it (cf. [@GLS]):
- $Z^s(C,z)$, the cluster scheme defined by the germ $(C,z)$ and the tree of essential point $T^*(C,z)$;
- $Z^s_1(C,z)=Z^s(\widetilde C,z)$, the cluster scheme defined by the germ $(LC,z)$, where $L$ is a straight line through $z$ and transverse to $C$.
The importance of these schemes arises from
\[l5\] (1) The scheme $Z^s(C,z)$ is minimal among the zero-dimensional schemes $Z$ such that almost all germs $f\in I(Z)$ are topologically equivalent to $(C,z)$.
\(2) Let some zero-dimensional scheme $Z$ such that $z\not\in Z$, satisfy $$H^1({{\cal J}}_{Z^s_1(C,z)\cup Z/{{\mathbb P}}^2}(d))=0\ .\label{e37}$$ Then there exist $D\in |{{\cal J}}_{Z^s(C,z)\cup Z/{{\mathbb P}}^2}(d)|$ such that $(D,z)$ is topologically equivalent to $(C,z)$. Moreover, these curves $D$ form a dense open subset in $|{{\cal J}}_{Z^s(C,z)\cup
Z/{{\mathbb P}}^2}(d)|$.
Clearly $Z^s(C,z)\supset Z^{es}(C,z)$. Moreover, it can be shown that $Z^s(C,z)$ is the minimal cluster scheme containing $Z^{es}(C,z)$.
[*Proof*]{}. The first statement reflects the fact that the tree of essential infinitely near points of $(C,z)$ and multiplicities of $C$ at them (uniquely) determine the topological type of $(C,z)$.
The second statement can be proven in the same way as it is done in Step 1 of the proof of Lemma 5.8 in [@GLS], where $Z$ is supposed to be empty, $Z_1^S(C,z)$ is denoted by $\widetilde X$, and the required $h^1$-vanishing condition is found in (5.12). Note only that the scheme $X'$, used in this proof, is a subscheme of $\widetilde X$; hence the $h^1$-vanishing for $X'$ mentioned in (5.12) follows from that for $\widetilde X=Z_1^s(C,z)$. [$\Box$]{}
Zero-dimensional schemes associated with analytic types of singular points {#secnew2}
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the previous notation, we introduce the zero-dimensional scheme $Z^{ea}(C,z)$ defined by the [*Tjurina ideal*]{} $$I^{ea}(C,z)\,:=\, \langle\, f, f_x,
f_y\,\rangle \,\subset\,
\hat{{\cal O}}_{{{\Sigma}},z}\,,$$ where $f(x,y)=0$ is a local equation for the germ $(C,z)$. The ideal $I^{ea}(C,z)$ is the tangent space to equianalytic (i.e., analytically trivial) deformations of $(C,z)$.
For our purpose we shall use zero-dimensional schemes associated with analytic types of singular points, which are analogous to $Z^s,Z^s_1$, but without the minimality property as in Lemma \[l5\](1) (except for the simple singularities $A_k$, $k\ge 1$, $D_k$, $k\ge 4$, $E_6$, $E_7$, $E_8$, for which topological and analytic equivalence coincide).
If the singular point $z$ of $C$ is simple, we put $$Z^a(C,z)=Z^s(C,z),\quad Z^a_1(C,z)=Z^s_1(C,z)\ .$$ If the singular point $z$ of $C$ is not simple, $f(x,y)=0$ is an equation of $C$ in a neighborhood of $z$, following [@GLS1], section 1.3, and we define
- the zero-dimensional scheme $Z^a(C,z)$ by the ideal $$I^a(C,z)=\left\{
g\in\hat{{\cal O}}_{{{\mathbb P}}^2,z}\ :\ \langle g,g_x,
g_y\rangle\subset
\langle f,f_x,
f_y\rangle\right\}\ ,$$
- the zero-dimensional scheme $Z^a_1(C,z)$ by the ideal $I^a_1(C,z)={{\mathfrak m}}_z\cdot I^a(C,z)$.
Observe that $Z^a_1(C,z)\supset Z^a(C,z)\supset Z^{ea}(C,z)\supset Z^{es}(C,z)$.
\[l7\] In the above notation,
\(1) any scheme $Z\in{{\operatorname{Iso}}}(Z^a(C,z))$ (resp., $Z\in{{\operatorname{Iso}}}(Z^a_1(C,z))$) is $Z^a(\widetilde C,w)$ (resp., $Z^a_1(\widetilde C,w)$) for some germ $(\widetilde C,w)$ analytically equivalent to $(C,z)$;
\(2) if $g\in I^a(C,z)$ (resp., $g\in I^a_1(C,z)$), then, for almost all $t\in{{\mathbb C}}$ (resp., for all $t\in{{\mathbb C}}$) the curve germs $\{f=0\}$ and $\{f+tg=0\}$ are analytically equivalent.
[*Proof*]{}. The first statement is evident. The fact that, for $g\in I^a(C,z)$ and almost all $t\in{{\mathbb C}}$, the germs $\{f=0\}$ and $\{f+tg=0\}$ are analytically equivalent, follows from the Mather-Yau theorem [@MY] (see also Lemma 1.8(a) [@GLS1]).
Assume now that $g\in I^a_1(C,z)={{\mathfrak m}}_z\cdot I^a(C,z)$. Observe that if $h\in I^a(C,z)$, then $h=af+bf_x+cf_y$, $b,c\in{{\mathfrak m}}_z$, which follows from Lemma 1.8(a,c) [@GLS1]. Then $$\begin{aligned}
&g=af+(xb'+yb'')f_x+(xc'+yc'')f_y,\quad
a,b',b'',c',c''\in{{\mathfrak m}}_z,\label{e400}\\
&b'f_{xx}+c'f_{xy},\ b''f_{xx}+c''f_{xy},\ b'f_{xy}+c'f_{yy}, \
b'f_{xy}+c'f_{yy}\in\langle f,f_x,f_y\rangle\ .\label{e401}\end{aligned}$$ Since $1+a\in\hat{{\cal O}}_{{{\mathbb P}}^2,z}^*$, the germ $f+g=f+af+(xb'+yb'')f_x+(xc'+yc'')f_y$ is equivalent to $f+\widetilde g$, $$\widetilde g=\frac{xb'+yb''}{1+a}f_x+\frac{xc'+yc''}{1+a}f_y\
.$$ The restrictions to $b',b'',c',c''$ in (\[e400\]), (\[e401\]) yield that $$\langle\widetilde g,\widetilde g_x,\widetilde g_y\rangle\subset
{{\mathfrak m}}_z\cdot\langle f,f_x,f_y\rangle\ ,$$ so the equivalence of $f$ and $f+\widetilde g$ follows from the Mather-Yau theorem [@MY] (cf. Lemma 1.8(b) [@GLS1]).
\[l8\] Let a zero-dimensional scheme $Z$ such that $z\not\in Z$ satisfy $$H^1({{\cal J}}_{Z_1^a(C,z)\cup Z/{{\mathbb P}}^2}(d))=0\ .\label{e49}$$ Then there exist a curve $D\in |{{\cal J}}_{Z^a(C,z)\cup Z/{{\mathbb P}}^2}(d)|$, whose germ $(D,z)$ is analytically equivalent to $(C,z)$. Moreover, such curves $D$ form a dense open subset in $|{{\cal J}}_{Z^a(C,z)\cup Z/{{\mathbb P}}^2}(d)|$.
[*Proof*]{}. In the exact sequence $$H^0({{\cal J}}_{Z/{{\mathbb P}}^2}(d))\to \hat{{\cal O}}_{{{\mathbb P}}^2,z}/I^a_1(C,z)
\to H^1({{\cal J}}_{Z\cup Z^a_1(C,z)/{{\mathbb P}}^2}(d))=0\ ,$$ the first morphism is surjective. Denote by $\varphi\in\hat{{\cal O}}_{{{\mathbb P}}^2,z}/I^a_1(C,z)$ the image of a germ $\psi\in\hat{{\cal O}}_{{{\mathbb P}}^2,z}$ defined by $(C,z)$. Take $\Phi\in H^0({{\cal J}}_{Z/{{\mathbb P}}^2}(d))$ which projects to $\varphi$. Then $\Phi-\psi\in I^a_1(C,z)$, and by Lemma \[l7\](2), the curve germs $(\{\Phi=0\},z)$ and $(C,z)$ are analytically equivalent, thus, we can put $D=\{\Phi=0\}$.
Zero-dimensional schemes associated with analytic types of critical points {#sec2}
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Let $f:({{\mathbb C}}^2,0)\to({{\mathbb C}},0)$ be a germ of a holomorphic function with a finite Milnor number $\mu(f)=\dim\hat{{\cal O}}_{{{\mathbb C}}^2,0}/\langle f_x,f_y\rangle$. Germs $f,g\in\hat{{\cal O}}_{{{\mathbb C}}^2,0}$ are called [*(right) equivalent*]{}, if there is $\psi\in{{\operatorname{Aut}}}(\hat{{\cal O}}_{{{\mathbb C}}^2,0})$ such that $g=f\circ\psi$. Introduce the zero-dimensional schemes
- $Z_0(f)$ defined by the ideal $$I_0(f)=\{g\in\hat{{\cal O}}_{{{\mathbb C}}^2,0}\ :\ g,g_x,g_y\in
\langle f_x,f_y\rangle\}\ ;$$
- $Z(f)$ defined by the ideal $I(f)={{\mathfrak m}}_0I_0(f)$.
An analogue of Lemma \[l7\] reads as
\[l11\] In the above notation,
\(1) any scheme $Z\in{{\operatorname{Iso}}}(Z(f))$ is $Z(\widetilde f)$ for some germ $\widetilde f$ equivalent to $f$;
\(2) if $g\in I(f)$, then, for all $t\in{{\mathbb C}}$, the germ $f+tg$ is equivalent to $f$.
The first statement of Lemma is evident. The second one is, in fact, known and can be proven as Mather’s finite determinacy theorem [@Ma].
Bounds for degrees of zero-dimensional schemes
----------------------------------------------
Given a reduced curve germ $(C,z)\subset{{\mathbb P}}^2$ of a function germ $f\in\hat{{\cal O}}_{{{\mathbb C}}^2,0}$, the degrees of the schemes $Z^s(C,z)$, $Z^a(C,z)$, $Z(f)$ are invariants of the given singular or critical point up to the corresponding equivalence. We shall compare these invariants with the classical ones.
\[l10\] In the above notation, $$\deg Z^s(C,z)=\deg Z^a(C,z)=\deg
Z_0(f)=\left[\frac{3k+4}{2}\right]\ ,\label{e41}$$ if $(C,z)$ or $f\in\hat{{\cal O}}_{{{\mathbb C}}^2,0}$ is of type $A_k$, $k\ge 1$. For other singular and critical points $$\begin{aligned}
&\deg Z^s(C,z)\le 3{{\delta}}(C,z)\ ,\label{e40}\\ &\deg Z^a(C,z)\le
2\mu(C,z)\ ,\label{e42}\\ &\deg Z_0(f)\le 3\mu(f)-2\cdot{{\operatorname{mt}}}(f)+2\
.\label{e71}\end{aligned}$$
[*Proof*]{}. Formula (\[e41\]) is an easy computation along the definition of $Z^s(C,z)=Z^a(C,z)=Z_0(f)$ in this case.
Assume that ${{\operatorname{mt}}}(C,z)\ge 3$.
Then $$\deg Z^s(C,z)=\sum_{q\in T^*(C,z)}\frac{{{\operatorname{mt}}}(C,q)\cdot({{\operatorname{mt}}}(C,q)+1)}{2}
={{\delta}}(C,z)+\sum_{q\in T^*(C,z)}{{\operatorname{mt}}}(C,q)\ .$$ By definition of $T^*(C,z)$, $$\#\{q\in T^*(C,z)\ :\ {{\operatorname{mt}}}(C,q)=1\}\le{{\operatorname{mt}}}(C,z)=m\ .$$ Hence $$\sum_{q\in T^*(C,z)}{{\operatorname{mt}}}(C,q)\le 2\cdot{{\operatorname{mt}}}(C,z)+
\sum_{\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{0.6}
\begin{array}{c}
\scriptstyle{q\in T^*(C,z)}\\
\scriptstyle{q\ne z}\\
\scriptstyle{{{\operatorname{mt}}}(C,q)>1}
\end{array}}{{\operatorname{mt}}}(C,q)$$ $$\le 2\sum_{q\in T^*(C,z)}\frac{{{\operatorname{mt}}}(C,z)\cdot
({{\operatorname{mt}}}(C,z)-1)}{2}=2{{\delta}}(C,z)\ ,$$ and (\[e40\]) follows.
We shall establish (\[e42\]), first, for simple singularities $D_k$, $k\ge 4$, $E_k$, $k=6,7,8$. Here $Z^a(C,z)=
Z^s(C,z)$, and a direct computation gives $$\deg Z^a(D_k)=\deg Z^s(D_k)=\left[\frac{3k+1}{2}\right]\le 2k,
\quad k\ge 4\ ,$$ $$\deg Z^a(E_k)=\deg Z^s(E_k)=k+3\le 2k,\quad k=6,7,8\ .$$ If $(C,z)$ is not simple, introduce $\Pi_1,\Pi_2$, two distinct generic polar curves of $C$, and $\Pi_{11},\Pi_{12}$, two generic polar curves of $\Pi_1$. By [@GLS1], formula (1.5), $$I^a(C,z)\supset\{fC+g\Pi_1\ :\ f,g
\in\hat{{\cal O}}_{{{\mathbb P}}^2,z},\ g\Pi_{11},g\Pi_{12}\in\langle\Pi_1,\Pi_2\rangle\}\ .$$ By the double point divisor theorem [@VDW], §50, the ideal $$\{g\in\hat{{\cal O}}_{{{\mathbb P}}^2,z}\ :\ g\Pi_{11},g\Pi_{12}\in\langle\Pi_1,
\Pi_2\rangle\}$$ contains the ideal $$I=\{g\in\hat{{\cal O}}_{{{\mathbb P}}^2,z}\ :\ (g\cdot P)_z\ge(\Pi_2\cdot P)_z-{{\operatorname{mt}}}(P,z)+1$$ $$\text{for any local branch}\ P\ \text{of}\ (\Pi_1,z)\}\ ,$$ where $(*,*)_z$ denotes the intersection multiplicity of two curve germs at the point $z$[^5]. Here $$\dim\hat{{\cal O}}_{{{\mathbb P}}^2,z}/I=\sum_P((\Pi_2\cdot P)_z-{{\operatorname{mt}}}(P,z)+1)-{{\delta}}(\Pi_1,z)$$ $$\le\sum_P(\Pi_2\cdot P)_z-{{\delta}}(\Pi_1,z)=\mu(C,z)-{{\delta}}(\Pi_1,z)\ .$$ If ${{\operatorname{mt}}}(C,z)=3$ and $(C,z)$ is not simple, then $\Pi_1$ has at least a tacnode at $z$, so ${{\delta}}(\Pi_1,z)\ge 2={{\operatorname{mt}}}(C,z)-1$. If ${{\operatorname{mt}}}(C,z)\ge 4$, then ${{\operatorname{mt}}}(\Pi_1,z)= {{\operatorname{mt}}}(C,z)-1\ge 3$, so $${{\delta}}(\Pi_1,z)\ge\frac{{{\operatorname{mt}}}(\Pi_1,z)\cdot({{\operatorname{mt}}}(\Pi_1,z)-1)}{2}\ge{{\operatorname{mt}}}(\Pi_1,z)
={{\operatorname{mt}}}(C,z)-1\ ,$$ which altogether results in $\dim\hat{{\cal O}}_{{{\mathbb P}}^2,z}/I\le
\mu(C,z)-{{\operatorname{mt}}}(C,z)+1$. Hence $$\deg Z^a(C,z)=\dim\hat{{\cal O}}_{{{\mathbb P}}^2,z}/I^a(C,z)\le
(C\cdot\Pi_1)_z+\dim\hat{{\cal O}}_{{{\mathbb P}}^2,z}/I$$ $$\le(\mu(C,z)+{{\operatorname{mt}}}(C,z)-1)+(\mu(C,z)-{{\operatorname{mt}}}(C,z)+1)=2\mu(C,z)\ .$$
For inequality (\[e71\]) we note that $$I_0(f)\supset\{g\in\hat{{\cal O}}_{{{\mathbb C}}^2,0}\ :\ g=af_x+bf_y,\
a,b\in\hat{{\cal O}}_{{{\mathbb C}}^2,0}$$ $$\qquad af_{xx},af_{xy},bf_{xy},bf_{yy}\in\langle
f_x,f_y\rangle\}$$ $$\supset\{g\in\hat{{\cal O}}_{{{\mathbb C}}^2,0}\ :\ g=af_x+bf_y,\
a,b\in I\}\ ,$$ where the ideal $I\subset\hat{{\cal O}}_{{{\mathbb C}}^2,0}$ is defined as in the preceding paragraph. Hence as in the previous computation $$\deg Z_0(f)\le\dim\hat{{\cal O}}_{{{\mathbb C}}^2,0}/\langle f_x,f_y\rangle+
2\dim\hat{{\cal O}}_{{{\mathbb C}}^2,0}/I\le 3\mu(f)-2\cdot{{\operatorname{mt}}}(f)+2\ .$$
Analytic and topological order of a zero-dimensional scheme in the plane
========================================================================
Definitions and notations {#sec5}
-------------------------
A zero-dimensional scheme $Z\subset{{\mathbb P}}^2$ can be characterized by the following numbers (orders) $$\begin{aligned}
&{{\operatorname{ord}}}_0(Z)=\min\{d\in{{\mathbb Z}}\ :\ H^0({{\cal J}}_{Z/{{\mathbb P}}^2}(d))>0\}\ ,\nonumber\\
&{{\operatorname{ord}}}_1(Z)=\min\{d\in{{\mathbb Z}}\ :\ H^1({{\cal J}}_{Z/{{\mathbb P}}^2}(d))=0\}\ .\nonumber\end{aligned}$$ Put $${{\operatorname{ord}}}^{top}_0(Z)=\max_{Z'\in{{\operatorname{Def}}}(Z)}{{\operatorname{ord}}}_0(Z'),\ {{\operatorname{ord}}}^{top}_1(Z)
=\min_{Z'\in{{\operatorname{Def}}}(Z)}{{\operatorname{ord}}}_1(Z'),\ Z\ \mbox{is
cluster scheme},$$ $${{\operatorname{ord}}}^{an}_0(Z)=\max_{Z'\in{{\operatorname{Iso}}}(Z)}{{\operatorname{ord}}}_0(Z'),\quad
{{\operatorname{ord}}}^{an}_1(Z)=\min_{Z'\in{{\operatorname{Iso}}}(Z)}{{\operatorname{ord}}}_i(Z'),\quad Z\ \mbox{is any
scheme}.$$ Clearly, ${{\operatorname{ord}}}^{top}_i(Z)$, ${{\operatorname{ord}}}^{an}_i(Z)$ are ${{\operatorname{ord}}}_i(Z')$ for a generic element $Z'$ of the corresponding family.
It was shown in [@GLS], Lemmas 3.1, 4.1, 5.8, that
- for an irreducible zero-dimensional cluster scheme $Z$ defined by a curve germ having only nonsingular local branches, $${{\operatorname{ord}}}^{top}_1(Z)<(1+\sqrt{2})\sqrt{\deg Z}+{{\operatorname{mt}}}Z+1\ .\label{e19}$$
- for an arbitrary irreducible zero-dimensional cluster scheme $Z$, $${{\operatorname{ord}}}^{top}_1(Z)<\frac{\sqrt{85}-3}{2}\sqrt{\deg Z}+{{\operatorname{mt}}}Z+
{{\operatorname{mt}}}_sZ+1\ ,\label{e20}$$ where ${{\operatorname{mt}}}_sZ$ is the sum of multiplicities of the singular branches of the germ $f(Z)$.
We shall estimate the analytic orders of any zero-dimensional scheme. As a by-product we improve estimates (\[e19\]), (\[e20\]) for topological orders and extend them to reducible schemes.
\[p1\] For any zero-dimensional scheme $Z\subset{{\mathbb P}}^2$, $${{\operatorname{ord}}}^{an}_0(Z)\ge\frac{\deg Z}{\sqrt{2M_2(Z)}} \ .\label{e3}$$
\[r3\] In view of (\[e73\]), the bound (\[e3\]) can be weakened up to the following, simpler inequality: $${{\operatorname{ord}}}^{an}_0(Z)>\frac{\sqrt{\deg Z}}{2}\ .$$
[*Proof*]{}. [**Step 1**]{}. Consider, first, the case of an irreducible scheme $Z$ concentrated at a point $z\in{{\mathbb P}}^2$.
Let $Y$ be a generic element of ${{\operatorname{Iso}}}(Z)$, concentrated at $z$, and $d={{\operatorname{ord}}}_0(Y)$. Take a generic curve $C\in|{{\cal J}}_{Y/{{\mathbb P}}^2}(d)|$, and suppose that $C=C_1^{l_1}...C_r^{l_r}$, where $C_1,...,C_r$ are distinct reduced irreducible curves of degrees $d_1,...,d_r$, respectively, so that $d=l_1d_1+...+l_rd_r$.
If $C$ contains only point $z$ of $T(Y_{cl})$, then $C$ transversally intersects a generic element $f\in I(Y)$. Since $d\ge{{\operatorname{mt}}}(Y_{cl},z)$, we have $$d\ge\sqrt{d\cdot{{\operatorname{mt}}}(Y_{cl},z)}=\sqrt{(C\cdot f)_z}
\ge\sqrt{\deg Y}=\sqrt{\deg Z}\ .$$
Now without loss of generality we can assume that the tree $T(Y_{cl})$ contains at least two points, the curves $C_i$, $1\le i\le s<r$, contain only point $z$ of $T(Y_{cl})$, and any curve $C_i$, $i>s$, contains at least two points of $T(Y_{cl})$.
Fix $s<i\le r$. Put $T_i=T(C_i)\cap T(Y_{cl})$. Choose local coordinates $x,y$ in a neighborhood of $z=(0,0)$ so that the axes are transverse to $C_i$ and to a generic $f\in I(Y)$. Introduce the sequence $$\psi_m\in{{\operatorname{Aut}}}(\hat{{\cal O}}_{{{\mathbb P}}^2,z}),\quad\psi_m(x,y)=(x,y+{{\varepsilon}}x^m),
\quad m\ge 1,\quad{{\varepsilon}}={{\operatorname{const}}}\ne 0\ ,\label{e11}$$ and consider the schemes $\psi_m(Y)$. The ascending sequence of trees $T(Y_{cl})\cap T(\psi_m(Y_{cl}))$ stabilizes for a sufficiently large $m$. Then there exists $$k=\max\{m\ge 1\ :\ T_i\not\subset T(\psi_m(Y_{cl}))\}\ .\label{e26}$$
\[l1\] $$\sum_{q\in T_i\backslash T(\psi_k(Y_{cl}))}
({{\operatorname{mt}}}(C_i,q))^2\le({{\operatorname{mt}}}(C_i,z))^2\ .\label{e4}$$
[*Proof of Lemma \[l1\]*]{}. Denote by $T_m(C_i)$, $m\ge 1$, the tree of common infinitely near points of the curves $C_i$ and $\psi_m(C_i)$ at $z$. Then $$T_i\backslash T(\psi_k(Y_{cl}))\subset T_{k+1}(C_i)
\backslash T_k(C_i)$$ $$\Longrightarrow\quad
\sum_{q\in T_i\backslash T(\psi_k(Y_{cl}))}
({{\operatorname{mt}}}(C_i,q))^2\le
\sum_{q\in T_{k+1}(C_i)\backslash T_k(C_i)}({{\operatorname{mt}}}(C_i,q))^2$$ $$=(C_i\cdot\psi_{k+1}C_i)_z-(C_i\cdot\psi_kC_i)_z\ .$$ To estimate the latter expression, we use the Puiseux decomposition $$C_i(x,y)=(1+O(x,y))\prod_{s=1}^n(y-\xi_s(x)),\quad n={{\operatorname{mt}}}(C_i,z),\label{e28}$$ where $\xi_s(x)$, $s=1,...,n$, are fractional power series. Then $$(C_i\cdot\psi_k(C_i))_z=\sum_{1\le r,s\le n}{{\operatorname{ord}}}(\xi_r(x)-\xi_s(x)-
{{\varepsilon}}x^k)\ ,$$ $$(C_i\cdot\psi_{k+1}(C_i))_z=\sum_{1\le r,s\le n}{{\operatorname{ord}}}(\xi_r(x)-\xi_s(x)-
{{\varepsilon}}x^{k+1})\ ,$$ and (\[e4\]) follows, because of an obvious inequality $${{\operatorname{ord}}}(\xi_r(x)-\xi_s(x)-{{\varepsilon}}x^{k+1})\le
{{\operatorname{ord}}}(\xi_r(x)-\xi_s(x)-{{\varepsilon}}x^k)+1\ ,$$ where ${{\operatorname{ord}}}(*)$ means the minimal power of $x$ occurring in the series $*$. [$\Box$]{}
In view of the generality of $Y\in{{\operatorname{Iso}}}(Z)$ and ${{\varepsilon}}\ne 0$, the scheme $Y'=\psi_k(Y)$ is also generic in ${{\operatorname{Iso}}}_z(Z)$. Hence ${{\operatorname{ord}}}_0(Y')={{\operatorname{ord}}}_0(Y)=d$, and $Y'$ is contained in a curve $C'$ of degree $d$ which splits as $C'=(C'_1)^{l_1}...(C'_r)^{l_r}$, where $\deg C'_i=\deg C_i=d_i$, and the curve $C'_i$ is different from $C_i$, since $\psi_k$ moves the points $q\in T_i\backslash T(Y'_{cl})\ne\emptyset$. Then $$d_i^2\ge\sum_{q\in T(Y_{cl})\cap T(Y'_{cl})}({{\operatorname{mt}}}(C_i,q))^2\ ,$$ which by (\[e4\]) implies $$d_i^2\ge\frac{1}{2}\sum_{q\in T(Y_{cl})}({{\operatorname{mt}}}(C_i,q))^2\ .
\label{e2}$$ Note that (\[e2\]) holds for $i=1,...,s$ as well.
Take a generic element $f\in I(Y)$. Then $Y$ is contained in the scheme-theoretic intersection of $f$ and $C$ at the point $z$. Hence $$\deg Y=\deg Z\le(f\cdot C)_z=
\sum_{q\in T(Y_{cl})}{{\operatorname{mt}}}(Y_{cl},q)\cdot{{\operatorname{mt}}}(C,q)$$ $$\le\sqrt{\sum_{q\in T(Y_{cl})}({{\operatorname{mt}}}(Y_{cl},q))^2}
\sqrt{\sum_{q\in T(Y_{cl})}({{\operatorname{mt}}}(C,q))^2}
=\sqrt{M_2(Z)}\sqrt{\sum_{q\in T(Y_{cl})}({{\operatorname{mt}}}(C,q))^2}\ .$$ Here $$\sum_{q\in T(Y_{cl})}({{\operatorname{mt}}}(C,q))^2=
\sum_{q\in T(Y_{cl})}\left(\sum_{i=1}^rl_i\cdot{{\operatorname{mt}}}(C_i,q)\right)^2
\stackrel{\text{(\ref{e2})}}{\le}2\left(\sum_{i=1}^rl_id_i\right)^2
=2d^2\ ,$$ and (\[e3\]) follows.
[**Step 2**]{}. Let $Z$ consist of components $Z_1,...,Z_p$ concentrated at points $z_1,...,z_p\in{{\mathbb P}}^2$, respectively, $p\ge 2$. Consider a generic scheme $Y\in{{\operatorname{Iso}}}(Z)$, concentrated at a generic $p$-tuple $w_1,...,w_p\in{{\mathbb P}}^2$, and a generic curve $C\in|{{\cal J}}_{Y/{{\mathbb P}}^2}(d)|$, $d={{\operatorname{ord}}}_0(Y)={{\operatorname{ord}}}^{an}_0(Z)$. Assume that $C=C_1^{l_1}...C_r^{l_r}$, where $C_1,...,C_r$ are reduced irreducible.
If a component $C_i$, $1\le i\le r$, passes through only one of the points $w_1,...,w_p$, then (\[e2\]) holds due to the argument in Step 1 of the proof.
Let $C_i$ pass through points $w_1,...,w_s$, $s\ge 2$, and be transverse to generic elements $f_j\in I(Y_{w_j})$, $j=1,...,s$. Assuming that $0<{{\operatorname{mt}}}(C_i,w_1)\le...\le{{\operatorname{mt}}}(C_i,w_k)$, we move the point $w_1$ to $w'_1\not\in C_i$ keeping $w_2,...,w_p$ fixed. The correspondingly deformed scheme $Y'$ is also generic in ${{\operatorname{Iso}}}(Z)$, and hence there exists a curve $C'\in|{{\cal J}}_{Y'/{{\mathbb P}}^2}(d)|$ splitting as $C'=(C'_1)^{l_1}...(C'_r)^{l_r}$ with $\deg C'_j=d_j$, $j=1,...,r$, $C'_i$ close to $C_i$ having multiplicities $${{\operatorname{mt}}}(C'_i,w'_1)={{\operatorname{mt}}}(C_i,w_1),\quad{{\operatorname{mt}}}(C'_i,w_j)={{\operatorname{mt}}}(C_i,
w_j),\ j=2,...,k\ .$$ Then by [@GS], Theorem 2(1), or [@Xu], Lemma 3, $$d_i^2\ge({{\operatorname{mt}}}(C_i,w_1))^2-{{\operatorname{mt}}}(C_i,w_1)+
\sum_{j=2}^k({{\operatorname{mt}}}(C_i,w_j))^2$$ $$\ge\frac{1}{2}\sum_{j=1}^k({{\operatorname{mt}}}(C_i,w_j))^2=\frac{1}{2}
\sum_{q\in T(Y_{cl})}({{\operatorname{mt}}}(C_i,q))^2\ .\label{e10}$$
Let $C_i$ pass through $w_1,...,w_s$, $s\ge 2$, and contain at least two points of $T(Y_{w_1,cl})$. Then we apply transformations (\[e11\]) to $Y_{w_1}$, where $w_1=(0,0)$, keeping $Y_{w_j}$, $j=2,...,p$, unchanged. The reasoning, similar to that in Step 1 of the proof, shows that a suitable $\psi_m$ moves the tree $T(Y_{w_1,cl}) \cap T(C_i)$, turning $C_i$ into a curve $C'_i$ of the same degree $d_i$ with $$(C_i\cdot C'_i)_{w_1}\ge\frac{1}{2}\sum_{q\in T(Y_{w_1,cl})\cap C_i}
({{\operatorname{mt}}}(C_i,q))^2\ ,$$ which immediately implies $$d^2_i\ge\frac{1}{2}\sum_{q\in T(Y_{w_1,cl})\cap C_i}
({{\operatorname{mt}}}(C_i,q))^2+\sum_{j=2}^k\sum_{q\in T(Y_{w_j,cl})\cap C_i}
({{\operatorname{mt}}}(C_i,q))^2$$ $$\ge\frac{1}{2}\sum_{q\in T(Y_{cl})\cap C_i}({{\operatorname{mt}}}(C_i,q))^2\ .\label{e12}$$
Finally, (\[e3\]) follows from (\[e2\]), (\[e10\]), (\[e12\]), as was done in Step 1 of the proof. [$\Box$]{}
\[p3\] For any singular zero-dimensional scheme $Z\subset{{\mathbb P}}^2$, $${{\operatorname{ord}}}^{an}_1(Z) \le\sqrt{\frac{3}{2}M_2(Z)}+\frac{\deg
Z}{\sqrt{3M_2(Z)/2}}-2\ .\label{e7}$$ For any nonsingular zero-dimensional cluster scheme $Z\subset{{\mathbb P}}^2$, $${{\operatorname{ord}}}^{an}_1(Z)=-\left[\frac{3-\sqrt{1+8\deg Z}}{2}\right]\ .
\label{e22}$$
\[r4\] Due to (\[e73\]), inequality (\[e7\]) implies a weaker relation $${{\operatorname{ord}}}^{an}_1(Z) <\frac{4}{\sqrt{3}}\sqrt{\deg Z}-2\ ,\label{e24}$$ which in turn is stronger than both (\[e19\]) and (\[e20\]).
[*Proof*]{}. [**Step 1**]{}. Let $Z$ be nonsingular (and hence a cluster scheme). Relation (\[e22\]) means that $$d={{\operatorname{ord}}}^{an}_1(Z)=\min\{n\ :\ h^0({{\cal O}}_{{{\mathbb P}}^2}(n))=
\frac{(n+1)(n+2)}{2}\ge\deg Z\}\ .$$ In other words, the $\deg Z$ conditions imposed on curves $C\in|{{\cal J}}_{Y/{{\mathbb P}}^2}(d)|$ by a generic element $Y\in{{\operatorname{Def}}}(Z)={{\operatorname{Iso}}}(Z)$ are independent. Take a natural sequence of schemes $\emptyset\subsetneq
Z_1\subsetneq...\subsetneq Z_s=Z$, $s=\deg Z$, where the linear system $|{{\cal J}}_{Z_{i+1}/{{\mathbb P}}^2}(d)|$ is obtained from $|{{\cal J}}_{Z_i/{{\mathbb P}}^2}(d)|$ by imposing one condition, either a passage through a point $\not\in Z_i$, or an extended by $1$ tangency order with a fixed nonsingular curve germ. Then one can inductively show that generic members of these linear systems are nonsingular, and a generic choice of the new condition reduces the dimension each time by $1$.
[**Step 2**]{}. Take a generic scheme $Y\in{{\operatorname{Iso}}}(Z)$. Consider the Castelnuovo function ${{\cal C}}_Y(n)=h^1({{\cal J}}_{Y/{{\mathbb P}}^2}(n-1))-h^1({{\cal J}}_{Y/{{\mathbb P}}^2}(n))$, $n\ge
0$. One can find a detailed description of the Castelnuovo function and its graph in [@D; @GLS1]. In particular (see Figure \[f1\]), $$\begin{aligned}
&{{\cal C}}_Y(n)=n+1,\ 0\le n<{{\operatorname{ord}}}_0(Y)={{\operatorname{ord}}}^{an}_0(Z)\ ,\label{e16}\\
&{{\cal C}}_Y(n)\le{{\cal C}}_Y(n-1),\ n\ge{{\operatorname{ord}}}_0(Y)\ ,\label{e13}\\
&{{\cal C}}_Y(n)=0,\ n>{{\operatorname{ord}}}_1(Y)={{\operatorname{ord}}}^{an}_1(Z)\ ,\label{e17}\\
&\sum_{n\ge 0}{{\cal C}}_Y(n)=\deg Z=\deg Y\ .\label{e14}\end{aligned}$$
(13,8)(0,0) (2,1)[(1,0)[11.5]{}]{} (2,1)[(0,1)[7]{}]{} (2,2)[(1,0)[1]{}]{} (3,3)[(1,0)[1]{}]{} (4,4)[(1,0)[1]{}]{} (5,5)[(1,0)[1]{}]{} (6,6)[(1,0)[3]{}]{} (9,4)[(1,0)[2]{}]{} (11,3)[(1,0)[1]{}]{} (12,2)[(1,0)[1]{}]{} (3,2)(3,3) (4,3)(4,4) (5,4)(5,5) (6,5)(6,6) (9,6)(9,4) (11,4)(11,3) (12,3)(12,2) (13,2)(13,1) (2,6)(6,6) (2,4)(4,4) (5,4)(9,4) (12,2)(12,1) (0.5,6)[${{\operatorname{ord}}}_0(Y)$]{} (1.5,4)[$d$]{} (11.3,0.5)[${{\operatorname{ord}}}_1(Y)$]{}
If there is no $n\ge{{\operatorname{ord}}}_0(Y)$ such that ${{\operatorname{ord}}}_0(Y)>
{{\cal C}}_Y(n)={{\cal C}}_Y(n-1)>0$, then we put $d={{\operatorname{ord}}}_0(Y)$. If there exists $0<d<{{\operatorname{ord}}}_0(Y)$ such that ${{\cal C}}_Y(n)={{\cal C}}_Y(n-1)=d$ for some $n\ge{{\operatorname{ord}}}_0(Y)$ (so called “long stair"), then we assume that $d$ is minimal with this property (see Figure \[f1\]). By [@D], Claims 2.2 and 2.3, (see also [@GLS1]), there exists a curve $C$ of degree $d$ such that (see Figure \[f1\]) $${{\cal C}}_{C\cap Y}(n)=\min\{d,\ {{\cal C}}_Y(n)\}\ .\label{e6}$$
At this moment we assume that $d>\sqrt{\deg(Y\cap C)}$. Taking into account the choice of $d$ and property (\[e14\]), and looking at Figure \[f1\], we derive that $$2d>{{\operatorname{ord}}}_1(Y)+1\quad\Longrightarrow\quad
d\ge\frac{{{\operatorname{ord}}}_1(Y)}{2}+1\ ,$$ and consequently $$\deg(Y\cap C)\ge\frac{d(d+1)}{2}+\frac{({{\operatorname{ord}}}_1(Y)+1-d)({{\operatorname{ord}}}_1(Y)+2-d)}{2}
\ge\frac{({{\operatorname{ord}}}_1(Y)+2)^2}{4}\ .$$ Hence, in view of $M_2(Y)\ge\deg
Y\ge\deg(Y\cap C)$, $${{\operatorname{ord}}}_1(Y)\le 2\sqrt{\deg(Y\cap
C)}-2<\sqrt{\frac{3}{2}M_2(Y)}+\frac{\deg Y}{\sqrt{3M_2(Y)/2}}-2\
.$$
[**Step 3**]{}. From now on we assume that $Z$ is singular, and, in the notation of Step 2 $$d\le\sqrt{\deg(Y\cap C)}\ .\label{e100}$$
For the reader’s convenience we start by proving a bound weaker than (\[e7\]), $${{\operatorname{ord}}}^{an}_1(Z) \le\sqrt{2M_2(Z)}+\frac{\deg Z}{\sqrt{2M_2(Z)}}-2\
.\label{e23}$$ It will illustrate the main idea of the proof, which is based on the argument used in the proof of Proposition \[p1\]. Further refinement up to inequality (\[e7\]) is of technical nature and consists of exploring particular steps in the proof of (\[e23\]).
The use of inequality (\[e23\]) instead of (\[e7\]) leads, in fact, to similar estimates of orders of singular points with a different constant factor.
The choice of $d$ and properties (\[e16\])-(\[e14\]) of Castelnuovo function immediately imply that $$({{\operatorname{ord}}}_1(Y)+1)d\le\deg(Y\cap C)+d(d-1)$$ $$\Longrightarrow\quad{{\operatorname{ord}}}^{an}_1(Z)\le\frac{\deg(Y\cap C)}{d}+d-2\
. \label{e5}$$ We shall estimate $d=\deg C$ from below using the argument in the proof of Proposition \[p1\]. The generality of $Y$ in ${{\operatorname{Iso}}}(Z)$ guarantees the fixed shape of ${{\cal C}}_Y$ when varying $Y$ in an open dense subset of ${{\operatorname{Iso}}}(Z)$, as well as the existence of a continuous family of curves $C$ of degree $d$, satisfying (\[e6\]) and having the same collection of degrees of irreducible components. Let $C=C_1^{l_1}...C_r^{l_r}$, where $C_1,...,C_r$ are reduced irreducible, $\deg C_i=d_i$, $i=1,...,r$. Then, reasoning as in the proof of Proposition \[p1\], we obtain $$d_i^2\ge\frac{1}{2}\sum_{q\in T(Y_{cl})}({{\operatorname{mt}}}(C_i,q))^2,\quad i=1,...,r.$$ Taking generic elements $f_j\in I(Y_{w_j})$, $Y=Y_{w_1}\cup
...\cup Y_{w_p}$, $w_1,...,w_p\in{{\mathbb P}}^2$, one obtains $$\deg(C\cap Y)\le\sum_{j=1}^p(f_j\cdot C)_{w_j}
\le\sqrt{\sum_{q\in T(Y_{cl})}({{\operatorname{mt}}}(Y,q))^2}\sqrt{\sum_{q\in T(Y_{cl})}
({{\operatorname{mt}}}(C,q))^2}$$ $$\le\sqrt{2M_2(Y)}\cdot d\quad
\Longrightarrow\quad d\ge\frac{\deg(C\cap Y)}{\sqrt{2M_2(Y)}}\ .$$ In view of this bound and (\[e100\]), inequality (\[e5\]) implies (\[e23\]).
[**Step 4**]{}. To refine inequality (\[e23\]) we need a strengthened form of Lemma \[l1\].
\[l2\] In the notation of Step 3, either $C_i$ is a straight line containing two points of $T(Y_{cl})$, or $$d_i^2\ge\frac{2}{3}\sum_{q\in T(Y_{cl})}({{\operatorname{mt}}}(C_i,q))^2\ .\label{e25}$$
The proof is found in section \[sec1\] below.
We shall now prove (\[e7\]) for schemes $Z$ such that, for any two points $q_1,q_2\in T(Z_{cl})$, $${{\operatorname{mt}}}(Z_{cl},q_1)+{{\operatorname{mt}}}(Z_{cl},q_2)\le\sqrt{\frac{3}{2}M_2(Z)}\ .\label{e34}$$
In the notation of Step 2, let $C=C'C''$, $C'=C_1^{l_1}...C_s^{l_s}$, $C''=C_{s+1}^{l_{s+1}}...C_r^{l_r}$, where $0\le s\le r$; any $C_i$, $i=1,...,s$, is a straight line containing exactly two points of $T(Y_{cl})$, and $C_{s+1},...,C_r$ are the other irreducible components of $C$.
Taking generic elements $f_j\in I(Y_{w_j})$, $Y=Y_{w_1}\cup
...\cup Y_{w_p}$, $w_1,...,w_p\in{{\mathbb P}}^2$, one obtains $$\deg(Y\cap C'')\le\sum_{j=1}^p(f_j\cdot C'')_{w_j}
\le\sqrt{\sum_{q\in T(Y_{cl})}({{\operatorname{mt}}}(Y_{cl},q))^2}\sqrt{\sum_{q\in T(Y_{cl})}
({{\operatorname{mt}}}(C'',q))^2}\ .$$ By Lemma \[l2\], $$\sqrt{\sum_{q\in T(Y_{cl})}({{\operatorname{mt}}}(C'',q))^2}=
{\sum_{q\in T(Y_{cl})}\left(\sum_{i=s+1}^rl_i\cdot{{\operatorname{mt}}}(C_i,q)\right)^2}$$ $$\le\sum_{i=s+1}^rl_i\sqrt{\sum_{q\in T_i}({{\operatorname{mt}}}(C_i,q))^2}
\le\sqrt{\frac{3}{2}}\sum_{i=s+1}^rl_id_i\ .$$ Hence $$\deg(Y\cap C'')\le\sqrt{\frac{3}{2}M_2(Z)}\sum_{i=s+1}^rl_id_i\ .$$ On the other hand, by (\[e34\]), $$\deg(Y\cap C')\le\sum_{j=1}^p(f_j\cdot C')_{w_j}
=\sum_{i=1}^sl_i\left(\sum_{j=1}^p(f_j\cdot C_i)_{w_j}\right)$$ $$\le\sqrt{\frac{3}{2}M_2(Z)}\sum_{i=1}^sl_i\ .$$ So, it follows that $$\deg(Y\cap C)\le\deg(Y\cap C')+\deg(Y\cap C'')
\le d\sqrt{\frac{3}{2}M_2(Z)}$$ $$\Longrightarrow\quad d\ge\frac{\deg(Y\cap C)}{\sqrt{3
M_2(Z)/2}}\ ,$$ which implies (\[e7\]) by virtue of (\[e5\]) and (\[e100\]).
[**Step 5**]{}. We shall complete the proof of Proposition \[p3\] by induction on $\deg Z$. The case of nonsingular $Z$ of degree $\ne 2$ is the base of induction since (\[e22\]) implies (\[e7\]) except for $\deg Z=2$.
Assume that $Z$ is singular. By the result of Step 4, one has to consider only the case that $T(Z)$ has at least two vertices, and there exist $q_1,q_2\in T(Z)$ such that $${{\operatorname{mt}}}(Z_{cl},q_1)+{{\operatorname{mt}}}(Z_{cl},q_2)>\sqrt{\frac{3}{2}M_2(Z)}\ .\label{e35}$$ This means that, for a generic $Y\in{{\operatorname{Iso}}}(Z)$, there exists a straight line $L$ containing two points of $T(Y)$ and satisfying $$\deg(Y\cap L)>\sqrt{\frac{3}{2}M_2(Z)}=\sqrt{\frac{3}{2}M_2(Y)}\ .$$ In other words, $L$ contains two vertices $q_1,q_2$ of $T(Y_{cl})$ with multiplicities $m_i={{\operatorname{mt}}}(Y_{cl},q_i)$, $i=1,2$, $m_1\ge 2$, and $$\deg(Y\cap L)\ge m_1+m_2>\sqrt{\frac{3}{2}\sum_{q\in T(Y_{cl})}
({{\operatorname{mt}}}(Y_{cl},q))^2}\ .$$
Put $$d=\left[\sqrt{\frac{3}{2}M_2(Z)}+\frac{\deg
Z}{\sqrt{3M_2(Z)/2}}-2\right] \ .\label{e402}$$ First, notice that $$d\ge m_1+m_2-1\ .\label{e36}$$ Indeed, $$\sqrt{\frac{3}{2}M_2(Z)}+\frac{\deg Z}{\sqrt{3M_2(Z)/2}}-2\ge
\sqrt{\frac{3}{2}M_2(Z)}+\frac{(m_1(m_1+1)+m_2(m_2+1))/2}{\sqrt{3M_2(Z)
/2}}-2$$ $$\ge\sqrt{\frac{3}{2}(m_1^2+m_2^2)}+\frac{m_1(m_1+1)+m_2(m_2+1)}{\sqrt{6
(m_1^2+m_2^2)}}-2\ge m_1+m_2-1\ ,$$ where the latter inequality holds, because substituting $m_1$ and $m_2$ for $m=(m_1+m_2)/2$, we diminish the left-hand side and obtain an inequality $$\frac{4}{\sqrt{3}}m+\frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}-2\ge 2m-1\ ,$$ which holds true for $m\ge 3/2$.
The exact sequence of sheaves $$0\to{{\cal J}}_{Y:L/{{\mathbb P}}^2}(d-1)\to{{\cal J}}_{Y/{{\mathbb P}}^2}(d)\to
{{\cal J}}_{Y\cap L/L}(d)\to 0$$ induces the exact cohomology sequence $$H^1({{\cal J}}_{Y:L/{{\mathbb P}}^2}(d-1))\to H^1({{\cal J}}_{Y/{{\mathbb P}}^2}(d))\to
H^1({{\cal J}}_{Y\cap L/L}(d))\ ,$$ where the last term vanishes due to (\[e36\]). Hence $H^1({{\cal J}}_{Y/{{\mathbb P}}^2}(d))=0$, provided $H^1({{\cal J}}_{Y:L/{{\mathbb P}}^2}(d-1))=0$.
If $\deg(Y:L)\ne 2$, by the induction assumption, inequality (\[e35\]), and the formula $\deg(Y:L)=\deg Y-m_1-m_2$, $${{\operatorname{ord}}}_1(Y:L)\le
\sqrt{\frac{3}{2}M_2(Y:L)}+\frac{\deg Y:L}{\sqrt{3M_2(Y:L)/2}}-2$$ $$\le\sqrt{\frac{3}{2}M_2(Y)}+\frac{\deg Y-m_1-m_2}{\sqrt{3M_2(Y)/2}}-2
<\sqrt{\frac{3}{2}M_2(Y)}+\frac{\deg Y}{\sqrt{3M_2(Y)/2}}-3$$ $$\Longrightarrow\quad{{\operatorname{ord}}}_1(Y:L)\le d-1\ ,$$ and we are done.
If $\deg(Y:L)=2$, then, clearly, $H^1({{\cal J}}_{Y:L/{{\mathbb P}}^2}(d-1))=0$ holds, provided, $d\ge 2$, which follows from (\[e402\]), since $m_1\ge 2$, $m_2\ge 1$, and consequently $\deg Z\ge 4$. [$\Box$]{}
Proof of Lemma \[l2\] {#sec1}
---------------------
Without loss of generality we assume that $T(Y_{cl})$ has at least two vertices, $C_i$ contains at least two points of $T(Y_{cl})$, and is not a straight line, containing exactly two points of $T(Y_{cl})$.
Let $C_i$ contain exactly two points, say $q_1,q_2$ of $T(Y_{cl})$, and is singular at $q_1,q_2$, then $d_i\ge 2$, and (\[e25\]) turns into the inequality $d_i^2\ge 4\ge 2/3(1+1)$.
Let $C_i$ contain exactly two points of $T(Y_{cl})$. If one of these points $q$ is infinitely near to the other point $z$, and $C_i$ is singular at $z$, i.e., ${{\operatorname{mt}}}(C_i,z)\ge 2$, then, intersecting the curves $C_i$ and $\psi_1(C_i)$ (see notation in the proof of Lemma \[l1\]), we obtain by [@GS], Theorem 2(1), or [@Xu], Lemma 3, $$d_i^2\ge({{\operatorname{mt}}}(C_i,z))^2+({{\operatorname{mt}}}(C_i,q))^2-{{\operatorname{mt}}}(C_i,q)\ge\frac{2}{3}
(({{\operatorname{mt}}}(C_i,z))^2+({{\operatorname{mt}}}(C_i,q))^2)\ ,$$ where the latter inequality follows from $$({{\operatorname{mt}}}(C_i,z))^2+({{\operatorname{mt}}}(C_i,q))^2-3\cdot{{\operatorname{mt}}}(C_i,q)
\ge 4+({{\operatorname{mt}}}(C_i,q))^2-3\cdot{{\operatorname{mt}}}(C_i,q)>0\ .$$ If $C_i\cap
T(Y_{cl})$ consists of points $z_1\ne z_2\in{{\mathbb P}}^2$, and $C_i$ is singular at $z_1$, i.e., ${{\operatorname{mt}}}(C_i,z_1)\ge 2$, then, moving the point $z_2$ and respectively the curve $C_i$, we similarly obtain $$d_i^2\ge({{\operatorname{mt}}}(C_i,z_1))^2+({{\operatorname{mt}}}(C_i,z_2))^2-{{\operatorname{mt}}}(C_i,z_2)\ge\frac{2}{3}
(({{\operatorname{mt}}}(C_i,z_1))^2+({{\operatorname{mt}}}(C_i,z_2))^2)\ .$$
The previous argument in general leads to (\[e25\]), when $C_i\cap Y$ is reducible. So, we assume that $C_i\cap Y$ is irreducible, and $C_i$ contains at least three points of $T(Y_{cl})$.
Let $k\ge 2$ in (\[e26\]). We shall refine the statement of Lemma \[l1\] up to (see the notation of Lemma \[l1\]) $$\sum_{q\in T_i\backslash T(\psi_k(Y))}
({{\operatorname{mt}}}(C_i,q))^2\le\frac{1}{k+1}
\sum_{q\in T_i}({{\operatorname{mt}}}(C_i,q))^2\ .\label{e27}$$ Indeed, it would immediately follow from $$\sum_{q\in T_i\cap T(\psi_{m+1}(Y))\backslash T(\psi_m(Y))}
({{\operatorname{mt}}}(C_i,q))^2\le\sum_{q\in T_i\cap T(\psi_m(Y))\backslash
T(\psi_{m-1}(Y))}({{\operatorname{mt}}}(C_i,q))^2\label{e29}$$ for all $m\ge 1$. The vertices of $T(C_i)$, $T(Y)$ are encoded by finite segments of the Puiseux expansion in a neighborhood of $z=(0,0)$ $$C_i(x,y)=(1+O(x,y))\prod_{s=1}^n(y-\xi_s(x)),\quad
n={{\operatorname{mt}}}(C_i,z),$$ $$f(Y)(x,y)=(1+O(x,y))\prod_{s=1}^{m_0}(y-\eta_s(x)), \quad
m_0={{\operatorname{mt}}}(Y,z)\ ,$$ where $\xi_s(x)$, $\eta(x)$ are fractional power series. For any $s=1,...,n$, there exists $p(s)$ such that $${{\operatorname{ord}}}(\xi_s(x)-\eta_{p(s)}(x))= \max_j{{\operatorname{ord}}}(\xi_s(x)-\eta_j(x))\ .$$ Then $$\sum_{q\in
T_i}({{\operatorname{mt}}}(C_i,q))^2=\sum_{s=1}^n\sum_{t=1}^n\min\{{{\operatorname{ord}}}(\xi_t(x)-\xi_s(x),
{{\operatorname{ord}}}(\xi_t(x)-\eta_{p(s)})\}$$ $$=
\sum_{s=1}^n\sum_{t=1}^n{{\operatorname{ord}}}\left(\xi_t(x)-
\frac{\xi_s(x)+{{\varepsilon}}_1\eta_{p(s)}(x)}{1+{{\varepsilon}}_1}\right)\ ,$$ for a generic number ${{\varepsilon}}_1$. Similarly, $$\sum_{q\in T_i\cap
T(\psi_mY)}({{\operatorname{mt}}}(C_i,q))^2=
\sum_{s=1}^n\sum_{t=1}^n{{\operatorname{ord}}}\left(\xi_t(x)-
\frac{\xi_s(x)+{{\varepsilon}}_1\eta_{p(s)}(x)}{1+{{\varepsilon}}_1}-{{\varepsilon}}x^m\right)\
,$$ for generic numbers ${{\varepsilon}}_1$, ${{\varepsilon}}$. In view of the last relation, the following series of simple inequalities yields (\[e29\]) and thereby (\[e27\]): $${{\operatorname{ord}}}\left(\xi_t(x)-
\frac{\xi_s(x)+{{\varepsilon}}_1\eta_{p(s)}(x)}{1+{{\varepsilon}}_1}-{{\varepsilon}}x^{m+1}\right)$$ $$\qquad\qquad-{{\operatorname{ord}}}\left(\xi_t(x)-
\frac{\xi_s(x)+{{\varepsilon}}_1\eta_{p(s)}(x)}{1+{{\varepsilon}}_1}-{{\varepsilon}}x^m\right)$$ $$\le{{\operatorname{ord}}}\left(\xi_t(x)-
\frac{\xi_s(x)+{{\varepsilon}}_1\eta_{p(s)}(x)}{1+{{\varepsilon}}_1}-{{\varepsilon}}x^m\right)$$ $$\qquad\qquad-{{\operatorname{ord}}}\left(\xi_t(x)-
\frac{\xi_s(x)+{{\varepsilon}}_1\eta_{p(s)}(x)}{1+{{\varepsilon}}_1}-{{\varepsilon}}x^{m-1}\right),$$ $s,t=1,...,n$.
In turn (\[e27\]) and the assumption $k\ge 2$ yield $$d_i^2\ge\sum_{q\in T_i\cap T(\psi_k(Y))}({{\operatorname{mt}}}(C_i,q))^2
\ge\frac{k}{k+1}\sum_{q\in T_i}({{\operatorname{mt}}}(C_i,q))^2
\ge\frac{2}{3}\sum_{q\in T_i}({{\operatorname{mt}}}(C_i,q))^2\ .$$
The final case in the proof of Lemma \[l2\] is that of $k=1$ being defined by (\[e26\]). This yields, in particular, that $C_i$ is singular at $z$. Indeed, $C_i$ is supposed to contain three points of $T(Y_{cl})$, and if it were nonsingular, the third point in $T(C_i)\cap T(Y_{cl})$ would have moved under transformation $\psi_2$ which contradicts the assumption $k=1$. Next, due to $T_i=T(C_i)\cap T(Y_{cl})\subset T(C_i)\cap
T(\psi_2(C_i))$, we obtain $$\sum_{q\in T_i}({{\operatorname{mt}}}(C_i,q))^2\le(C_i\cdot\psi_2(C_i))_z\
.\label{e30}$$ Let $c(x,y)=0$ be an equation of $C_i$ in an affine neighborhood of the point $z=(0,0)$. Then $$(C_i\cdot\psi_2(C_i))_z=\bigg(c(x,y)\cdot c(x,y+{{\varepsilon}}x^2)
\bigg)_z$$ $$=\bigg(c(x,y)\cdot(c(x,y+{{\varepsilon}}x^2)-c(x,y))\bigg)_z$$ $$\le\bigg(c(x,y)\cdot(x^2\frac{\partial c}{\partial y}(x,y))
\bigg)_z$$ $$=2\bigg(c(x,y)\cdot x\bigg)_z+\bigg(c(x,y)\cdot
\frac{\partial c}{\partial y}(x,y)\bigg)_z\ .\label{e31}$$ On the other hand, for small $|{{\varepsilon}}|$, in some neighborhood $U$ of $z$, one has by [@GS], Theorem 2(2), $$d_i^2\ge(C_i\cdot\psi_1C_i)_U\ge\bigg(c(x,y)
\cdot(x\frac{\partial c}{\partial y}(x,y))\bigg)_z$$ $$=\bigg(c(x,y)\cdot x\bigg)_z+\bigg(c(x,y)\cdot
\frac{\partial c}{\partial y}(x,y)\bigg)_z\ .\label{e32}$$ Here $\partial c/\partial y(0,0)=0$, since $C_i$ is singular at $z$, and hence $$\bigg(c(x,y)\cdot
\frac{\partial c}{\partial y}(x,y)\bigg)_z\ge
\bigg(c(x,y)\cdot x\bigg)_z\ .\label{e33}$$ Combining (\[e30\])-(\[e33\]), one easily derives (\[e25\]).
Analytic and topological order of a singular point. Curves with prescribed singularities
========================================================================================
Plane curves with prescribed singularities {#sec6}
------------------------------------------
\[t1\] Let $(C_i,z_i)$, $i=1,...,r$, be reduced plane curve germs with isolated singular points $z_1,...,z_r$, respectively.
\(1) If $$\left[\sqrt{\frac{3}{2}\sum_{i=1}^rM_2(Z^s(C_i,z_i))}+
\frac{\sum_{i=1}^r\deg Z^s(C_i,z_i)}{\sqrt{3
\sum_{i=1}^rM_2(Z^s(C_i,z_i))/2}}\right]\le d+1\ ,\label{e39}$$ then there exists an irreducible plane curve $C$ of degree $d$ having $r$ singular points topologically equivalent to $(C_1,z_1)$, ..., $(C_r,z_r)$, respectively, as its only singularities.
\(2) If $$\left[\sqrt{\frac{3}{2}\sum_{i=1}^rM_2(Z^a(C_i,z_i))}+
\frac{\sum_{i=1}^r\deg Z^a(C_i,z_i)}{\sqrt{3
\sum_{i=1}^rM_2(Z^a(C_i,z_i))/2}}\right]\le d+1\ ,\label{e43}$$ then there exists an irreducible plane curve $C$ of degree $d$ having $r$ singular points analytically equivalent to $(C_1,z_1)$, ..., $(C_r,z_r)$, respectively, as its only singularities.
Furthermore, the germ at $C$ of the (topological or analytic) equisingular stratum in the space of curves of degree $d$ is T-smooth.
A particular case of one singularity is of special importance, since it will be used in constructing curves with prescribed singularities on arbitrary algebraic surfaces.
\[d1\] Given a reduced plane curve germ $(C,z)$, denote by $e^s(C,z)$ (resp., $e^a(C,z)$) the minimal degree $m$ of a plane curve $F$ having only one singular point $w$, which is topologically (resp., analytically) equivalent to $(C,z)$, and satisfying the condition $$H^1({{\cal J}}_{Z/{{\mathbb P}}^2}(m-1))=0\ ,\label{e70}$$ where $Z=Z^{es}(F,w)$ (resp., $Z=Z^{ea}(F,w)$). We call the parameters $e^s$ and $s^a$ the [*topological*]{} and [*analytic*]{} order of a singular point.
It should be noticed that $e^s$, $e^a$ introduced above differ from similar singular point invariants used in [@GLS; @KT; @Lo; @Sh2]. The present notion corresponds to strong transversality in the sense of [@Sh2]. More precisely,
\[l13\] (1) Let $F$ be a plane curve as in Definition \[d1\] and $L$ be a straight line which does not pass through $w$. Then the germ at $F$ of the family of curves of degree $m$ having in a neighborhood of $w$ a singular point topologically (resp., analytically) equivalent to $(C,z)$, is smooth of expected dimension, and transversally intersects the linear system $$\{G\in|{{\cal O}}_{{{\mathbb P}}^2}(d)|\ :\ G\cap L=F\cap L\}\ .$$
\(2) Let $L\subset{{\mathbb P}}^2$ be a straight line. Then the set of $m$-tuples $\overline z$ of distinct points on $L$, such that there is a curve $F$ of degree $m$ as in Definition \[d1\], satisfying $F\cap L=\overline z$, is Zariski open in ${{\operatorname{Sym}}}^m(L)$.
[*Proof*]{}. The first statement is equivalent to $$H^1({{\cal J}}_{Z\cup(F\cap L)/{{\mathbb P}}^2}(m))=0$$ (see details in [@GL; @GLS1; @Sh], where $Z$ is understood as in Definition \[d1\]), which follows from (\[e70\]) and the exact sequence $$0=H^1({{\cal J}}_{Z/{{\mathbb P}}^2}(m-1))\to H^1({{\cal J}}_{Z\cup(F\cap L)/{{\mathbb P}}^2}(m))
\to H^1(L,{{\cal J}}_{F\cap L}(m))=0\ .$$
For the second statement take a curve $F$ as in Definition \[d1\], which meets $L$ transversally, and the germ $M$ at $F$ of the family of curves of degree $m$ having in a neighborhood of $w$ a singular point topologically (resp., analytically) equivalent to $(C,z)$. Consider the map $G\in M\mapsto G\cap L\in{{\operatorname{Sym}}}^m(L)$. Then the preceding statement of Lemma means that this map is a submersion, and we are done. [$\Box$]{}
\[t2\] For any reduced plane curve germ $(C,z)$, $$e^s(C,z)\le\sqrt{\frac{3}{2}M_2(Z^s(C,z))}+ \frac{\deg
Z^s(C,z)}{\sqrt{3 M_2(Z^s(C,z))/2}}-1\ ,\label{e45}$$ $$e^a(C,z)\le\sqrt{\frac{3}{2}M_2(Z^a(C,z))}+ \frac{\deg
Z^a(C,z)}{\sqrt{3 M_2(Z^a(C,z))/2}}-1\ .\label{e44}$$
The hypotheses of Theorems \[t1\], \[t2\] can be translated into more familiar singularity invariants.
\[t3\] Let $(C_i,z_i)$, $i=1,...,r$, and $(C,z)$ be plane curve germs with isolated singular points $z_1,...,z_r$ and $z$, respectively. Denote by $n$, $k$ and $t$ the number of nodes, cusps and ordinary triple points, respectively, among $(C_1,z_1)$, ..., $(C_r,z_r)$.
\(1) If $$6n+10k+\frac{169}{6}t+\frac{25}{3}u+\frac{27}{2}
\sum_{(C_i,z_i)\ne A_1,A_2,D_4}{{\delta}}(C_i,z_i)\le d^2-2d+3\ ,\label{e50}$$ where $u$ is the number of points of type $A_{2m}$, $m\ge 2$, among $(C_i,z_i)$, $i=1,...,r$, then there exists an irreducible curve of degree $d$ having $r$ singular points topologically equivalent to $(C_1,z_1)$, ..., $(C_r,z_r)$, respectively, as its only singularities.
\(2) If $$6n+10k+\frac{169}{6}t+
\sum_{(C_i,z_i)\ne A_1,A_2,D_4}\frac{(5\mu(C_i,z_i)+3{{\delta}}(C_i,z_i)/2)^2}{3
\mu(C_i,z_i)+3{{\delta}}(C_i,z_i)/2}\le d^2-2d+3\ ,\label{e57}$$ then there exists an irreducible curve of degree $d$ having $r$ singular points analytically equivalent to $C_1,z_1)$, ..., $(C_r,z_r)$, respectively, as its only singularities.
\(3) If $(C,z)$ is of type $A_m$, $m\ge 1$, then $$e^s(C,z)=e^a(C,z)\le 2[\sqrt{m+5}]\ ;$$ if $(C,z)$ is of type $D_m$, $m\ge 4$, then $$e^s(C,z)=e^a(C,z)\le 2[\sqrt{m+7}]+1\ ;$$ if $(C,z)$ is of type $E_m$, $m=6,7,8$, then $$e^s(C,z)=e^a(C,z)=\left[\frac{m+2}{2}\right]\ ;$$ if $(C,z)$ is not simple, then $$e^s(C,z)\le\frac{9}{\sqrt{6}}\sqrt{{{\delta}}(C,z)}-1\ ,$$ $$e^a(C,z)\le\frac{5\mu(C,z)+3{{\delta}}(C,z)/2}{\sqrt{3\mu(C,z)+3{{\delta}}(C,z)/2}}-1
\le 3\sqrt{\mu(C,z)}-1\ .$$
\[r2\] We should like to point out that, for specific singularities, invariants in the existence conditions can be reduced, for example, a curve with $n$ nodes and $k$ cusps exists if $2n+4k\le
d^2+O(d)$ [@Sh1], Theorem 4.1. We, however, have focused on obtaining a universal existence condition rather than an optimality of singularity invariants, though our results substantially improve all previously known general existence conditions [@GLS; @Lo]. For example, since ${{\delta}}\le2\mu/3$ for singularities different from nodes, cusps and ordinary triple points, (\[e57\]) yields the following weaker, but rather simpler sufficient existence condition for an irreducible plane curve with one or many singularities prescribed up to analytic equivalence: $$e^a(C,z)\le 3\sqrt{\mu(C,z)}-2\ (\text{as}\ \mu(C,z)>4),
\quad\sum_{i=1}^r\mu(C_i,z_i)\le\frac{1}{9}(d^2-2d+3)\ ,$$ which is much better than the previously known sufficient condition for the existence of an irreducible curve with singularities prescribed only up to topological equivalence (see[@Lo; @GLS]): $$e^s(C,z)<\min\left\{\sqrt{29\mu(C,z)}+\frac{9}{2},\
\sqrt{41.4\mu(C,z)}-2\right\}\ ,$$ $$\sum_{i=1}^r\mu(C_i,z_i)\le\frac{1}{46}(d+2)^2\ .$$
Proof of Theorem \[t1\]
-----------------------
Consider, first, the case of topological equivalence of singular points. By Lemma \[l4\], without loss of generality, we can suppose that $Z^s(C_i,z_i)$ is a generic element of ${{\operatorname{Def}}}(Z^s(C_i,z_i))$, $i=1,...,r$.
Inequality (\[e39\]) means by Proposition \[p3\] that $$H^1({{\cal J}}_{Z/{{\mathbb P}}^2}(d-1))=0\ ,\label{e48}$$ where $Z=Z^s(C_1,z_1)\cup...\cup Z^s(C_r,z_r)$. Introduce the schemes
- $Z\cup\{z\}$, where $z\in{{\mathbb P}}^2\backslash
\{z_1,...,z_r\}$;
- $Z^{(i)}=Z^s(C_1,z_1)\cup...\cup Z^s(C_{i-1},z_{i-1})
\cup Z^s_1(C_i,z_i)\cup Z^s(C_{i+1},z_{i+1})\cup...\cup
Z^s(C_r,z_r)$, $i=1,...,r$.
We claim that $$\begin{aligned}
&H^1({{\cal J}}_{Z\cup\{z\}/{{\mathbb P}}^2}(d))=0,\quad z\in{{\mathbb P}}^2\backslash Z\ ,
\label{e46}\\
&H^1({{\cal J}}_{Z^{(i)}/{{\mathbb P}}^2}(d))=0,\quad i=1,...,r\ .\label{e47}\end{aligned}$$ Indeed, let $L_0$ be a generic straight line through $z$, and $L_i$ be a generic straight line through $z_i$. Then $$\deg(L_0\cap Z^{(0)}(z))=\deg\{z\}=1\le d+1\quad
\Longrightarrow\quad H^1(L_0,{{\cal J}}_{z}(d))=0\ .$$ In view of (\[e48\]), $$H^1(L_i,{{\cal J}}_{L_i\cap Z}(d-1))=0\quad
\Longrightarrow\quad\deg(L_i\cap Z^s(C_i,z_i))\le d\ ;$$ hence $$\deg(L_i\cap Z^s_1(C_i,z_i))
\le d+1\quad\Longrightarrow H^1(L_i,{{\cal J}}_{Z^{(i)}}(d))=0\ .$$ Then, using the last $h^1$-vanishing statement, the relation $Z^s_1(C_i,z_i):L_i=Z^s(C_i,z_i)$ coming from Lemmas 2.14, 2.15 [@GLS], and the exact sequences $$\begin{aligned}
&0\to{{\cal J}}_{Z/{{\mathbb P}}^2}(d-1)\to{{\cal J}}_{Z\cup\{z\}/{{\mathbb P}}^2}(d)\to{{\cal J}}_z(d)\to 0\ ,\nonumber\\
&0\to{{\cal J}}_{Z/{{\mathbb P}}^2}(d-1)\to{{\cal J}}_{Z^{(i)}/{{\mathbb P}}^2}(d)\to{{\cal J}}_{L_i\cap
Z^s_1(C_i,z_i)/L_i} (d)\to 0\ ,\nonumber\end{aligned}$$ one can easily derive (\[e46\]), (\[e47\]) from (\[e48\]).
By Lemma \[l5\](2), the $h^1$-vanishing (\[e47\]) implies that, for any $i=1,...,r$, there exists a curve $D_i\in|{{\cal J}}_{Z/{{\mathbb P}}^2}(d)|$ such that $(D_i,z_i)$ is topologically equivalent to $(C_i,z_i)$, $1\le j\le r$. Again by Lemma \[l5\](2), for a generic curve $D$ of the linear system ${{\lambda}}_1D_1+...+{{\lambda}}_rD_r$, ${{\lambda}}_1,...,{{\lambda}}_r\in{{\mathbb C}}$, the germs $(D,z_i)$ are topologically equivalent to $(C_i,z_i)$, $i=1,...,r$, respectively. Furthermore, we can suppose that $D$ is reduced. Let $w_1,...,w_m$ be all singular points of $D$ outside $z_1,...,z_r$. By virtue of (\[e46\]), there exist curves $D'_1,...,D'_m\in|{{\cal J}}_{Z/{{\mathbb P}}^2}(d)|$ such that $w_j\not\in D'_j$, $j=1,...,m$. By Bertini’s theorem, the singular locus of a generic curve $D'$ of the linear system ${{\lambda}}D+{{\Lambda}}'_1D'_1+...+{{\lambda}}'_mD'_m$, ${{\lambda}},{{\lambda}}'_1,...,{{\lambda}}'_m\in{{\mathbb C}}$, is $\{z_1,...,z_r\}$, and $(D',z_i)$ is topologically equivalent to $(C_i,z_i)$, $i=1,...,r$.
Finally, we show that $D'$ is irreducible. The above argument shows that the linear system $|{{\cal J}}_{Z/{{\mathbb P}}^2}(d)|$ has no fixed part. If all the curves in $|{{\cal J}}_{Z/{{\mathbb P}}^2}(d)|$ are reducible, then by Bertini’s theorem a generic curve $D'\in|{{\cal J}}_{Z/{{\mathbb P}}^2}(d)|$ splits into irreducible components, which all belong to a one-dimensional linear system. In particular, $$\dim|{{\cal J}}_{Z/{{\mathbb P}}^2}(d)|\le d\ .$$ On the other hand, by (\[e48\]), $$\dim|{{\cal J}}_{Z/{{\mathbb P}}^2}(d)|=\frac{d(d+3)}{2}-\deg Z\ .$$ Inequalities (\[e38\]) and (\[e39\]) yield $$d+2>\sqrt{\frac{3}{2}M_2(Z)}+\frac{\deg Z}{\sqrt{3M_2(Z)/2}}$$ $$\ge\sqrt{\frac{3}{2}\deg Z}+\frac{\deg Z}{\sqrt{3\deg Z/2}}=
\frac{7}{\sqrt{6}}\sqrt{\deg Z}\ .$$ Hence $$\dim|{{\cal J}}_{Z/{{\mathbb P}}^2}(d)|-d=\frac{d(d+1)}{2}-\deg Z$$ $$>\frac{13}{12}\deg Z-\frac{15}{2\sqrt{6}}\sqrt{\deg Z}+1\ge 0$$ as $\deg Z\ge 6$, and we are done, since the remaining cases of one node or one cusp are obviously covered by (\[e39\]).
The case of the analytic equivalence of singular points can be treated in the same way, when using Lemmas \[l7\](2) and \[l8\] instead of Lemma \[l5\](2).
Finally, we note that, by construction, $Z^s(D,z_i)=Z^s(C_i,z_i)$ in the first case of the Theorem, and $Z^a(D,z_i)=Z^a(C_i,z_i)$ in the second case, $i=1,...,r$. In view of $$I^s(D,z_i)\subset I^{es}(D,z_i),\quad I^a(D,z_i)\subset I^{ea}(D,z_i),
\quad i=1,...,r\ ,$$ (\[e48\]) implies $$H^1({{\cal J}}_{Z'/{{\mathbb P}}^2}(d))=0\ ,$$ with the zero-dimensional scheme $Z'$ defined at points $z_1,...,z_r$ by the ideals $I^{es}(D,z_i)$ or $I^{ea}(D,z_i)$, respectively to the case considered. In turn the last $h^1$-vanishing means the T-smoothness of the topological or analytic equisingular stratum at $D$ in the space of curves of degree $d$ (see [@GL; @GLS; @GLS1; @Sh] for details).
Proof of Theorem \[t3\]
-----------------------
The case $d\le 3$ is trivial, so we assume that $d\ge 4$.
\(1) If there are no nodes and cusps among $(C_i,z_i)$, $i=1,...,r$, then for an ordinary triple point $(C_i,z_i)$ $$\deg Z^s(C_i,z_i)=6,\quad M_2(Z^s(C_i,z_i))=9\ ,$$ for a point of type $A_{2m}$, $m\ge 2$, by (\[e38\]) and Lemma \[l10\], $$\deg Z^s(C_i,z_i)=3{{\delta}}(C_i,z_i)+2,\quad
M_2(Z^s(C_i,z_i))=4{{\delta}}(C_i,z_i)+2,$$ and for the rest of the germs, $$\deg Z^s(C_i,z_i)\le 3{{\delta}}(C_i,z_i),\quad M_2(Z^s(C_i,z_i))\le
4{{\delta}}(C_i,z_i)\ .$$ Hence $$\left(\sqrt{\frac{3}{2}\sum_{i=1}^rM_2(Z^s(C_i,z_i))}+
\frac{\sum_{i=1}^r\deg Z^s(C_i,z_i)}{\sqrt{3
\sum_{i=1}^rM_2(Z^s(C_i,z_i))/2}}\right)^2$$ $$\le\frac{(9\sum_{(C_i,z_i)\ne D_4}{{\delta}}(C_i,z_i)+39t/2+5u)^2}{6
\sum_{(C_i,z_i)\ne D_4}{{\delta}}(C_i,z_i)+27t/2+3u}
\le\frac{27}{2}\sum_{(C_i,z_i)\ne
D_4}{{\delta}}(C_i,z_i)+\frac{169}{6}t+\frac{25}{3}u \ .\label{e54}$$ Thus, (\[e50\]) implies (\[e39\]), and we are done.
Assume that $n+k>0$. Put $$s=\max\{t\ge 2\ :\ \sum_{i=1}^{t-2}(d-i)+1\le 3n+5k\}\ .$$ Observe that by (\[e50\]), $s\le d-1$. Inequalities (\[e50\]), (\[e54\]) also yield $$\sqrt{\frac{3}{2}\sum_{(C_i,z_i)\ne A_1,A_2}M_2(Z^s(C_i,z_i))}+
\frac{\sum_{(C_i,z_i)\ne A_1,A_2}\deg Z^s(C_i,z_i)}{\sqrt{3
\sum_{(C_i,z_i)\ne A_1,A_2}M_2(Z^s(C_i,z_i))/2}}$$ $$\le\sqrt{\frac{27}{2}
\sum_{(C_i,z_i)\ne
A_1,A_2,D_4}{{\delta}}(C_i,z_i)+\frac{169}{6}t+\frac{25}{3}u}$$ $$\le\sqrt{d^2-2d+3-6n-10k}\le\sqrt{d^2-2d+3-2\sum_{i=1}^{s-2}(d-i)-2}$$ $$=\sqrt{d^2-2(s-1)d+(s-1)(s-2)+1}\le d-s+1\ ;$$ hence, by Proposition \[p3\], $$H^1({{\cal J}}_{Z'/{{\mathbb P}}^2}(d-s-1))=0\
,$$ where $Z'$ is the part of $Z$ without nodes and cusps. Then we derive (\[e39\]), and thereby the first statement of Theorem \[t3\], from
\[l12\] Let $L\subset{{\mathbb P}}^2$ be a straight line, $X,Y\subset{{\mathbb P}}^2$ be zero-dimensional schemes such that $L\cap Y=\emptyset$, $X\cap Y=\emptyset$, and $X=X^{(1)}\cup X^{(2)}
\cup X^{(3)}\cup X^{(4)}$, where $X^{(1)}$ is a union of schemes of degree $1$ (i.e., locally defined by the maximal ideal), $X^{(2)}$ is a union of schemes of degree $2$ (i.e., locally defined by ideals like $\langle y,x^2\rangle$), $X^{(3)}$ is a union of schemes from ${{\operatorname{Def}}}(Z^s(\text{node}))$ (i.e., locally defined by the square of the maximal ideal), $Z^{(4)}$ is a union of schemes from ${{\operatorname{Def}}}(Z^s(\text{cusp}))$ (i.e., locally defined by ideals like $\langle y^2,yx^2,x^3\rangle$). Assume that
1. $H^1({{\cal J}}_{Y/{{\mathbb P}}^2}(d-s-1))=0$, where $$s=\max\{t\ge 2\ :\ \sum_{i=1}^{t-2}(d-i)+1\le\deg X\}\quad\text{and}
\quad s\le d-1\ ;$$
2. $X^{(4)}\cap L=\emptyset$, $\deg(X\cap L)\le d$;
3. the components of $X$ which do not meet $L$ are placed in ${{\mathbb P}}^2\backslash(Y\cup L)$ in a general position.
Then $$H^1({{\cal J}}_{X\cup Y/{{\mathbb P}}^2}(d-1))=0\ .\label{e55}$$
[*Proof of Lemma \[l12\]*]{}. We perform induction on $s$, using the so-called “Horace method" [@H] (see also [@GLS] and Step 4 in the proof of Proposition \[p3\] above).
If $s=2$, then $\deg X\le d-1$. We specialize all the components of $X$ on the line $L$ with maximal possible intersection with $L$. First, we note that (\[e55\]) for the specialized scheme $X$ implies the same relation for the original $X$ due to the semicontinuity of cohomology. Second, $$\deg((X:l)\cap L)\le\deg(X\cap L)\le\deg X\le d-1\ ,$$ and $X\subset L^2$. Then (\[e55\]) follows from the two exact sequences $$0=H^1({{\cal J}}_{Y/{{\mathbb P}}^2}(d-3))\to H^1({{\cal J}}_{(X:L)\cup Y/{{\mathbb P}}^2}(d-2))
\to H^1(L,{{\cal J}}_{(X:L)\cap L}(d-2))=0\ ,$$ $$H^1({{\cal J}}_{(X:L)\cup Y/{{\mathbb P}}^2}(d-2))\to H^1({{\cal J}}_{X\cup Y/{{\mathbb P}}^2}(d-1))
\to H^1(L,{{\cal J}}_{X\cap L}(d-1))=0\ .\label{e56}$$
Let $s\ge 3$ and $d-1\le\deg(X\cap L)\le d$. Then $H^1(L,{{\cal J}}_{X\cap L}(d-1))=0$, and (\[e56\]) reduces (\[e55\]) to $H^1({{\cal J}}_{(X:L)\cup Y/{{\mathbb P}}^2}(d-2))=0$, which holds by the induction assumption. Indeed, one can easily check that $X:L$ is the union of zero-dimensional schemes of the same four kinds as $X$, the intersection $(X:L)\cap L$ is the union of schemes of degree $1$, and $\deg((X:L)\cap L)<\deg(X\cap L)\le d$. At last, since $$\sum_{i=1}^{s-1}(d-i)+1>\deg X\ ,$$ then $$\sum_{i=1}^{s-2}(d-1-i)+1>\deg X-(d-1)\ge\deg(X:L)\ ,$$ so $$s-1\ge\max\{t\ge 2\ :\ \sum_{i=1}^{t-2}(d-1-i)+1\le\deg X\}\ .$$
Let $s\ge 3$ and $\deg(X\cap L)\le d-2$. If all the components of $X$ are specialized on $L$ then we complete the proof as in the case $s=2$. If there are components of $X$ out of $L$, we specialize some of them on $L$ keeping three rules:
- $\deg(X\cap L)\le d$,
- if $\deg(X\cap L)\le d-2$ then a component $X'$ of degree $2$ of $X$ is specialized on $L$ so that $\deg(X'\cap L)=2$ (with tangency),
- if $\deg(X\cap L)\le d-3$ then a component $X'\in
{{\operatorname{Def}}}(\text{cusp})$ is specialized on $L$ so that $\deg(X'\cap L)=3$ (with tangency).
If we end up with $d-1\le\deg(X\cap L)\le d$, then notice that the components of $X:L$ meeting $L$ are of degree $\le 2$ or belong to ${{\operatorname{Def}}}(\text{node})$, and $\deg((X:L)\cap L)\le\deg(X\cap L)-1\le
d-1$; this allows us to complete the proof as in the preceding paragraph. If we end up with $\deg(X\cap L)\le d-2$, and all components of $X$ specialized on $L$ so that the components from ${{\operatorname{Def}}}(\text{cusp})$ are tangent to $L$, then $X\subset L^2$ and we complete the proof as in the case $s=2$. [$\Box$]{}
\(2) If there are no nodes and cusps among $(C_i,z_i)$, $i=1,...,r$, then by (\[e38\]) and Lemma \[l10\], $$\deg Z^a(C_i,z_i)\le 2\mu(C_i,z_i),\ M_2(Z^a(C_i,z_i))\le
2\mu(C_i,z_i)+{{\delta}}(C_i,z_i),\ (C_i,z_i)\ne D_4\ .$$ Hence $$\left(\sqrt{\frac{3}{2}\sum_{i=1}^rM_2(Z^a(C_i,z_i))}+
\frac{\sum_{i=1}^r\deg Z^a(C_i,z_i)}{\sqrt{3
\sum_{i=1}^rM_2(Z^a(C_i,z_i))/2}}\right)^2$$ $$\le\frac{(\sum_{(C_i,z_i)\ne D_4}(5\mu(C_i,z_i)+3
{{\delta}}(C_i,z_i)/2)+39t/2)^2}{\sum_{(C_i,z_i)\ne D_4}(3\mu(C_i,z_i)+3
{{\delta}}(C_i,z_i)/2)+27t/2}$$ $$\le\sum_{(C_i,z_i)\ne D_4}\frac{(5\mu(C_i)+3{{\delta}}(C_i,z_i)/2)^2}{3
\mu(C_i,z_i)+3{{\delta}}(C_i,z_i)/2}+\frac{169}{6}t\ .$$ Thus, (\[e57\]) implies (\[e43\]), and we are done.
If $n+k>0$ we prove the second statement of Theorem \[t3\] in the same way as in the first part of the proof.
\(3) Estimates for $e^s(C,z)$, $e^a(C,z)$ (increased by $1$ in view of condition (\[e70\])), where $(C,z)$ is of type $A_k,D_k$, are taken from [@Lo]. For singularities $E_k$, $k=6,7,8$, one has classically known curves of degree $d=4,4,5$, respectively. Relation (\[e70\]) in these cases holds by [@DPW], Theorem 1.1(2), under the condition $k<3d-3$. The other estimates follow from (\[e38\]), Lemma \[l10\], Theorem \[t2\], and the inequality ${{\delta}}(C,z)\le
2/3\cdot\mu(C,z)$ for a non-simple singular point.
Curves with prescribed singularities on algebraic surfaces {#sec4}
----------------------------------------------------------
Let ${{\Sigma}}$ be a smooth algebraic surface and $D\subset{{\Sigma}}$ be a divisor with $\dim|D|>0$. To obtain a criterion for the existence of a curve $C\in|D|$ with prescribed singularities, we combine [@Sh2], Theorem 1, which basically reduces the problem to $h^1$-vanishing for the ideal sheaf of a zero-dimensional subscheme of ${{\Sigma}}$ defined by $e^s$ or $e^a$-powers of local maximal ideals, [@KT], Theorem 2.1, which provides a numerical sufficient condition for the above $h^1$-vanishing, and Theorem \[t3\](3) with upper bounds to $e^s$ and $e^a$.
\[t4\] Let ${{\Sigma}}$ be a smooth projective surface, $D$ a divisor on ${{\Sigma}}$ with $D-K_{{{\Sigma}}}$ nef, and $L\subset{{\Sigma}}$ a very ample divisor. Let $(C_1,z_1)$, ..., $(C_r,z_r)$ be reduced singular germs of plane curves, among them $n$ nodes and $k$ cusps.
\(1) If $$18n+32k+27\sum_{{{\delta}}(C_i,z_i)>1}{{\delta}}(C_i,z_i)\le(D-K_{{\Sigma}}-L)^2\
,\label{e60}$$ $$(D-L-K_{{\Sigma}})L>\frac{9}{\sqrt{6}}\max_{1\le i\le r}\sqrt{{{\delta}}(
C_i,z_i)}+1\ ,\label{e61}$$ and, for any irreducible curve $B$ with $B^2=0$ and $\dim|B|_a>0$, $$\frac{9}{\sqrt{6}}\max_{1\le i\le r}\sqrt{{{\delta}}(C_i,z_i)}<
(D-K_{{\Sigma}}-L)B+1\ ,\label{e62}$$ then there exists an irreducible curve $C\in|D|$ with $r$ singular points topologically equivalent to $(C_1,z_1)$, ..., $(C_r,z_r)$, respectively, as its only singularities.
\(2) If $$18n+32k+18\sum_{\mu(C_i,z_i)>2}\mu(C_i,z_i)\le(D-K_{{\Sigma}}-L)^2\
,$$ $$(D-L-K_{{\Sigma}})L>3\max_{1\le i\le r}\sqrt{\mu(C_i,z_i)}+1\ ,$$ and, for any irreducible curve $B$ with $B^2=0$ and $\dim|B|_a>0$, $$3\max_{1\le i\le r}\sqrt{\mu(C_i,z_i)}<
(D-K_{{\Sigma}}-L)B+1\ ,$$ then there exists an irreducible curve $C\in|D|$ with $r$ singular points analytically equivalent to $(C_1,z_1)$, ..., $(C_r,z_r)$, respectively, as its only singularities.
Here $|B|_a$ means the family of curves algebraically equivalent to $B$.
[*Proof*]{}. [*Step 1*]{}. Since, $e^s(\text{node})=2$, $e^s(\text{cusp})=3$, and by Theorem \[t3\](3), $$e^s(C_i,z_i)+1\le\frac{9}{\sqrt{6}}\sqrt{{{\delta}}(C_i,z_i)}\quad
\text{as}\quad{{\delta}}(C_i,z_i)>1\ ,$$ (\[e60\]) and (\[e62\]) imply $$2\sum_{i=1}^r(e^s(C_i,z_i)+1)^2\le(D-K_{{\Sigma}}-L)^2\
,$$ $$(D-K_{{\Sigma}}-L)B>\max_{1\le i\le r}e^s(C_i,z_i)\ ,$$ for curves $B$ as in (\[e62\]). By [@KT], Theorem 2.1, this yields $$H^1({{\Sigma}},{{\cal J}}_Z(D-L))=0\ ,$$ where $Z\subset {{\Sigma}}$ is a zero-dimensional scheme concentrated at generic points $w_1,...,w_r\in{{\Sigma}}$ and defined by the ideals $({{\mathfrak m}}_{w_i})^{e^s(C_i,z_i)}$, $i=1,...,r$.
[*Step 2*]{}. Let $w_0$ be a generic point in ${{\Sigma}}\backslash\{w_1,...,w_r\}$, and $w$ be any point in ${{\Sigma}}\backslash\{w_1,...,w_r,w\}$. Since $L$ is very ample, there is a nonsingular connected curve in $|L|$ (which we further denote by $L$ as well), which passes through $w,w_0$ and, may be, through one of $w_1,...,w_r$. In the exact sequence $$0=H^1({{\Sigma}},{{\cal J}}_Z(D-L))\to H^1({{\Sigma}},{{\cal J}}_{Z\cup\{w,w_0\}}(D))\to
H^1(L,{{\cal J}}_{(Z\cap L)\cup\{w,w_0\}}(D))\ ,$$ the latter term vanishes, since by (\[e61\]), $$\deg{{\cal J}}_{(Z\cap L)\cup\{w,w_0\}}(D)\ge DL-2-
\max_{1\le i\le r}e^s(C_i,z_i)>L^2+LK_{{\Sigma}}=2g(L)-2\ .$$ Hence $$H^1({{\Sigma}},{{\cal J}}_{Z\cup\{w,w_0\}}(D))=0\ .$$ In particular, there exists a curve in $|{{\cal J}}_{Z\cup\{w_0\}}(D)|$ which does not pass through $w$. Since $w_0$ is generic, and $w$ is any point outside $w_0,...,w_r$, by Bertini’s theorem a generic curve $D_0\in
|{{\cal J}}_{Z\cup\{w_0\}}(D)|$ is nonsingular outside $w_1,...,w_r$, and this linear system has no fixed part. In addition, $D_0$ is irreducible. Indeed, otherwise, by Bertini’s theorem, $D_0$ and all close curves in $|{{\cal J}}_{Z\cup\{w_0\}}(D)|$ would split into variable components which belong to the same one-dimensional algebraic family, but this contradicts the fact that $D_0$ is nonsingular at the fixed point $w_0$.
[*Step 3*]{}. For any $i=1,...r$, define a zero-dimensional scheme $Z_i$ which coincides with $Z$ at $w_j$, $1\le j\le r$, $j\ne i$, and is given by the ideal $({{\mathfrak m}}_{w_i})^{e^s(C_i,z_i)+1}$ at $w_i$. We claim that $$H^1({{\Sigma}},{{\cal J}}_{Z_i}(D))=0\ .\label{e63}$$ Indeed, there exists a nonsingular curve in $|L|$ (which we again denote by $L$ for the sake of notation) which passes through $w_i$ and does not contain any point $w_j$, $j\ne i$. Then in the exact sequence $$0=H^1({{\Sigma}},{{\cal J}}_Z(D-L))\to H^1({{\Sigma}},{{\cal J}}_{Z_i}(D))\to
H^1(L,{{\cal J}}_{Z_i\cap L}(D))\ ,$$ the last term vanishes since by (\[e61\]), $$DL-\deg(Z_i\cap L)\ge DL-e^s(C_i,z_i)>L^2+LK_{{\Sigma}}=2g(L)-2\ .$$
[*Step 4*]{}. Using (\[e63\]), for any $i=1,...,r$, we can find a curve $D_i\in|{{\cal J}}_{Z/{{\Sigma}}}(D)|$ which has an ordinary singular point of multiplicity $e^s(C_i,z_i)$ at $w_i$, and, in addition, in some fixed local coordinates in a neighborhood of $w_i$, the $e^s(C_i,z_i)$-jet at $w_i$ of a local equation of $D_i$ is a [*generic*]{}[^6] $e^s(C_i,z_i)$-form. Then, a generic curve $\widetilde D$ in the linear system spanned by $D_0,D_1,...,D_r$, is irreducible, nonsingular outside $w_1,...,w_r$, has an ordinary singular point of multiplicity $e^s(C_i,z_i)$ at $w_i$, $i=1,...,r$, and, finally, the $e^s(C_i,z_i)$-jet at $w_i$ of a local equation of $\widetilde D$ in some fixed coordinates in a neighborhood of $w_i$ is a generic $e^s(C_i,z_i)$-form, $i=1,...,r$.
[*Step 5*]{}. By Lemma \[l13\](2), for any $i=1,...,r$, there is an affine curve $F_i$ of degree $e^s(C_i,z_i)$ with its only singular point topologically equivalent to $(C_i,z_i)$, and such that the leading form of the defining polynomial coincides with the $e^s(C_i,z_i)$-jet at $w_i$ of a local equation of $\widetilde D$. Now we apply [@Sh2], Theorem 1, to deform $\widetilde D$ into the required curve $C\in|D|$ with prescribed singularities.
Namely, in the assertion of [@Sh2], Theorem 1, $S=S_1=S_3=S_4=S_5=\emptyset$, $S_2=\{w_1,...,w_r\}$, the affine curves $F_1,...,F_r$ serve as deformation models for the singular points of $\widetilde D$, so that these models are strongly transversal with respect to the topological equivalence of singular points in view of (\[e70\]). Furthermore, the $h^1$-vanishing condition in [@Sh2], Theorem 1, reads as $$H^1({{\Sigma}},{{\cal J}}_{\widetilde Z}(D))=0\ ,$$ where $\widetilde Z=\bigcup_iZ^{es}(\widetilde D,w_i)$, which immediately follows, say, from (\[e63\]), since $Z_i\supset\widetilde Z$ for any $i=1,...,r$.
[*Step 6*]{}. The second statement of Theorem \[t4\] can be proven in the same way, when taking into account that, by Theorem \[t3\](3), $e^a(C_i,z_i)\le3\sqrt{\mu(C_i,z_i)}-1$ as $\mu(C_i,z_i)>2$. [$\Box$]{}
Analytic order of a critical point {#sec3}
==================================
Let $f\in\hat{{\cal O}}_{{{\mathbb C}}^2,0}$, $\mu(f)<\infty$. Denote by $e^a(f)$ the minimal degree of a polynomial $p\in{{\mathbb C}}[x,y]$ right equivalent to $f$ at $0$, i.e., there is a local diffeomorphism $\varphi:({{\mathbb C}}^2,0)\to({{\mathbb C}}^2,0)$ such that $p=f\circ\varphi$ in a neighborhood of the origin.
\[t5\] If $f$ is of type $A_m$, $m\ge 1$, then $$e^a(f)\le 2[\sqrt{m+5}]-1\ ;$$ if $f$ is of type $D_m$, $m\ge 4$, then $$e^a(f)\le 2[\sqrt{m+7}]\ ;$$ if $f$ is of type $E_m$, $m=6,7,8$, then $$e^a(f)=\left[\frac{m+2}{2}\right]\ ;$$ if $f$ is not simple, then $$e^a(f)<\frac{4}{\sqrt{3}}\sqrt{3\mu(f)-2\cdot{{\operatorname{mt}}}(f)+2}-1\
.\label{e72}$$
[*Proof*]{}. Since the case of a simple germ $f$ coincides with the case of a simple curve germ $\{f=0\}$, we take corresponding bounds from Theorem \[t3\](3) (note only that here there is no need to increase the estimates from [@Lo] by $1$, since (\[e70\]) is not required). Let $f$ be not simple. We claim that $${{\operatorname{ord}}}_1^{an}(Z(f))<\frac{4}{\sqrt{3}}\sqrt{3\mu(f)-2\cdot{{\operatorname{mt}}}(f)+2}-1\
.$$ Indeed, by (\[e73\]), Lemma \[l10\], and Proposition \[p3\] $${{\operatorname{ord}}}_1^{an}(Z_0(f))\le\frac{\dim Z_0(f)}{\sqrt{3M_2(Z_0(f))/2}}+
\sqrt{\frac{3}{2}M_2(Z_0(f))}-2$$ $$<\frac{4}{\sqrt{3}}\sqrt{\deg Z_0(f)}-2\le
\frac{4}{\sqrt{3}}\sqrt{3\mu(f)-2\cdot{{\operatorname{mt}}}(f)+2}-2\ .$$ Hence there is a germ $g\in\hat{{\cal O}}_{{{\mathbb C}}^2,0}$ right equivalent to $f$ such that $$H^1({{\cal O}}{Z_0(g)/{{\mathbb P}}^2}(m))=0,\quad
m=\left[\frac{4}{\sqrt{3}}\sqrt{3\mu(f)-2\cdot{{\operatorname{mt}}}(f)+2}\right]-2\
.$$ For a generic straight line $L$ intersecting $Z_0(g)$, we have $$Z(g):L=Z_0(g),\quad \deg(Z(g)\cap L)\le{{\operatorname{mt}}}Z_0(g)+1\le\deg
Z_0(g)\le m\ ;$$ hence $$0=H^1({{\cal O}}_{Z_0(g)/{{\mathbb P}}^2}(m))\to H^1({{\cal O}}_{Z(g)/{{\mathbb P}}^2}(m+1))
\to H^1(L,{{\cal O}}_{Z(g)\cap L}(m+1))=0\ ,$$ which yields $$H^1({{\cal O}}_{Z(g)/{{\mathbb P}}^2}(m+1))=0\ .$$ Then the surjectivity of the morphism $$H^0({{\cal O}}_{{{\mathbb P}}^2}(m+1))\to H^0({{\cal O}}_{Z(g)})=\hat{{\cal O}}_{{{\mathbb C}}^2,0}/I(g)\
,$$ gives us a polynomial $p\in{{\mathbb C}}[x,y]$ of degree $\le m+1$ such that $p-g\in I(g)$, and we are done by Lemma \[l11\](2).
Higher-dimensional case: example {#sec7}
================================
Let $f:({{\mathbb C}}^n)\to({{\mathbb C}},0)$, $n\ge 3$, be a germ of a holomorphic function with an isolated critical point, i.e., $\mu(f)<\infty$. As for $n=2$, we would like to estimate the minimal degree $d(f)$ of a polynomial $p\in{{\mathbb C}}[x_1,...,x_n]$ right equivalent to $f$ at the origin. The classical bounds are $$\sqrt[n]{\mu(f)}+1\le d(f)\le\mu(f)+1\ .$$ Analogously to the two-dimensional case we state
\[c1\] There exists a sequence of positive numbers $a_n$, $n\ge 3$, such that $$d(f)\le a_n\sqrt[n]{\mu(f)}$$ for any germ $f:({{\mathbb C}}^n)\to({{\mathbb C}},0)$ with $\mu(f)<\infty$.
This conjecture is elementary for $n=1$, and follows from Theorem \[t5\] for $n=2$. It, in fact, implies similar bounds for isolated singular points of hypersurfaces in ${{\mathbb P}}^n$, and sufficient existence conditions for hypersurfaces of a given degree with prescribed isolated singularities.
To support Conjecture \[c1\] we prove it in any dimension for the case of critical points of type $A_k$, $k\ge 1$.
\[t6\] There is a sequence of positive numbers $a_n$, $n\ge 1$, such that $$d(f)\le a_n\sqrt[n]{k}\label{e80}$$ for any germ $f:({{\mathbb C}}^n,0)\to({{\mathbb C}},0)$, $n\ge 1$, of type $A_k$, $k\ge 1$.
For $n=2$ one can produce explicit formulas for polynomials of degree $\le a_2\sqrt{k}$ with a critical point of type $A_k$, like the classically known polynomial $(y-x^m)^2+y^{2m}$ of degree $2m$ with the critical point of type $A_{2m^2-1}$ at the origin (see more examples in [@GN; @Lo]). We do not know similar formulas for $n\ge 3$, and provide an existence proof in the spirit of preceding sections.
[*Proof*]{}. For a germ $f:({{\mathbb C}}^n,0)\to({{\mathbb C}},0)$ of type $A_k$, $k\ge
1$, introduce the zero-dimensional schemes $Z_0(f)$ and $Z(f)$ defined at the origin by the ideals $$I_0(f)=\{g\in\hat{{\cal O}}_{{{\mathbb C}}^n,0}\ :\ g,g_{x_1},...,g_{x_n}\in
\langle f_{x_1},...,f_{x_n}\rangle\},\quad I(f)={{\mathfrak m}}_0\cdot I_0(f)\
,$$ (cf. section \[sec2\]). Similarly to the proof of Theorem \[t5\] we conclude that $$d(f)\le{{\operatorname{ord}}}_1^{an}(Z(f))\le{{\operatorname{ord}}}_1^{an}(Z_0(f))+1\ .$$ We shall show that there is a sequence of positive numbers $b_n$, $n\ge 1$, such that $${{\operatorname{ord}}}_1^{an}(Z_0(f))\le b_n\sqrt[n]{k}\ .\label{e81}$$
In the sequel we shall use an auxiliary statement.
\[l14\] In the given notation:
\(1) After a suitable linear coordinate change, the hypersurface germs $\{f_{x_2}=0\}$, ..., $\{f_{x_n}=0\}$ are nonsingular and intersect transversally along a nonsingular curve $${{\gamma}}(t)=(x_1(t),...,x_n(t)),\quad x_1(t)=t,\ x_i(t)=O(t^2),\
i=2,...,n\ .$$ The intersection multiplicity of ${{\gamma}}$ and $\{f_{x_1}=0\}$ at the origin is $$({{\gamma}}\cdot f_{x_1})_0=\mu(f)=k\ .$$
\(2) Introduce an ascending sequence of zero-dimensional schemes $Z_m$, $m\ge 1$, defined at the origin by the ideals $$I_m=\{g\in{{\cal O}}_{{{\mathbb C}}^n,0}\ :\ ({{\gamma}}\cdot g)_0,({{\gamma}}\cdot
g_{x_1})_0,..., ({{\gamma}}\cdot g_{x_n})_0\ge m\},\quad m\ge 1\ .$$ Let $L\subset{{\mathbb P}}^n$ be a hyperplane such that $L\cap{{\mathbb C}}^n=\{x_n=0\}$ and $2\le({{\gamma}}\cdot
L)_0=m_0\le k$. Assume that the function germ $f|_L:(L,0)\to({{\mathbb C}},0)$ has an isolated critical point. Then
1. $Z_k=Z_0(f)$,
2. $Z_m\cap L\subset Z_0(f|_L)$ for all $m\le k$,
3. $Z_m:L^2\subset Z_{m-m_0}$ if $m>m_0$, and $Z_m\subset L^2$ if $m\le m_0$.
[*Proof of Lemma \[l14\]*]{}. For the first claim we observe that for suitable coordinates $f(x_1,...,x_n)=x_2^2+...+x_n^2+\text{h.o.t.}$
Statement 2(i) becomes trivial when passing to local coordinates $y_1,...,y_n$ such that $f=y_1^{k+1}+y_2^2+...+y_n^2$. In statement 2(ii) it is enough to check the case $m=k$, which reduces to the evident implication $$g\in\langle
f_{x_1},...,f_{x_n},x_n\rangle\quad\Longrightarrow\quad
g|_L\in\langle (f_{x_1})|_L,...,(f_{x_{n-1}})|_L\rangle\ .$$ Statement 2(iii) is straightforward. [$\Box$]{}
Now we are going to prove (\[e81\]) by induction on $n$; the case $n=1$ is trivial, the case of $n=2$ is covered by Lemma \[l10\] and Proposition \[p3\]. Assume that $n\ge 3$ and that (\[e81\]) is proven for $n-1$. Let $(s-1)^n<k\le s^n$. Put $m_0=s^{n-1}$. By the induction assumption there is a function germ $h=h(x_1,...,x_{n-1}): (L,0)\to({{\mathbb C}},0)$ with an isolated critical point of type $A_{2m_0-1}$ such that $$H^1(L,{{\cal J}}_{Z_0(h)}(p))=0,\quad p\ge[b_{n-1}2^{1/(n-1)}s]\ .\label{e82}$$ By a linear coordinate change in $L$ we can turn $h$ into $$h(x_1,...,x_{n-1})=x_2^2+...+x_{n-1}^2+\text{h.o.t.}$$ In particular, the system $$h_{x_2}=...=h_{x_{n-1}}=0$$ has a solution $x_2=x_2(x_1)$, ..., $x_{n-1}=
x_{n-1}(x_1)$ in a neighborhood of $0$, and $$\varphi(x_1)=h_{x_1}(x_1,x_2(x_1),...,x_{n-1}(x_1))=
{{\alpha}}x_1^{2m_0-1}+O(x_1^{2m_0}),\quad{{\alpha}}\ne 0\ .$$ Define a function germ $f:({{\mathbb C}}^n,0)\to({{\mathbb C}},0)$ by $$f(x_1,...,x_n)=h(x_1,...,x_{n-1})+x_n^2-2x_n\psi(x_1)$$ with certain $\psi:({{\mathbb C}},0)\to({{\mathbb C}},0)$. Here the system $$f_{x_2}=...=f_{x_n}=0$$ defines a curve ${{\gamma}}:({{\mathbb C}},0)\to({{\mathbb C}}^n,0)$ $$x_1=t,\ x_2=x_2(t),\ ...,\ x_{n-1}=x_{n-1}(t),\ x_n=
\psi(t)\ ,$$ and we impose the condition $({{\gamma}}\cdot f_{x_1})_0=k$, saying that $f$ has an isolated critical point of type $A_k$. To satisfy the last condition, we choose $\psi$ so that $$f_{x_1}(t,x_2(t),...,x_{n-1}(t),\psi(t))=t^k\ ,$$ which in view of $f_{x_1}=h_{x_1}-2x_n\psi'(x_1)$ reads as $$\varphi(t)-2\psi(t)\psi'(t)=t^k\ ,$$ and is solved with respect to $\psi$ as follows $$\psi^2(t)=\int_0^t(\varphi(t)-t^k)dt=\frac{{{\alpha}}}{2m_0}t^{2m_0}
+O(t^{2m_0+1})-\frac{t^{k+1}}{k+1}$$ $$\Longrightarrow\quad
\psi(t)=\sqrt{\frac{{{\alpha}}}{2m_0}}t^{m_0}+O(t^{m_0+1})\ .$$ Observe also that the last formula means that $({{\gamma}}\cdot L)_0=m_0$, and thus that Lemma \[l14\] applies.
We complete the proof by establishing $$H^1({{\cal J}}_{Z_0(f)/{{\mathbb P}}^n}(s_0+2s))=0,\quad s_0=[b_{n-1}2^{1/(n-1)}s]\ .$$ Indeed, consider the exact sequences ${{\cal E}}_i$, $i=1,...,2s$, $${{\cal E}}_i\ :\qquad H^1({{\cal J}}_{Z_0(f):L^i/{{\mathbb P}}^n}(s_0+2s-i))\to
H^1({{\cal J}}_{Z_0(f):L^{i-1}/{{\mathbb P}}^n}(s_0+2s-i+1))$$ $$\to H^1(L,{{\cal J}}_{(Z_0(f):L^{i-1})\cap L}(s_0+2s-i+1))\ .$$ By Lemma \[l14\](2)(ii) $$(Z_0(f):L^{i-1})\cap L\quad\subset\quad Z_0(f)\cap L
\quad\subset\quad Z_0(h)\ ;$$ hence the last term in all the sequences vanishes by (\[e82\]). Observing that $Z_0(f):L^{2s}=\emptyset$ by Lemma \[l14\](2)(iii) and $k/m_0\le
s$, we conclude that all terms in the sequence ${{\cal E}}_{2s}$ vanish, and then moving inductively by decreasing $i$, we obtain that the middle term in ${{\cal E}}_1$, which appears in (\[e82\]), vanishes.
[99]{} J. Alexander and A. Hirschowitz. An asymptotic vanishing theorem for generic unions of multiple points. [*Invent. Math.*]{} [**140**]{} (2000), no. 2, 303–325. C. Ciliberto and R. Miranda. The Segre and Harbourne-Hirschowitz conjectures. In: [*Applications of algebraic geometry to coding theory, physics and computation (Eilat, 2001)*]{}, NATO Sci. Ser. II Math. Phys. Chem., [**36**]{}, Kluwer Acad. Publ., Dordrecht, 2001, pp. 37–51. E. D. Davis. $0$-dimensional subschemes of ${{\mathbb P}}^2$: New applications of Castelnuovo’s function. [*Ann. Univ. Ferrara*]{} [**32**]{} (1986), 93–107. S. Diaz and J. Harris. Ideals associated to deformations of singular plane curves. [*Trans. Amer. Math. Soc.*]{} [**309**]{} (1988), 433–468. G.-M. Greuel and C. Lossen. Equianalytic and equisingular families of curves on surfaces. [*Manuscripta math.*]{} [**91**]{} (1996), no. 3, 323–342. G.-M. Greuel, C. Lossen, and E. Shustin. Plane curves of minimal degree with prescribed singularities. [*Invent. Math.*]{} [**133**]{} (1998), no. 3, 539–580. G.-M. Greuel, C. Lossen, and E. Shustin. Castelnuovo function, zero-dimensional schemes and singular plane curves. [*J. Alg. Geom.*]{} [**9**]{} (2000), no. 4, 663–710. D. A. Gudkov and E. I. Shustin. On the intersection of the close algebraic curves. In: [*Topology (Leningrad, 1982)*]{}, Lect. Notes Math., vol. 1060, Springer, Berlin etc., 1984, pp. 278–289. S. M. Gusein-Zade and N. N. Nekhoroshev. On $A_k$-singularity on plane curves of fixed degree. [*Func. Anal. i Prilozhen.*]{} [**34**]{} (2000), no. 3, 69-70 (Russian) (English translation in [*Func. Anal. Appl.*]{} [**34**]{} (2000), 214–215). A. Hirano. Constructions of plane curves with cusps. [*Saitama Math. J.*]{} [**10**]{} (1992), 21–24. F. Hirzebruch. Singularities of algebraic surfaces and characteristic numbers. [*Contemp. Math.*]{} [**58**]{} (1986), 141–155. A. Hirschowitz. Une conjecture pour la cohomologie des diviseurs sur les surfaces rationelles génériques. [*J. reine angew. Math.*]{} [**397**]{} (1989), 208–213. T. Keilen and I. Tyomkin. Existence of curves with prescribed topological singularities. [*Trans. Amer. Math. Soc.*]{} [**354**]{} (2002), 1837-1860. C. Lossen. New asymptotics for the existence of plane curves with prescribed singularities. [*Comm. Algebra*]{} [**27**]{} (1999), 3263–3282. J. N. Mather. Stability of $C^{\infty}$-mappings, III: Finitely determined map-germs. [*Publ. Math. IHES*]{} [**35**]{} (1968), 127–156. J. N. Mather and S.-T. Yau. Classification of isolated hypersurface singularities by their moduli algebras. [*Invent. Math.*]{} [**69**]{} (1982), 243–251. A. A. du Plessis and C. T. C. Wall. Singular hypersurfaces, versality and Gorenstein algebras. [*J. Alg. Geom*]{} [**9**]{} (2000), no. 2, 309–322. F. Severi. [*Vorlesungen über Algebraische Geometrie*]{} (Anhang F). Leipzig, Teubner, 1921. E. Shustin. Real plane algebraic curves with prescribed singularities. [*Topology*]{} [**32**]{} (1993), 845–856. E. Shustin. Geometry of equisingular families of plane algebraic curves. [*J. Alg. Geom.*]{} [**5**]{} (1996), no. 2, 209–234. E. Shustin. Lower deformations of isolated hypersurface singularities. [*Algebra i Analiz*]{} [**11**]{} (1999), no. 5, 221–249 (English translation in [*St. Petersburg Math. J.*]{} [**11**]{} (2000), no. 5, 883–908). B. L. van der Waerden. [*Einführung in die algebraische Geometrie*]{}, 2nd edition, Springer, Berlin, 1973. J. Wahl. Equisingular deformations of plane algebroid curves. [*Trans. Amer. Math. Soc.*]{} [**193**]{} (1974), 143–170. G. Xu. Curves in ${{\mathbb P}}^2$ and symplectic packings. [*Math. Ann.*]{} [**299**]{} (1994), 609–613. G. Xu. Ample line bundles on smooth surfaces. [*J. reine angew. Math.*]{} [**469**]{} (1995), 199-209.
[^1]: [*AMS Subject Classification*]{}: 14F17, 14H20, 58K05
[^2]: The author was partially supported by Grant No. G-616-15.6/99 of the German-Israeli Foundation for Research and Development and by the Hermann-Minkowski Minerva Center for Geometry at Tel Aviv University. This work has been completed during the author’s RiP stay at the Mathematisches Forschunsinstitut Oberwolfach.
[^3]: Also called [*analytic isomorphism*]{} or [*contact*]{} equivalence.
[^4]: That is defined by powers of the maximal ideals
[^5]: For the sake of notation we write $g$ instead of $\{g=0\}$ in these formulas.
[^6]: Here “generic" means that the object considered can be chosen arbitrarily in a Zariski open subset of the whole space of objects.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: |
Improved terrestrial experiment to test the equivalence principle for rotating extended bodies is presented, and a new upper limit for the violation of the equivalence principle is obtained at the level of 1.6$%
\times $10$^{\text{-7}}$, which is limited by the friction of the rotating gyroscope. It means the spin-gravity interaction between the extended bodies has not been observed at this level.
address: |
$^{\text{a}}$Department of Physics, Huazhong Univeristy of Science\
and Technology, Wuhan 430074, China\
$^{\text{b}}$CCAST(World Lab.), P. O. Box 8730, Beijing 100080\
$^{\text{c}}$Institute of Theoretical Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences,\
Beijing 100080, China\
$^{\text{d}}$Institute of Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing\
100080, China
author:
- 'Z. B. Zhou$^{\text{a}}$, J. Luo$^{\text{a *}}$, Q. Yan$^{\text{a}}$, Z. G. Wu$^{\text{a}}$, Y. Z. Zhang$^{\text{b,c}}$, Y. X. Nie$^{\text{d}}$'
title: New Upper Limit of Terrestrial Equivalence Principle Test for Rotating Extended Bodies
---
Introduction
============
The equivalence principle (EP), as one of the fundamental hypotheses of Einstein’s general relativity, has been tested by many experiments, including torsion balance scheme [@R1; @R2; @R3; @R4] and free-fall one [R5,R6,R7]{}. Lunar laser ranging from the Earth to the Moon has provided up to now the most accurate test of the EP to 5$\times $10$^{\text{-13 }}$[R8]{}. Recently, some different tests of EP for gravitational self-energy and spin-polarized macroscopic objects have been reported [@R9; @R10; @R11]. However, in all of the experiments including the Satellite Test of the Equivalence Principle (STEP) and the Galileo Galilei (GG) space projects as well as the MICROSCOPE space mission [@R12; @R13; @R14], the test masses are all non-rotating.
It is well known that spin-interactions of elementary particles, spin-orbit coupling and spin-spin coupling, have been studied in both theory and experiment. Furthermore, the spin-gravitational couplings, i.e. the spin-gravitoelectric coupling and the spin-gravitomagnetic coupling, and the spin-rotation coupling between intrinsic spins have been also investigated for a long time [@R15; @R16; @R17; @R18; @R19; @R20].
Over the last few years there has been a growing interest in effects of gravitational fields on gyroscopes [@R21; @R22; @R23; @R24]. From the experimental point of view, the NASA/Stanford Relativity Mission Gravity Probe B (GP-B) experiment will provide two extremely precise tests of general relativity based on observations of four identical superconducting gyroscopes in a satellite in a 400 miles polar orbit around the Earth [R25]{}. These gyroscopes are carefully isolated from nearly all sources of Newtonian torques, and their residual drift is presented less than 0.020 marc-second/year for a gyroscope in a fully inertial orbit [@R26]. General relativity predicts that, though isolated from external torques, the spin axes of these gyroscopes will precess with respect to a distant inertial reference frame at a rate of 6.6 arc-second/year for the geodetic effect, and 0.042 arc-second/year due to frame dragging. Cerdonio et al. have proposed a novel detector (gyromagnetic electron gyroscope) to locally detect the frame dragging due to the terrestrial rotation [@R27]. Recently, Zhang et al. also developed a phenomenological model for the spin-spin interaction between rotating extended bodies, which predicts the effect of the spin-spin coupling on the orbital acceleration of the gyroscope free-falling in gravitational field rather than the spin procession of the gyroscope[@R28]. In the mode, a dimensionless parameter representing the strength of violation of EP can be defined as follows $$\eta _{\text{s}}=\frac{\Delta g}{g}=\kappa \left( \frac{\stackrel{%
\rightharpoonup }{S}_{\text{1}}\cdot \stackrel{\rightharpoonup }{S}_{\text{e}%
}}{Gm_{\text{1}}M_{\text{e}}R_{\text{1}}}-\frac{\stackrel{\rightharpoonup }{S%
}_{\text{2}}\cdot \stackrel{\rightharpoonup }{S}_{\text{e}}}{Gm_{\text{2}}M_{%
\text{e}}R_{\text{2}}}\right) \text{ ,} \label{Eq.1}$$where [*G*]{} is the Newtonian gravitational constant, [*m*]{}$_{\text{1}}$, [*m*]{}$_{\text{2}}$ and [*M*]{}$_{\text{e}}$ are the masses of the two gyroscopes and the Earth, respectively, and $\stackrel{\rightharpoonup }{S}_{%
\text{1}}$, $\stackrel{\rightharpoonup }{S}_{\text{2}}$, and $\stackrel{%
\rightharpoonup }{S}_{\text{e}}$ are their spin angular momentums, [*R*]{}$_{%
\text{1}}$ and [*R*]{}$_{\text{2}}$ are the distances between the centers of the two gyroscopes and the Earth, respectively, and the parameter $\kappa $ represents the universal coupling factor for the spin-spin interaction for rotating extended bodies. As pointed out in Refs. 28 and 29, the phenomenological model developed by Zhang et al. is to investigate the effect of the spin-spin coupling on the orbital acceleration of the rotating gyroscope free falling in gravitational field, which is different from the aim of the GP-B.
A preliminary double free-fall (DFF) experiment to test the EP for rotating extended bodies, in which two gyroscopes with differing rotating senses drop freely, has been performed, and the results show that the EP is still valid for rotating extended bodies at the level of 2$\times $10$^{\text{-6}}$ [R29]{}. A main limit of preliminary experimental precision has been proved to come from the pump outgassing effect due to the asymmetrical outgassing for the two tubes. In the initial experimental setup, the vacuum pump system is set in the top part of the tube. In this case, when the test masses fall through the tee part of the tube ($\backsim $ 0.3 s free-fall), a force due to the pump outgassing will deflect the test masses or lead them to a more complex motion [@R30]. An abrupt acceleration change of about 20 mGal is observed at this height. To avoid it, the pump system is moved down to the bottom part of the tube, and meantime the vacuum level is improved from initial 50 mPa to 2 mPa. At the same time, the vibration excited by the operating pump is effectively isolated by a rubber-gas-steel isolator, and the isolation ratio is measured about -30 dB to -60 dB in the range of above 3 Hz. And then, the effective falling height is prolonged from initial 20 cm (0.2 s) to 9 m (1.0 s). In this article, error sources of our DFF experiment will be carefully discussed and a new upper limit of the EP for rotating extended bodies will be presented.
Experimental Description and Error Analysis
===========================================
A Michelson-type interferometer including a frequency-stabilized He-Ne laser beam with a relative length standard of 1.3$\times
$10$^{\text{-8}}$ is used to monitor the differential vertical displacement between two gyroscopes, in which one is rotating and another is non-rotating, and then the interference fringes are sampled by means of a 10 MHz 12-bit AD card combined with an external rubidium atomic clock, and then stored in a computer. The diameter of the laser beam is collimated about 3.0 mm so that the beam wavefront effect can be neglected. An aligned verticality is kept within 50$^{\prime \prime }$ for each laser beam, and the maximum uncertain differential acceleration due to the aligned verticality is below 20 ${\sc \mu }$Gal.
Each of the two test masses consists of a steel gyroscope with a mass of 420.0$\pm $2.5 g, a diameter of about 55 mm and a height of about 32 mm, which together with a corner-cube-retroreflector (CCR) of 76.4$\pm $0.4 g is sealed in an aluminum frame of 159.4$\pm $0.9 g. Tinned copper wires with a diameter of 0.25 mm are used to suspend the test masses, and the initial suspending differential height between them is kept within 1 mm, which implies the vertical gravity gradient correction is about 0.3 ${\sc \mu }$Gal. The test mass with a non-rotation rotor is released about 3 ms before the rotating one, which sets a systematic error of about 0.3 $\mu $Gal due to the finite speed of light. The rotating gyroscope is driven by a DC motor and its rotating speed is kept at (17000$\pm $200) rpm.
An uncertain acceleration due to the residual gas drag effect is less than 0.2 ${\sc \mu }$Gal at $p$ = 2 mPa and $T$ = 300 K [@R29]. In addition, the outgassing effect on the dropped objects should be carefully considered because of the continuous operation of a turbo-molecular pump with a full rated pumping speed $v_{\text{p}}$ of 1500 L/s. The acceleration contribution for a single dropped object can be estimated as follows [R31]{} $$a\leq R\rho v_{\text{p}}V/m \label{Eq.2}$$where $R$ represents the ratio of the surface of the dropped object and the inner surface of the vacuum tube, and is about 0.04 here, $\rho $ and $V$ are the residual gas density and mean gas particle speed, respectively. Then, the acceleration for a single dropped object is about 100 $\mu $Gal at $p$ = 2 mPa. Fortunately, the DFF scheme can reduce the common mode effect, and a differential acceleration for the two test masses due to the outgassing effect depends on both the outgassing difference and the gas density difference between the two tubes. It is very difficult to calculate the real difference due to the complex flux motion exactly. However, it can be roughly estimated based on the pressure difference between the two tubes. When the turbo-molecular pump runs normally, the pressure of the bottom part of the tube (close to the pump) is measured about 1.7 mPa, and at the same time, the top parts of the two tubes are measured about 8.7 mPa and 5.6 mPa, respectively. This means that the outgassing speeds in the two tubes are about 0.61 $v_{\text{p}}$ and 0.39 $v_{\text{p}}$ if the pressure distribution in both tubes is the same. So in this assumption, the acceleration difference for the two test masses due to the outgassing effect is estimated less than 22 $\mu $Gal.
A possible lifting force for a rotating rotor due to the residual gas flow’s circulation can be calculated based on the Zhukovskii’s theorem, and this effect can be neglected here [@R29]. A possible horizontal velocity difference $\Delta v_{\text{h}}$ is estimated smaller than 4.2 mm/s according to the change of the interference pattern intensity during free-fall of test masses, and an acceleration difference due to the Coriolis’s effect is less than 54 $\mu $Gal [@R29]. It means that the horizontal velocity difference would have to be monitored in the further experiment with a higher precision.
The silent amplitude spectrum of the seismic noise in our laboratory contributes an uncertainty of about 1 ${\sc \mu }$Gal to the final experiment result [@R32]. But the mechanical vibration modes of the optical measurement system are dominant due to excitation of the vacuum pumps. Figure 1 is a typical residual differential displacement of the DFF experiment between both non-rotating test masses, in which the linear term has been subtracted. Three main modes have been observed about 16.8 Hz, 36.6 Hz, and 96.1 Hz, and their amplitudes comes to about 0.05 $\mu $m, which contribute an uncertain acceleration of 8 $\mu $Gal based on the following equation [@R30]$$\Delta g_{\text{f}}=\frac{120x_{\text{n}}}{\omega _{\text{n}}T^{\text{3}}}%
\sqrt{1+\frac{12}{\omega _{\text{n}}^{2}T^{\text{2}}}+(\frac{12}{\omega _{%
\text{n}}^{2}T^{\text{2}}})^{\text{2}}}\cos (\frac{\omega _{\text{n}}T}{2}%
+\phi _{\text{n}})\cos (\frac{\omega _{\text{n}}T}{2}+\text{tg}^{-1}\frac{%
12-\omega _{\text{n}}^{2}T^{\text{2}}}{6\omega _{\text{n}}T}),$$where $x_{\text{n}}$, $\omega _{\text{n}}$, and $\phi _{\text{n}}$ represent the amplitude, the angular frequency, and the phase of the high-frequency vibration, respectively, and $T$ is the effective time length. Parabolic curve fitting result shows that the differential acceleration $\Delta g_{%
\text{N-N}}$ is -58 $\mu $Gal, which is consistent with the total systematic uncertainty, as listed in Table 1, of 64 $\mu $Gal.
Experimental Results
====================
Figure 2(a) and 2(b) are, respectively, typical residual differential displacements of the DFF experiment with non- and left-rotating (spin vector pointing upward) gyroscopes, and non- and right-rotating (spin vector pointing downward) ones. From both figures, it is very clear that there are a dominant slow frequency motion but not a parabolic term. This slow frequency (1.6$\pm $0.2 Hz) motion is confirmed to be resulted from the friction coupling between the rotating rotor and the aluminum frame by observing the motion of the reflected beam. Since effective free-fall duration in our DFF experiment is about 1 s and the correlative coefficient between a parabolic term ($\Delta g$ $\backsim $ 100 $\mu $Gal) and a harmonic term of 1.6 Hz ($x_{\text{n}}$ $\backsim $ 0.06 $\mu $m) comes to 0.3 $\backsim $ 0.4, the slow frequency fluctuation is very difficult to be subtracted by fitting. Nevertheless, a maximum uncertain acceleration due to the slow motion can be estimated based on Eq. (3), and its effect comes to about 130 $\mu $Gal ($x_{\text{n}}\backsim $ 0.06 $\mu $m) for the non- and left-rotating gyroscopes and 150 $\mu $Gal ($x_{\text{n}}\backsim $ 0.07 $%
\mu $m) for the non- and right-rotating gyroscopes, respectively. The fitting results of the both residual curves show that the differential acceleration between the non- and left-rotating gyroscopes $\Delta g_{\text{%
N-L}}$ is 0.48 $\mu $Gal, and that between the non- and right-rotating gyroscopes $\Delta g_{\text{N-R}}$ is -110 $\mu $Gal, which are consisted with the systematic uncertainty of 160 $\mu $Gal as listed in Table 1. In addition, a high-frequency mechanical vibration of the CCR at the frequency of the rotating rotor, caused by the friction coupling, has also been observed and its modulation amplitude is in the order of 0.1 $\mu $m, which contributes an uncertainty of about 5 $\mu $Gal. Fortunately, the limit can be suppressed by a factor of sin($\omega _{\text{n}}t_{\text{s}}/2$)/($%
\omega _{\text{n}}t_{\text{s}}/2$) by means of a time-domain data-smoothing-process, here $t_{\text{s}}$ is the time length of the smoothing-process.
Based on above statement, the EP is still valid at the level of 1.6$\times $10$^{\text{-7}}$ for rotating extended bodies, which is improved by over one order for preliminary experiment result [@R23], and the spin-spin interaction between the rotating extended bodies has not been observed at this level. According to the Eq. (1) and the approximately uniform sphere mode of the Earth, it can be concluded that the coupling factor $\kappa \leq
$1.6$\times $10$^{\text{-19 }}$kg$^{\text{-1}}$, which sets a new upper limit for the spin-spin interaction between a rotating extended body and the Earth.
Discussions
===========
Our experiment precision is mainly limited by the mechanical friction of the gyroscope, which could be improved by choosing better gyroscope or extending the free-fall duration. As pointed out in the introduction section, GP-B mission measures the spin axes precession of spinning fused-quartz gyroscopes with respect to an inertial reference frame, partly due to the geodetic effect, and partly due to frame dragging. In general relativity the both effects have small, non-zero values even without violation of the EP. However, based on the model developed by Zhang et al., a perigean precession of the gyroscope in the GP-B experiment is not greater than 100 arc-second/year based on current experimental result $\kappa \leq $1.6$%
\times $10$^{\text{-19 }}$kg$^{\text{-1}}$. Nevertheless, the GP-B experiment measures the spin axis precession rather than the orbital motion of the gyroscope. As proposed in Ref. 28, a possible scheme is to put a non-spinning shell surrounding a spinning gyroscope in a satellite, and the motion of the spinning gyroscope with respect to the non-spinning reference frame could be monitored using a SQUID or an inertial sensor [@R33; @R34]. If the gap between the gyroscope and the reference shell can be measured in the level of 1 nm/year, and the coupling factor $\kappa $ between the spin-spin interaction between the rotating extended bodies could be tested in the level of 10$^{\text{-31}}$ kg$^{\text{-1}}$, which is improved by about 12 orders.
[**Acknowledgments**]{} We are grateful to Prof. W. R. Hu and A. Ruediger for their discussion and useful suggestion. This work was supported by the Ministry of Science and Technology of China under Grant No: 95-Yu-34 and 19990754 and by the National Natural Science Foundation of China under Grant No: 19835040, 10175070, and 10047004.
R. V. Eötvös, D. Pekar, and E. Fekete, Ann. Phys. (Leipzig) 68 (1922) 11.
P. G. Roll, R. Krotkov, and R. H. Dicke, Ann. Phys. (N.Y.) 26 (1964) 442.
V. B. Braginsky and V. I. Panov, Sov. Phys. JETP 34 (1972) 463.
Y. Su et al., Phys. Rev. D 50 (1994) 3614.
T. M. Niebauer, M. P. McHugh, and J. E. Faller, Phys. Rev. Lett. 59 (1987) 609.
K. Kuroda and N. Mio, Phys. Rev. Lett. 62 (1989) 1941.
S. Carusotto et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 69 (1992) 1722.
J. O. Dickey et al., Science 265 (1994) 482.
S. Baessler et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 83 (1999) 3585.
R. C. Ritter et al., Phys. Rev. D 42 (1990) 977.
W. D. Ni et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 82 (1999) 2439; L. S. Hou and W. T. Ni, Mod. Phys. Lett. A 16 (2001) 763.
STEP : Testing the Equivalence Principle in Space, Proceedings, edited by R. Reinhard (Pisa, 1993).
A. M. Nobili et al., J. Astronaut. Sci. 43 (1995) 219.
P. Touboul and M. Rodrigues, Class. Quantum Grav. 18 (2000) 2487.
I. Yu Kobzarev and L. B. Okun, JETP 16 (1963) 1343.
D. J. Wineland and N. F. Ramsey, Phys. Rev. A 5 (1972) 821; C. J. Berglund et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 75 (1995) 1879; A. N. Youdin et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 77 (1996) 2170;
C. G. de Oliveira and J. Tiomno, Nuovo Cimento 24 (1962) 672; B. M. Barker and R. F. O’Connell, Phys. Rev. D 12 (1975) 329; L. H. Ryder, Gen. Rel. Grav. 31 (1999) 775.
B. Mashhoon, Nature 250 (1974) 316; Phys. Rev. D 10 (1974) 1059; Phys. Rev. D 11 (1975) 2679.
S. A. Werner, J. L. Staudenmann and R. Colella, Phys. Rev. Lett. 42 (1979) 1103; T. L. Gustavson, P. Bouyer and M. A. Kasevich, Phys. Rev. Lett. 78 (1997) 2046.
B. Mashhoon, Phys. Lett. A 198 (1995) 9; B. Mashhoon, R. Neutze, M. Hannam and G. E. Stedman, Phys. Lett. A 249 (1998) 161; B. Mashhoon, Phys. Rev. A 47 (1993) 4498.
K. D. Krori, T. Chaudhury, and C. R. Mahanta, Phys. Rev. D 42 (1990) 3584.
B. Mashhoon, Class. Quantum Grav. 17 (2000) 2399; B. Mashhoon, Gen. Rel. Grav. 31 (1999) 681.
L. Herrera, F. M. Paiva, and N. O. Santos, Class. Quantum Grav. 17 (2000) 1549.
F. Sorge, D. Bini, and F. de Felice, Class. Quantum Grav. 18 (2001) 2945.
S. Buchman et al., Adv. Space Res. 25 (2000) 1177.
S. Buchman et al., Phys. B 280 (2000) 497.
M. Cerdonio, G. A. Prodi, and S. Vitale, Gen. Rel. Grav. 20 (1988) 83.
Y. Z. Zhang, J. Luo, and Y. X. Nie, Mod. Phys. Lett. A 16 (2001) 789.
J. Luo, Y. X. Nie, Y. Z. Zhang, and Z. B. Zhou, Phys. Rev. D 65 (2002) 042005.
Z. B. Zhou, PhD thesis, Huazhong University of Science and Technology (in Chinese), 2001.
T. M. Niebauer et al., Metrologia 32 (1995) 159.
Z. B. Zhou et al., Chin. Phys. Lett. 18 (2001) 10.
V. Josselin, M. Rodrigues, and P. Touboul, Acta Astronutica 49 (2001) 95.
A. Cavalleri et al., Class. Quantum Grav. 18 (2001) 4133.
Systematic Error Uncertainty ($\mu $Gal)
------------------ --------------------------
$\backsim $ 13
$\leq $ 20
$\backsim $ 22
$\leq $ 54
$\backsim $ 8
$\leq $ 64
$\leq $ 150
$\leq $ 160
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'It is shown that unlike the perfect fluid case, anisotropic fluids (principal stresses unequal) may be geodesic, without this implying the vanishing of (spatial) pressure gradients. Then the condition of vanishing four acceleration is integrated in non-comoving coordinates. The resulting models are necessarily dynamic, and the mass function is expressed in terms of the fluid velocity as measured by a locally Minkowskian observer. An explicit example is worked out.'
author:
- |
L. Herrera[^1]\
Escuela de Física, Facultad de Ciencias,\
Universidad Central de Venezuela,\
Caracas, Venezuela.\
\
[J. Martin[^2]]{} and J. Ospino\
Area de Física Teórica. Facultad de Ciencias.\
Universidad de Salamanca. 37008 Salamanca, España.
title: 'ANISOTROPIC GEODESIC FLUID SPHERES IN GENERAL RELATIVITY.'
---
Introduction
============
As is well known, the vanishing of four acceleration (geodesic condition) implies for a perfect fluid that pressure gradients vanish. In the case of spherical bounded ( non-dissipative) configuration, the vanishing of pressure at the boundary surface, implies in turn the vanishing of pressure everywhere within the distribution (dust).
Indeed, for a perfect fluid the equation of motion reads $$(\rho + p) a^\alpha = h^{\alpha\nu} p_{,\nu}
\label{em}$$ with $$h^\alpha_\mu \equiv \delta^\alpha_\mu - u^\alpha u_\mu
\label{h}$$ $$a^\mu = u^\nu u^\mu_{;\nu}
\label{a}$$ where colon and semicolon denote partial and covariant derivatives, and as usual $a^\mu$, $u^\mu$, $\rho$ and $p$ stand for the four acceleration, the four velocity, the energy density and the pressure respectively.
>From the above it becomes evident that the geodesic condition implies the vanishing of pressure gradients. From purely physics considerations this conclusion is also obvious: the vanishing of four-acceleration means that only gravitational forces are acting on any fluid element, thereby implying that pressure gradients (the only hydrodynamic force in a perfect fluid) vanish. However in the case of anisotropic fluids, an additional force term appears besides the pressure gradient (see next section). Therefore it is in principle possible to have a fluid distribution, such that both terms cancel each other, leading to a geodesic fluid with non-vanishing pressure gradients.
Since the original Lemaitre paper [@Lem] and particularly since the work of Bowers and Liang [@BL] anisotropic fluids have attracted the attention of many researchers in relativity and relativistic astrophysics (see [@Anis] and references therein), due to the conspicuous role played by local anisotropy of pressure in the structure and evolution of self–gravitating objects. It is the purpose of this work to present further models of anisotropic spheres, based on the geodesic condition. Besides the natural interest of such models in general relativity, the presented models are interesting because they represent the generalization of Tolman–Bondi [@ToB] models to anisotropic fluids, in non-comoving coordinates. Incidentally, it is worth noticing that in the classical paper by Oppenheimer and Snyder on dust collapse [@Opp], they start their study, using the same kind of coordinates we use here, and then switch to comoving ones, in order to integrate the field equations.
The plan of the paper is as follows. In Section 2 we define the conventions and give the field equations and expressions for the kinematic variables we shall need, in noncomoving coordinates. The geodesic condition is explicitly integrated in Section 3. In Section 4 we work out an example. Finally a discussion of results is presented in Section 5.
Relevant Equations and Conventions
==================================
We consider spherically symmetric distributions of collapsing anisotropic fluid, which we assume to evolve adiabatically (without dissipation), bounded by a spherical surface $\Sigma$.
The line element is given in Schwarzschild–like coordinates by
$$ds^2=e^{\nu} dt^2 - e^{\lambda} dr^2 -
r^2 \left( d\theta^2 + sin^2\theta d\phi^2 \right),
\label{metric}$$
where $\nu(t,r)$ and $\lambda(t,r)$ are functions of their arguments. We number the coordinates: $x^0=t; \, x^1=r; \, x^2=\theta; \, x^3=\phi$.
The metric (\[metric\]) has to satisfy Einstein field equations
$$G^\nu_\mu=-8\pi T^\nu_\mu,
\label{Efeq}$$
which in our case read [@Bo]:
$$-8\pi T^0_0=-\frac{1}{r^2}+e^{-\lambda}
\left(\frac{1}{r^2}-\frac{\lambda'}{r} \right),
\label{feq00}$$
$$-8\pi T^1_1=-\frac{1}{r^2}+e^{-\lambda}
\left(\frac{1}{r^2}+\frac{\nu'}{r}\right),
\label{feq11}$$
$$\begin{aligned}
-8\pi T^2_2 = - 8\pi T^3_3 = & - &\frac{e^{-\nu}}{4}\left(2\ddot\lambda+
\dot\lambda(\dot\lambda-\dot\nu)\right) \nonumber \\
& + & \frac{e^{-\lambda}}{4}
\left(2\nu''+\nu'^2 -
\lambda'\nu' + 2\frac{\nu' - \lambda'}{r}\right),
\label{feq2233}\end{aligned}$$
$$-8\pi T_{01}=-\frac{\dot\lambda}{r},
\label{feq01}$$
where dots and primes stand for partial differentiation with respect to $t$ and $r$, respectively.
In order to give physical significance to the $T^{\mu}_{\nu}$ components we apply the Bondi approach [@Bo].
Thus, following Bondi, let us introduce purely locally Minkowski coordinates ($\tau, x, y, z$) (alternatively one may introduce a tetrad field associated to locally Minkowskian observers).
$$d\tau=e^{\nu/2}dt\,;\qquad\,dx=e^{\lambda/2}dr\,;\qquad\,
dy=rd\theta\,;\qquad\, dz=rsin\theta d\phi.$$
Then, denoting the Minkowski components of the energy tensor by a bar, we have
$$\bar T^0_0=T^0_0\,;\qquad\,
\bar T^1_1=T^1_1\,;\qquad\,\bar T^2_2=T^2_2\,;\qquad\,
\bar T^3_3=T^3_3\,;\qquad\,\bar T_{01}=e^{-(\nu+\lambda)/2}T_{01}.$$
Next, we suppose that when viewed by an observer moving relative to these coordinates with proper velocity $\omega(t,r)$ in the radial direction, the physical content of space consists of an anisotropic fluid of energy density $\rho$, radial pressure $P_r$ and tangential pressure $P_\bot$. Thus, when viewed by this moving observer the covariant tensor in Minkowski coordinates is
$$\left(\begin{array}{cccc}
\rho & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & P_r & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & P_\bot & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & P_\bot
\end{array} \right).$$
Then a Lorentz transformation readily shows that
$$T^0_0=\bar T^0_0= \frac{\rho + P_r \omega^2 }{1 - \omega^2} ,
\label{T00}$$
$$T^1_1=\bar T^1_1=-\frac{ P_r + \rho \omega^2}{1 - \omega^2},
\label{T11}$$
$$T^2_2=T^3_3=\bar T^2_2=\bar T^3_3=-P_\bot,
\label{T2233}$$
$$T_{01}=e^{(\nu + \lambda)/2} \bar T_{01}=
-\frac{(\rho + P_r) \omega e^{(\nu + \lambda)/2}}{1 - \omega^2},
\label{T01}$$
Note that the coordinate velocity in the ($t,r,\theta,\phi$) system, $dr/dt$, is related to $\omega$ by
$$\omega(t,r)=\frac{dr}{dt}\,e^{(\lambda-\nu)/2}.
\label{omega}$$
Feeding back (\[T00\]–\[T01\]) into (\[feq00\]–\[feq01\]), we get the field equations in the form
$$\frac{\rho + P_r \omega^2 }{1 - \omega^2}
=-\frac{1}{8 \pi}\Biggl\{-\frac{1}{r^2}+e^{-\lambda}
\left(\frac{1}{r^2}-\frac{\lambda'}{r} \right)\Biggr\},
\label{fieq00}$$
$$\frac{ P_r + \rho \omega^2}{1 - \omega^2}=-\frac{1}{8
\pi}\Biggl\{\frac{1}{r^2} - e^{-\lambda}
\left(\frac{1}{r^2}+\frac{\nu'}{r}\right)\Biggr\},
\label{fieq11}$$
$$\begin{aligned}
P_\bot = -\frac{1}{8 \pi}\Biggl\{\frac{e^{-\nu}}{4}\left(2\ddot\lambda+
\dot\lambda(\dot\lambda-\dot\nu)\right) \nonumber \\
- \frac{e^{-\lambda}}{4}
\left(2\nu''+\nu'^2 -
\lambda'\nu' + 2\frac{\nu' - \lambda'}{r}\right)\Biggr\},
\label{fieq2233}\end{aligned}$$
$$\frac{(\rho + P_r) \omega e^{(\nu + \lambda)/2}}{1 -
\omega^2}=-\frac{\dot\lambda}{8 \pi r}.
\label{fieq01}$$
At the outside of the fluid distribution, the spacetime is that of Schwarzschild, given by
$$ds^2= \left(1-\frac{2M}{r}\right) dt^2 - \left(1-\frac{2M}{r}\right)^{-1}dr^2 -
r^2 \left(d\theta^2 + sin^2\theta d\phi^2 \right),
\label{Vaidya}$$
As is well known, in order to match smoothly the two metrics above on the boundary surface $r=r_\Sigma(t)$, we must require the continuity of the first and the second fundamental form across that surface. In our notation this implies
$$e^{\nu_\Sigma}=1-\frac{2M}{r_\Sigma},
\label{enusigma}$$
$$e^{-\lambda_\Sigma}=1-\frac{2M}{r_\Sigma}.
\label{elambdasigma}$$
and $$\left[P_r\right]_\Sigma=0,
\label{PQ}$$ Where, from now on, subscript $\Sigma$ indicates that the quantity is evaluated at the boundary surface $\Sigma$.
Eqs. (\[enusigma\]), (\[elambdasigma\]) and (\[PQ\]) are the necessary and sufficient conditions for a smooth matching of the two metrics (\[metric\]) and (\[Vaidya\]) on $\Sigma$.
Next, let us write the energy momentum tensor in the form $$T_{\mu\nu} = \left(\rho+P_\bot\right)u_\mu u_\nu - P_\bot g_{\mu\nu} +
\left(P_r-P_\bot\right)s_\mu s_\nu
\label{T-}$$
with $$u^\mu=\left(\frac{e^{-\nu/2}}{\left(1-\omega^2\right)^{1/2}},\,
\frac{\omega\, e^{-\lambda/2}}{\left(1-\omega^2\right)^{1/2}},\,0,\,0\right),
\label{umu}$$ $$s^\mu=\left(\frac{\omega \, e^{-\nu/2}}{\left(1-\omega^2\right)^{1/2}},\,
\frac{e^{-\lambda/2}}{\left(1-\omega^2\right)^{1/2}},\,0,\,0\right),
\label{smu}$$
where $u^\mu$ denotes the four velocity of the fluid and $s^\mu$ is a radially directed space–like vector orthogonal to $u^\mu$. Then the radial component of the conservation law
$$T^\mu_{\nu;\mu}=0.
\label{dTmn}$$
may be written as
$$\left(-8\pi T^1_1\right)'=\frac{16\pi}{r} \left(T^1_1-T^2_2\right)
+ 4\pi \nu' \left(T^1_1-T^0_0\right) +
\frac{e^{-\nu}}{r} \left(\ddot\lambda + \frac{\dot\lambda^2}{2}
- \frac{\dot\lambda \dot\nu}{2}\right),
\label{T1p}$$
which in the static case becomes
$$P'_r=-\frac{\nu'}{2}\left(\rho+P_r\right)+
\frac{2\left(P_\bot-P_r\right)}{r},
\label{Prp}$$
representing the generalization of the Tolman–Oppenheimer–Volkof equation for anisotropic fluids [@BL]. Thus, as mentioned before, local anisotropy introduces an extra term in this “force” equation, besides the usual pressure gradient term.
Finally, for the two non–vanishing components of the four acceleration, we easily find
$$a_0=\frac{1}{1-\omega^2}\left[\left(\frac{\omega\dot\omega}{1-\omega^2} +
\frac{\omega^2 \dot\lambda}{2}\right) +
e^{\nu/2} e^{-\lambda/2}
\left(\frac{\omega \nu'}{2} +
\frac{\omega^2 \omega'}{1-\omega^2}\right)
\right],
\label{a0}$$
$$a_1=-\frac{1}{1-\omega^2}\left[\left(\frac{\omega \omega'}{1-\omega^2} +
\frac{\nu'}{2}\right) +
e^{-\nu/2} e^{\lambda/2}
\left(\frac{\omega \dot\lambda}{2} +
\frac{\dot\omega}{1-\omega^2}\right)
\right],
\label{a1}$$
Integrating the Geodesic Condition
==================================
Let us now integrate the geodesic condition. First, observe that from the field equations (\[fieq00\]),(\[fieq11\]) and (\[fieq01\]), one obtains after simple manipulations $$\omega e^{(\nu - \lambda)/2}(\lambda'+\nu') + (1+\omega^2) \dot\lambda=0
\label{gc1}$$
Next, it follows at once from (\[a0\]) and (\[a1\]) that, $$\omega a_1=-a_0 e^{(\lambda - \nu)/2}
\label{gc2}$$
Therefore the vanishing four–acceleration condition amounts to $$\left(\frac{\omega \omega'}{1-\omega^2} +
\frac{\nu'}{2}\right) +
e^{-\nu/2} e^{\lambda/2}
\left(\frac{\omega \dot\lambda}{2} +
\frac{\dot\omega}{1-\omega^2}\right)=0.
\label{gc3}$$
Then, replacing $\nu'$ by its expression from (\[gc1\]), into (\[gc3\]), this last equation becomes $$\omega e^{(\nu - \lambda)/2}(\lambda'-\frac{2 \omega \omega'}{1-\omega^2})
+ \dot\lambda-\frac{2\omega \dot\omega}{1-\omega^2}=0,
\label{gc4}$$ or, using (\[omega\]) $$\dot\phi dt+\phi' dr=0,
\label{gc5}$$ whose solution is $$\phi=ln(1-\omega^2)+\lambda=Constant.
\label{gc6}$$
Finally, from the fact that $\omega(t,0)=0$ we obtain, $$e^{-\lambda}=1-\omega^2.
\label{gc7}$$ Introducing the mass function as usually, $$e^{-\lambda} = 1 - \frac{2m}{r}
\label{mass}$$ we have $$m = \frac{\omega^2 r}{2}
\label{3}$$
In all the above we have assumed $\omega\not =0$, since from simple physical considerations we should not expect static solutions to exist.
Indeed, if we assume staticity ($\omega=0$) then the geodesic condition implies $\nu'=0$, which in turn, using (\[fieq11\]) and (\[mass\]),leads to $$8\pi P_r=-\frac{2m}{r^3}.
\label{nost}$$ Then junction condition (\[PQ\]) would lead to $m_\Sigma=M=0$.
There is however one possible case of static geodesic solution, which appears if we relax the condition of continuity of the second fundamental form (implying the continuity of radial pressure) across the boundary surface, and assume the existence of a surface layer [@israel].
In this specific case, it follows from (40), the geodesic condition and field equations (15) and (17) that $$\rho+ P_r+2 P_\bot=0
\label{rhopr}$$
implying that the active gravitational mass (Tolman,[@Tol]) defined for any $r<r_{\Sigma}$ as,
$$m_T = 4 \pi \int^{r}_{0}{r^2 e^{(\nu+\lambda)/2}
(T^0_0 - T^1_1 - 2 T^2_2) dr}
\label{Tol}$$
vanishes inside the sphere.
We shall not consider here these kind of solutions and accordingly all our models will be dynamic ($\omega\neq 0$) and satisfy all junction conditions .
Now, from (\[omega\]) evaluated at the boundary surface, and (\[enusigma\]), (\[elambdasigma\]), we obtain
$$\omega_\Sigma = \frac{\dot r_\Sigma}{1 - 2M/r_\Sigma}
\label{4}$$
On the other hand, from (\[3\]) evaluated at the boundary surface, we have
$$\omega_\Sigma = \pm \sqrt{\frac{2M}{r_\Sigma}}
\label{7}$$
Where the $+$ ($-$) refers to the expansion (contraction) of the surface (from now on we shall only consider the contracting case). Feeding back (\[7\]) into (\[4\]), we get $$\omega_\Sigma = \frac{\dot r_\Sigma}{1 - \omega_\Sigma^2}
\label{5}$$
Then equating (\[5\]) and (\[7\]) we have $$\dot r_\Sigma = \left(\frac{2
M}{ r_\Sigma }\right)^{3/2}-\left(\frac{2
M}{ r_\Sigma }\right)^{1/2}
\label{11}$$ This equation may be integrated to give $$\frac{t}{2M} = 2
tanh^{-1}{\sqrt{\frac{2M}{r_\Sigma}}}-\frac{2 \left[1 + 6M/r_\Sigma\right]}{3
\left(2M/r_\Sigma\right)^{3/2}}
\label{12}$$ giving the evolution of the boundary surface. Unfortunately this last equation cannot be inverted (at least we were unable to do that) to obtain the explicit form $r=r_\Sigma(t)$. Accordingly we have also integrated (\[11\]) numerically , in order to exhibit the evolution of $r_{\Sigma}$, see figure(1).
So far we have found all consequences derived from the geodesic condition which, obviously, are valid in the pure dust case as well as in the anisotropic case. In the next section we shall work out an explicit example by impossing an “equation of state” for the physical variables.
A Model
=======
The purpose of this section is not to model any specific physical system, but just to illustrate the consequences derived from the geodesic condition. Thus, somehow inspired by the incompressible fluid model, let us assume $$T^0_0 = f(t)
\label{13}$$ then from (\[3\]) and the fact that $$m'=4 \pi r^2 T^0_0
\label{14}$$ one obtains $$\omega =- r \sqrt{\frac{8 \pi}{3} f(t)}
\label{14}$$ where $$f(t) = \frac{3 M }{4 \pi r_\Sigma^3}.
\label{15}$$ Observe from (\[14\]) that the evolution in this model is homologous.
Next, introducing the dimensionless variables $$x \equiv \frac{r}{r_\Sigma} \qquad ; \qquad
y \equiv \frac{r_\Sigma}{2 M}
\label{16}$$ we have $$e^{-\lambda} = 1 - \frac{x^2}{y}
\label{17}$$ $$\omega = -\frac{x}{\sqrt y}
\label{18}$$ Finally, from the field equations the following relations follow $$\rho y + P_r x^2 = \frac{3 (y - x^2)}{32 \pi M^2 y^3}
\label{19}$$ $$P_r y + \rho x^2 = \frac{(y - x^2)}{8 \pi} \left[
\left(1 - \frac{x^2}{y}\right)
\left(\frac{1}{4 M^2 x^2 y^2} + \frac{\partial \nu}{\partial x}
\frac{1}{4 M^2 x y^2}\right) - \frac{1}{4 M^2 x^2 y^2}
\right]
\label{20}$$ $$\rho + P_r = - \frac{3 \dot y (y - x^2)^{1/2} e^{-\nu/2}}{8 \pi (2 M y^3)}
\label{21}$$
Then from (\[19\]) and (\[20\]) we obtain $\rho + P_r$ as function of $\frac{\partial \nu}{\partial x}$, $x$ and $y$. Feeding back this expression into (\[21\]),this equation may be solved for $\nu$, which in turn allows to express all physical variables ($\rho, P_r$ and $P_\bot$) in terms of $x$ and $y$ which are given by (\[12\]) or alternatively by the numerical solution of (\[11\]).
Conclusions
===========
We have seen that the geodesic condition, which for anisotropic fluids is compatible with the presence of pressure gradients, can be integrated, giving the explicit form of the evolution of the boundary surface. Resulting models may be regarded as generalizations of Tolman–Bondi solutions, to anisotropic fluids. In order to obtain the evolution of all physical variables for different pieces of matter, additional information has to be given. In the model above we have assumed condition (\[13\]), which in turn leads to the homology condition (\[14\]). Parenthetically, this last condition is widely used by astrophysicists in their modelling of stellar structure and evolution [@KW].
Figures (1) and (2) display the behaviour of the radius and the evolution of $\omega_\Sigma$ in the contracting case. As expected, as the boundary surface approaches the horizon, its coordinate velocity ($\dot r_\Sigma$) stalls, whereas the velocity $\omega_\Sigma$ measured by the locally Minkowskian observer, tends to light velocity. Figure (3) shows the sensitivity of the pattern evolution with respect to the compactness of the initial configuration. As expected more compact configurations collapse faster. The good behaviour of $\rho$ and $p_r$ is easily deduced from (\[19\])–(\[21\]).
Acknowledgements
================
We acknowledge financial assistance under grant BFM2000-1322 (M.C.T. Spain) and from Cátedra-FONACIT, under grant 2001001789.
[99]{} G. Lemaitre, [*Ann. Soc. Sci. Bruxelles*]{} [**A53**]{}, 51 (1933). R. Bowers y E. Liang, [*Astrophys. J.*]{}, [**188**]{}, 657 (1974). L. Herrera and N. O. Santos, [*Phys. Rep.*]{} [**286**]{}, 53 (1997); H. Bondi,[*Mon.Not.R.Astr.Soc.*]{} [**262**]{}, 1088 (1993);L. Herrera, [*Phys. Lett. A*]{} [**165**]{}, 206 (1992); W. Barreto, [*Astr.Space.Sci.*]{} [**201**]{}, 191 (1993); A. Coley and B. Tupper, [*Class. Quantum Grav.*]{} [**11**]{}, 2553 (1994); J. Martinez, D. Pavon and L. Nunez [*Mon.Not.R.Astr.Soc.*]{} [**271**]{}, 463 (1994); T. Singh, P. Singh and A. Helmi, [*Il Nuov. Cimento*]{} [**110B**]{}, 387 (1995); A. Das, N. Tariq and J. Biech, [*J.Math.Phys.*]{} [**36**]{}, 340 (1995); R. Maartens, S. Maharaj and B. Tupper, [*Class.Quantum Grav.*]{} [**12**]{}, 2577 (1995);G. Magli, [*Class. Quantum Grav.*]{} [**14**]{}, 1937 (1997); A. Das, N. Tariq, D. Aruliah and T. Biech, [*J.Math.Phys.*]{} [**38**]{}, 4202 (1997);L. Herrera, A. Di Prisco, J. Hernández-Pastora and N.O. Santos, [*Phys. Lett. A*]{} [**237**]{}, 113 (1998); E. Corchero, [*Class.Quantum Grav.*]{} [**15**]{}, 3645 (1998); E. Corchero, [*Astr.Space Sci.*]{} [**259**]{}, 31 (1998); H. Bondi, [*Mon.Not.R.Astr.Soc.*]{} [**302**]{}, 337 (1999); H. Hernandez, L. Nunez and U. Percoco,[*Class.Quantum Grav.*]{} [**16**]{}, 897 (1999); T. Harko and M. Mark, [*J.Math. Phys.*]{} [**41**]{}, 4752 (2000); A. Das and S. Kloster, [*Phys.Rev.D*]{} [**62**]{}, 104002 (2000); [**15**]{}, 3215; S. Jhingan and G. Magli [*Phys. Rev.D*]{} [**61**]{}, 124006 (2000); L.Herrera, A. Di Prisco J. Ospino and E. Fuenmayor,[*J.Math.Phys.*]{} [**42**]{} 2199 (2001); J. Krisch and E.Glass,[*J.Math.Phys.*]{} [**43**]{},1509 (2002); E. Corchero,[*Class.Quantum Grav.*]{} [**19**]{}, 417 (2002);T. Harko and M. Mark, [*Ann. Phys. (Leipzig)*]{} [**11**]{}, 3 (2002). R. Tolman, [*Proc.Nat.Acad.Sci.*]{} [**20**]{} 169 (1934);\
H. Bondi, [*Mon.Not.R.Astr.Soc.*]{} [**107**]{} 410 (1947). J.R. Oppenheimer and H. Snyder, [*Phys. Rev.*]{} [**56**]{}, 455, (1939). H. Bondi, [*Proc. R. Soc.*]{} [**A281**]{}, 39 (1964). W. Israel,[*Il Nuovo Cimento*]{}, [**44B**]{} 1 (1966). R. Tolman, [*Phys. Rev.*]{}, [35]{} 875 (1930). M. Schwarzschild, [*Structure and Evolution of the Stars*]{}, (Dover, New York) (1958); R. Kippenhahn and A. Weigert, [*Stellar Structure and Evolution*]{}, (Springer Verlag, Berlin) (1990); C. Hansen and S. Kawaler, [*Stellar Interiors: Physical principles, Structure and Evolution*]{}, (Springer Verlag, Berlin) (1994).
Figure captions
===============
- Figure 1. $y=r_\Sigma/2M$ as function of $t/M$ for the inital value $y(0)=30$.
- Figure 2. $\omega_\Sigma$ as function of $t/M$ for the same initial data as in figure 1.
- Figure 3. $\omega_\Sigma$ as function of $t/M$ for $y(0)=30,29,28,27,26$ curves from rigth to left respectively.
[^1]: Postal address: Apartado 80793, Caracas 1080 A, Venezuela; e-mail address: [email protected]
[^2]: e-mail address:[email protected]
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'The Rabi model describes the simplest interaction between a cavity mode with a frequency $\omega_c$ and a two-level system with a resonance frequency $\omega_0$. It is shown here that the spectrum of the Rabi model coincides with the support of the discrete Stieltjes integral measure in the orthogonality relations of recently introduced orthogonal polynomials. The exactly solvable limit of the Rabi model corresponding to $\Delta=\omega_0/(2\omega_c)=0$, which describes a displaced harmonic oscillator, is characterized by the discrete Charlier polynomials in normalized energy $\upepsilon$, which are orthogonal on an equidistant lattice. A non-zero value of $\Delta$ leads to non-classical discrete orthogonal polynomials $\phi_{k}(\upepsilon)$ and induces a deformation of the underlying equidistant lattice. The results provide a basis for a novel analytic method of solving the Rabi model. The number of ca. [*1350*]{} calculable energy levels per parity subspace obtained in double precision (cca 16 digits) by an elementary stepping algorithm is up to two orders of magnitude higher than is possible to obtain by Braak’s solution. Any first $n$ eigenvalues of the Rabi model arranged in increasing order can be determined as zeros of $\phi_{N}(\upepsilon)$ of at least the degree $N=n+n_t$. The value of $n_t>0$, which is slowly increasing with $n$, depends on the required precision. For instance, $n_t\simeq 26$ for $n=1000$ and dimensionless interaction constant $\kappa=0.2$, if double precision is required. Given that the sequence of the $l$th zeros $x_{nl}$’s of $\phi_{n}(\upepsilon)$’s defines a monotonically decreasing discrete flow with increasing $n$, the Rabi model is indistinguishable from an algebraically solvable model in any finite precision. Although we can rigorously prove our results only for dimensionless interaction constant $\kappa< 1$, numerics and exactly solvable example suggest that the main conclusions remain to be valid also for $\kappa\ge 1$.'
author:
- Alexander Moroz
title: A hidden analytic structure of the Rabi model
---
Introduction {#sc:intr}
============
Let us consider a quantum model described by a Hamiltonian $\hat{H}$ satisfying the eigenvalue equation $$\hat{H}\upvarphi=E\upvarphi
\label{eme}$$ in the Bargmann Hilbert space $\mathfrak{b}$ of analytic entire functions [@Schw; @Brg]. The latter implies that any physical state is described by an entire function $$\upvarphi(z)=\sum_{n=0}^\infty \phi_n z^n,
\label{pss}$$ where $\{\phi_n\}_{n=0}^\infty$ are the sought expansion coefficients. The present work investigates consequences of the following three simple observations.
[*First observation*]{}.– A first trivial observation is that for $\upvarphi$ to be an element of $\mathfrak{b}$, the coefficients $\phi_n$’s have to approach zero in the limit $n\rightarrow\infty$. Hence for energy $\upepsilon$ to belong to the spectrum $\Upsigma$, $\phi_n$ have to be such a solution of Eq. (\[eme\]) that $\phi_n\rightarrow 0$. Briefly, $$\upepsilon\in \Upsigma \Longrightarrow \phi_n\rightarrow 0~~~~~
(n\rightarrow\infty).
\label{cd1}$$ Obviously, the arrow [*cannot*]{} be reversed without some further limitations. There could be solutions of Eq. (\[eme\]) going to zero in the limit $n\rightarrow\infty$ which need not lead to an entire function, and hence to an element of $\mathfrak{b}$ (e.g. $|\phi_n|\sim n^{-c}$, where $c$ is an arbitrary positive constant).
[*Second observation*]{}.– For a number of models [@Schw; @AMep; @Zh1], the eigenvalue equation (\[eme\]) reduces in the Bargmann space $\mathfrak{b}$ to a [*three-term difference equation*]{} $$\phi_{n+1} + a_n \phi_n + b_n \phi_{n-1}=0 \hspace*{1.8cm} (n\ge 0).
\label{3trg}$$ The recurrence coefficients $a_n$ and $b_n$ are functions of model parameters, and so are the coefficients $\phi_n$’s. Our [*second*]{} observation regards the case when (i) $b_n\neq 0$ and (ii) the recurrence coefficients have at most an asymptotic power-like dependence $$a_n\sim a n^{\varsigma},~~~~~~~ b_n\sim b n^{\upsilon}
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ (n\rightarrow\infty),
\label{rcd}$$ where $2\varsigma>\upsilon$ and $\tau=\varsigma-\upsilon\geq 1/2$. The above conditions select an important class ${\cal R}$ of quantum models that was initially introduced and studied in our earlier work [@AMep]. Prominent examples comprise a displaced harmonic oscillator [@Schw; @AMep; @AMops], the Rabi model [@Rb], two-mode squeezed harmonic oscillator [@Zh1], etc. The [*second*]{} observation is that, for the models of ${\cal R}$, also the reverse condition to that in Eq. (\[cd1\]) applies. Energy $\upepsilon$ belongs to the spectrum $\Upsigma$ if and only if $\phi_n(\upepsilon)\rightarrow 0$ in the limit $n\rightarrow\infty$. We have the spectral condition $$\upepsilon\in \Upsigma \Longleftrightarrow
\phi_n(\upepsilon)\rightarrow 0 \hspace*{1.2cm}
(n\rightarrow\infty).
\label{cd2}$$ Indeed, according to the Perron-Kreuser theorem (Theorem 2.3 in Ref. [@Gt]), there are possible two qualitatively different types of linearly independent solutions of the recurrence (\[3trg\]). The asymptotic behaviour of the [*minimal*]{} solution guaranteed by the Perron-Kreuser theorem is $$\frac{\phi_{n+1}}{\phi_n}\sim
-\frac{b}{a}\frac{1}{n^\tau} \rightarrow 0
\hspace*{1.2cm} (n\rightarrow \infty)
\label{mins}$$ \[in virtue of Eq. (\[rcd\]) and $\tau \geq 1/2>0$\]. On the other hand, the [*dominant*]{} solutions of the recurrence (\[3trg\]) behave as $\phi_{n+1}/\phi_n \sim -an^\varsigma$ in the limit $n\rightarrow \infty$. For either (i) $\varsigma>0$ or (ii) $\varsigma=0$ and $a> 1$ the absolute value of $\phi_n$ tends to infinity. The above dichotomy precludes any intermediate behaviour like $|\phi_n|\sim n^{-c}$. Consequently, any solution of the recurrence (\[3trg\]) with given initial conditions that behaves as $\phi_n(\upepsilon)\rightarrow 0$ in the limit $n\rightarrow \infty$ corresponds necessarily to an eigenvalue $\upepsilon\in\Upsigma$.
[*Third observation*]{}.– Our [*third*]{} observation concerns the case when each of the expansion coefficients $\phi_n$’s is proportional to a polynomial of degree $n$ in the energy parameter $\upepsilon$ [@AMops]. We recall that the [*necessary*]{} and [*sufficient*]{} condition for a family of polynomials $\{P_n\}$ (with degree $P_n = n$) to form an [*orthogonal polynomial system*]{} (OPS) is that $P_n$’s satisfy $$P_n(x)=(\beta_n x -c_n)P_{n-1}(x) - \lambda_n P_{n-2}(x)
\label{chi3trg}$$ with the initial condition $P_{-1}(x)=0$ and $P_{0}(x)=1$, where the coefficients $\beta_n,\, c_n$ and $\lambda_n$ are independent of $x$, $\beta_n\ne 0$, and $\lambda_n\ne 0$ for $n\ge 1$ [@Chi]. In what follows, the Stieltjes measure $d\psi(x)$ in the orthogonality relations induced by the positive moment functional $$\begin{aligned}
{\cal L}[P_m(x)P_n(x)] & = &
\int_{-\infty}^\infty P_m(x)P_n(x)\, d\psi(x)
\nonumber\\
& = & \lambda_1\lambda_2\ldots
\lambda_{n+1}\delta_{mn},
\label{bor}\end{aligned}$$ shall have a [*discrete*]{} support [@AMops]. In other words the set of all points $x$ at which the resulting Stieltjes measure $d\psi(x) \equiv \psi(x) - \psi(x-0)>0$ forms a discrete lattice $\Lambda$ [@Chi]. (In mathematics, the set $\Lambda$ is called the spectrum of $\psi$ - cf. p. 51 of Ref. [@Chi].)
Orthogonal polynomials that are pairwise orthogonal with respect to a discrete measure are called [*discrete*]{} orthogonal polynomials [@NSU; @KS]. The requirement that the expansion coefficients $\phi_n$’s are proportional to [*discrete*]{} orthogonal polynomials obviously entails a certain restriction on the form of the recurrence coefficients $a_n$ and $b_n$ of our initial recurrence (\[3trg\]). Nevertheless, the latter is still satisfied for a number of important models [@AMops]. Canonical properties of an OPS are that $P_n$’s
- have [*real*]{} and [*simple*]{} zeros (Theorem I-5.2 of Ref. [@Chi]),
- the zeros of any two subsequent polynomials $P_n(x)$ and $P_{n+1}(x)$ mutually separate each other (Theorem I-5.3 of Ref. [@Chi]).
Specifically, denote the zeros of $P_n(x)$ with degree $P_n = n$ by $x_{n1}<x_{n2}<\ldots< x_{nn}$. Then for any $l=1,2,\ldots,\allowbreak n-1$ $$x_{nl}<x_{n-1,l}<x_{n,l+1}.
\label{1p5p4}$$ For each fixed $l$, $\{x_{nl}\}_{n=l}^\infty$ is a strictly [*decreasing*]{} sequence, defining a discrete flow, and the limit $$\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty} x_{nl} = \xi_l \in \Upsigma
\label{1p5p6}$$ exists [@Chi]. Because of the spectral condition (\[cd2\]), the discrete flow has nowhere to flow than to the spectral point of our model. Hence $\xi_l\in\Upsigma$. In other words, the spectrum of a physical model coincides with the corresponding discrete lattice $\Lambda$.
[*Central questions*]{}.– The first two observations might have prompted the knowledgeable reader to pose the following question [**Q1**]{}: [*Could the zeros of a given $\phi_n(\upepsilon)$ be of use to determine the spectrum of models from the recurrence class ${\cal R}$*]{}?
The very fact that the spectrum of a model is determined as zeros of a polynomial implies a special case of analytic solvability known as [*algebraic*]{} solvability [@TU; @Trb; @BD; @KUW; @KKT]. Our another question is therefore [**Q2**]{}: [*Are there some models of the class ${\cal R}$ which are algebraically solvable*]{}?
The rest of the paper is devoted to answering the questions in the special case of the Rabi model [@Rb].
Rabi model {#sc:rbm}
==========
The Rabi model [@Rb] describes the simplest interaction between a cavity mode with a frequency $\omega_c$ and a two-level system with a resonance frequency $\omega_0$. The model is characterized by the Hamiltonian [@Schw; @Rb] $$\hat{H}_R =
\hbar \omega_c \mathds{1} \hat{a}^\dagger \hat{a}
+ \hbar g\sigma_1 (\hat{a}^\dagger + \hat{a}) + \mu \sigma_3,
\label{rabih}$$ where $\mu=\hbar \omega_0/2$, $\hat{a}$ and $\hat{a}^\dagger$ are the conventional boson annihilation and creation operators satisfying commutation relation $[\hat{a},\hat{a}^{\dagger}] = 1$, and $g$ is a coupling constant. In what follows, $\mathds{1}$ is the unit matrix, $\sigma_j$ are the Pauli matrices in their standard representation, and we set the reduced Planck constant $\hbar=1$. The Hilbert space is ${\cal B}=L^2(\mathbb{R})\otimes\mathbb{C}^2$, where $L^2(\mathbb{R})$ is represented by the Bargmann space of entire functions $\mathfrak{b}$, and $\mathbb{C}^2$ stands for a spin space [@Schw; @Brg]. In a unitary equivalent [*single-mode spin-boson picture*]{}, $\hat{H}_R$ becomes $$\hat{H}_{sb} =
\omega_c \mathds{1} \hat{a}^\dagger \hat{a} + \mu \sigma_1
+ g \sigma_3 (\hat{a}^\dagger + \hat{a}).
%%\label{sbh}$$ The transformation is accomplished by means of the unitary operator $$U= \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} (\sigma_1 + \sigma_3) = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}
\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
1& 1
\\
1 & -1
\end{array}
\right) = U^{-1}.
\label{unop}$$ The Hilbert space can be written as a direct sum ${\cal B}={\cal B}_+\oplus {\cal B}_-$ of the parity eigenspaces of the parity operator $\hat{\Pi}=\sigma_1 \hat{\gamma}$ [@AMep; @AMops; @FG; @Br]. Here $\hat{\gamma}=e^{i\pi \hat{a}^\dagger \hat{a}}$ induces [*reflections*]{} of the annihilation and creation operators: $\hat{a}\rightarrow-\hat{a}$, $\hat{a}^\dagger\rightarrow-\hat{a}^\dagger$, and leaves the boson number operator $\hat{a}^\dagger \hat{a}$ invariant [@FG; @Br]. The corresponding parity eigenstates $\Phi^+$ and $\Phi^-$ of the eigenvalue equation (\[eme\]) contain one independent component each [@AMep; @AMops; @FG; @Br], $$\Phi^+(z) = \left(
\begin{array}{c}
\upvarphi^+
\\
\hat{\gamma}\upvarphi^+
\end{array}\right), \hspace*{0.8cm}
\Phi^-(z) = \left(
\begin{array}{c}
\upvarphi^-
\\
- \hat{\gamma}\upvarphi^-
\end{array}\right).
\label{pregs}$$ The respective parity eigenstates $\Phi^+(z)$ and $\Phi^-(z)$ satisfy the following eigenvalue equations for the independent (e.g. upper) component (cf. Eqs. (4.12-13) of Ref. [@FG]) $$\begin{aligned}
H^+\upvarphi^+ &=& [A + B\hat{\gamma} + C ]\upvarphi^+= E^+\upvarphi^+,
\nonumber
\\
H^-\upvarphi^- &=& [A - B\hat{\gamma} + C ]\upvarphi^-= E^-\upvarphi^-,
\nonumber\end{aligned}$$ where $A=\omega_c \hat{a}^\dagger \hat{a}$, $B=\mu$, and $C=g (\hat{a}^\dagger + \hat{a})$. Here we have written $E^\pm$ since, in general, the spectra of $H^+$ and $H^-$ do not coincide.
Now, in the Bargmann space of entire functions, the action of $\hat{\gamma}$ becomes (Eq. (10) of Ref. [@AMops]; Eq. (37) of Ref. [@AMep]) $$\hat{\gamma}\upvarphi^\pm (z)=\upvarphi^\pm (-z)
=\sum_{n=0}^\infty (-1)^n \phi_n^\pm z^n.
\nonumber$$ Thereby, the Rabi model can be characterized by a pair of the three-term recurrences (Eq. (37) of Ref. [@AMep]) $$\begin{aligned}
\lefteqn{
\phi_{n+1}^\pm +\frac{1}{\kappa (n+1)}\,
[n - \upepsilon \pm(-1)^n\Delta]\phi_{n}^\pm
}\hspace*{3cm}
\nonumber\\
&& + \frac{1}{n+1}\, \phi_{n-1}^\pm = 0,
\label{rbmb2}\end{aligned}$$ where $\upepsilon\equiv E^\pm/\omega_c$, $\Delta=\mu/\omega_c=\omega_0/(2\omega_c)$, and $\kappa=g/\omega_c$ reflects the coupling strength [@AMep]. Because the recurrence (\[rbmb2\]) satisfies the conditions that guarantee uniqueness of the minimal solution, i.e. each $\upvarphi^\pm(z)$ generated by the respective minimal solutions is [*unique*]{}, the spectrum in each parity eigenspace ${\cal B}_\pm$ is necessarily [*nondegenerate*]{} (cf. sec. 5.2 of Ref. [@AMops]).
As shown in our recent work [@AMops], the substitution $\phi_n^\pm (\upepsilon)=P_{n}^{(-1)}(x)/n!$ transforms each of the two three-term recurrences (\[rbmb2\]) into the defining equation of monic orthogonal polynomials \[cf. Eq. (\[chi3trg\])\], $$\begin{aligned}
P_n^{(\alpha)}(x) &=&(x-c_{n+\alpha})P_{n-1}^{(\alpha)}(x)
- \lambda_{n+\alpha} P_{n-2}^{(\alpha)}(x),
\label{chi3tra}
\\
P_{-1}^{(\alpha)}(x) &=& 0,~~~~~~ P_{0}^{(\alpha)}(x)=1,
\nonumber % label{chi3trica}\end{aligned}$$ where $\alpha=-1$, $x=\upepsilon/\kappa$, $$c_n \equiv \frac{1}{\kappa }\,[n \pm (-1)^n\Delta],
\label{cn}$$ $\lambda_{n}=n$ for $n>0$, and $\lambda_{0}=1$ [@AMops]. Note that the coefficients $c_n$ and $\lambda_{n}$ are [*real*]{} and independent of $x$, and $\lambda_{n+\alpha} > 0$ for $n\ge 1$. Because the Stieltjes measure $d\psi(x)$ in the orthogonality relations (\[bor\]) has a [*discrete*]{} support [@AMops], Eq. (\[bor\]) reduces to $$\begin{aligned}
{\cal L}[P_m(x)P_n(x)] & = &
\sum_{x_i\in\Lambda} P_m^{(-1)}(x_i) P_n^{(-1)}(x_i)\, d\psi(x_i)
\nonumber\\
&& = n! \delta_{mn},
\label{rpor}\end{aligned}$$ where $\Lambda$ is a one-dimensional lattice representing the discrete support of $d\psi(x)$. Therefore, the resulting polynomials are [*discrete*]{} orthogonal polynomials [@NSU; @KS; @BFA; @Clr]. One can verify that, except for the special limiting case $\Delta=0$ (discussed below), the polynomials are [*non-classical*]{} orthogonal polynomials (i.e. they cannot be recovered as solution of a second-order difference equation of [*hypergeometric*]{} type - cf. Secs. 2-3 of Ref. [@NSU]; the classical polynomials are called the Hahn class of orthogonal polynomials in Sec. V-3 of Ref. [@Chi]).
The three-term recurrences (\[rbmb2\]) imply that the exponents $\varsigma=0$, $\upsilon=-1$ and $\tau=\varsigma-\upsilon=1\geq 1/2$ \[cf. Eq. (\[rcd\])\]. Therefore, the conditions required for the validity of our first to third observations are satisfied for the Rabi model, provided that $\kappa< 1$. The above range encompasses not only the conventional [*strong*]{} coupling regime characterized in that $\kappa=g/\omega_c \lesssim 10^{-2}$ but also the [*ultrastrong*]{} ($\kappa\gtrsim 0.1$) coupling regime, and overlaps with the [*deep strong*]{} ($\kappa\approx 1$) coupling regime [@CRL]. For $\kappa \gtrsim 0.1$ the validity of the rotating wave approximation (RWA) breaks down and the relevant physics can only be described by the full Rabi model [@Rb].
Main results {#sc:mnr}
============
Let us elucidate our main results on the example of the exactly solvable limit $\Delta=0$ describing a [*displaced harmonic oscillator*]{} [@Schw]. The expansion coefficients $\phi_n$ are known to be determined by the associated Laguerre polynomials $L_n^{(\zeta-n)}(\kappa^2)$, where $\zeta=\upepsilon +\kappa^2=\kappa x +\kappa^2$. (cf. Eq. (2.16) of Ref. [@Schw] and Sec. 4 of Ref. [@AMops]). Note in passing that energy variable $\zeta$ is not the polynomial variable of the associated Laguerre polynomials. It is expedient to work with the (monic) Charlier polynomials [@Chr] (cf. Eqs. VI-1.4-5 of Ref. [@Chi]) and express $\phi_n$ as (see Sec. 4 of Ref. [@AMops]) $$\phi_n (\upepsilon) = \frac{P_n^{(-1)}(x;\Delta=0)}{n!}
= \frac{1}{n!\kappa^{n}}\, C_n^{(\kappa^2)}(\zeta).
\label{pnm1}$$ The Stieltjes measure $d\psi^{(\kappa^2)}$ in the orthogonality relations of the Charlier polynomials (cf. Eq. VI-1.3 of Ref. [@Chi]) is known to be the step function $$d\psi^{(\kappa^2)}(\zeta)
=\sum_{l=0}^\infty \frac{e^{-\kappa^2} \kappa^{2\zeta}}{\zeta!}\, \delta(\zeta-l).
\label{chwf}$$ Note in passing that $d\psi^{(\kappa^2)}$ is the [*Poisson distribution function*]{} of probability theory at the jumps [@Chi]. The jumps occur at $\zeta=0,1,2,\ldots$ The set of all the jumps forms the support of the Stieltjes measure $d\psi^{(\kappa^2)}$ [@Chi], which in turn is known to be formed by the set of all the limit zero points $\xi_l$ defined earlier by Eq. (\[1p5p6\]) [@Chi]. Thus the orthogonality relations are $$\sum_{l=0}^\infty C_m^{(\kappa^2)}(l)C_n^{(\kappa^2)}(l)
\, d\psi^{(\kappa^2)}(l) = \kappa^{2n} n! \delta_{mn}.
\label{chpor}$$ Not surprizingly, the location of jumps correspond exactly to the eigenvalues of the displaced harmonic oscillator [@Schw] $$\upepsilon_l=l-\kappa^2
\label{bslnc}$$ (including $l=0$). The jumps define an [*equidistant*]{} lattice. Because the orthogonality relation (\[chpor\]) reduces to an infinite sum, the Charlier polynomials are said to be classical [*discrete*]{} orthogonal polynomials on an equidistant lattice [@NSU; @KS; @BFA; @Clr]. The adjective [*classical*]{} implies that the Charlier polynomials can be recovered as solutions of a second-order difference equation of [*hypergeometric*]{} type (cf. Sec. 2 of Ref. [@NSU]).
![ An illustration of the approximation of the spectrum in the case of the exactly solvable displaced harmonic oscillator, which corresponds to the Rabi model in the limit $\Delta=0$. Shown is the difference of the approximants determined by the zeros $x_{nl}$, $l=1,2,\ldots,n$, of $\phi_n(\upepsilon)$ compared to the exact eigenvalues $\upepsilon_{l-1}=l-1-\kappa^2$ for $\kappa=2$ and different degree $n$ of $\phi_n(\upepsilon)$. The precision in calculating zeros was set to seven decimal places.[]{data-label="fgzrsg2"}](zerosg2.eps){width="\columnwidth"}
Thus in the example of the displaced harmonic oscillator our conclusions can be shown to be rigorously valid also for $\kappa\ge 1$. As a by-product, none of the zeros of $\phi_n$ coincides with the exact spectrum. In more detail, Eq. (74) of Ref. [@AMops] shows that $\phi_n$ is a sum of polynomials in the dimensionless energy parameter $\zeta$, $$\phi_n = \sum_{j=0}^n (-1)^{n-j}
\frac{\kappa^{n-2j}}{(n-j)!j!}\, \prod_{k=0}^{j-1} (\zeta-k).
\label{cnsp}$$ The spectral points $\zeta=l\in \mathbb{N}$ (including $l=0$) of the displaced harmonic oscillator are characterized by a sudden collapse of the degree of $\phi_n$ to a polynomial of merely the degree $(l-1)$ in $\zeta$ for any $n\ge l$ [@AMops]. Consequently, $\phi_n$ reduces for any $\zeta=l$ to a finite sum of $l$ terms, each ranging from $(-1)^n \kappa^n/n!$ for $j=0$ to the $j=(l-1)$th term $$(-1)^{n+1-l} \frac{l \kappa^{n+2-2l}}{(n+1-l)!}\cdot
\nonumber$$ Clearly, the points of the spectrum $\zeta=l$ [*do not*]{} coincide with the zeros of any of $\phi_n$. However, each of the individual terms rapidly decreases with increasing $n$ in its absolute value down to zero. It is straightforward to show that for any $\zeta=l\in\mathbb{N}$ the absolute value of $\phi_n$ could be bounded by $l^2 \, \max(\kappa^n,\kappa^{n+2-2l})/(n+1-l)!$. Hence $$\phi_n(\zeta=l) \rightarrow 0 \hspace*{1.5cm}(n\rightarrow \infty),
\nonumber$$ i.e., at any given point of the spectrum $\phi_n$ rapidly vanishes in the limit $n\rightarrow \infty$ down to zero (cf. figure \[fgzrsg2\]).
For a nonzero value of $\Delta$ our polynomials cannot be recovered as solution of a second-order difference equation of [*hypergeometric*]{} type (cf. Secs. 2-3 of Ref. [@NSU]). Thus $\Delta\ne 0$ induces a deformation of the Charlier polynomials to [*non-classical*]{} discrete orthogonal polynomials and, at the same time, a deformation of the underlying equidistant lattice. Although neither the weight function nor the deformed lattice are analytically known, the orthogonality relations (\[bor\]) enable us to conclude that the above deformation is a [*norm preserving deformation*]{}. Indeed, Eq. (\[bor\]) implies that the norm depends only on the value of the recurrence coefficients $\lambda_j$. However, the latter do not depend on $\Delta$. Thus, as exemplified by Eq. (\[rpor\]), $||P_n^{(-1)}||^2=n!$ for any value of $\Delta$ \[cf. Eqs. (\[pnm1\]) and (\[chpor\])\].
![Convergence of the $1000$th zero $\upepsilon_{n,999}$ of $\phi_n(\upepsilon)$ toward the exact $1000$th eigenvalue $\upepsilon_{999}=998.907883759510,\, 997.950425260357$ and $973.989087026621$ of the Rabi model in the positive parity eigenspace for $(\kappa,\Delta)=(0.2,0.4),\, (1,0.7),\, (5,0.4)$, respectively. The ground state energy $\upepsilon_{0}$ corresponds to the first zero of $\phi_n(\upepsilon)$. Each decreasing sequence $\upepsilon_{n,999}$ forms a discrete flow converging toward the corresponding exact eigenvalue down to machine precision. []{data-label="fgrb1000"}](rb1000.eps){width="\columnwidth"}
Regarding the question [**Q1**]{} raised in the preceding section, the answer turns out thus not only be affirmative, but the result exceeds all the expectations also in the case of the Rabi model (cf. figure \[fgrb1000\]). The convergence of the zeros to the spectrum is very fast. The tail of highest-order zeros which do not approximate the spectrum increases for a given $n$th level with increasing $\kappa$. Although we can rigorously prove our results only for $\kappa< 1$, numerics strongly suggests that the main conclusions remain to be valid also for $\kappa\ge 1$. Convergence of each discrete flow of zeros has been independently checked by the Schweber quantization criterion [@Schw; @AMep; @AMops] (see also Sec. \[sc:schw\] below). The example in figure \[fgrb1000\] shows that the fraction $n_t/\kappa=(n-1000)/\kappa$ saturates at some constant value for $\kappa\gtrsim 1$. The eigenstate corresponding to the $n$th eigenvalue can be approximated for $N=n+n_t$ as $$\upvarphi(z) \approx \sum_{l=0}^N \phi_l(x_{Nn}) z^l
+ \sum_{l=N+1}^\infty \frac{(-\kappa z)^l}{l!}\cdot
\label{pss1}$$ In agreement with the asymptotic behaviour of the [*minimal*]{} solution enforced by the Perron-Kreuser theorem (\[mins\]), $\phi_n(\upepsilon)$ has to behave for any eigenvalue as $\phi_n(\upepsilon)\sim (-\kappa)^n/n!$ for sufficiently large $n$ (note that the three-term recurrences (\[rbmb2\]) implies $a=1/\kappa$, $\varsigma=0$, $b=1$, $\upsilon=-1$).
By the well known relations connecting the zeros and coefficients of a polynomial (Theorems I-4.2 and IV-3.1 of Ref. [@Chi]) $$\sum_{l=0}^{n-1} \upepsilon_{l} \approx \kappa \sum_{l=1}^n c_{l}
=\frac{n(n-1)}{2} + d,
\label{enrl}$$ where we have substituted from (\[cn\]) for $c_{l}$, and $d$ is one of $0,\pm \Delta$. The latter justifies that energy eigenvalues are rather closely distributed around a straight line [@Ksc].
The answer to our question [**Q2**]{} appears peculiar. Our computers allows us to work only in a [*finite*]{} precision. However, in the given precision, the spectrum of the Rabi model can be determined by the zeros of the polynomials $\phi_n(\upepsilon)$. We have seen above that the discrete zeros flow has nowhere to flow than to the spectral point (cf. figure \[fgrb1000\]). Therefore, in any finite precision the Rabi model is indistinguishable from an [*algebraically*]{} solvable model. At the same time, only a computer with unlimited precision would recognize that the Rabi model is not [*algebraically*]{} solvable, because the limit $n\rightarrow\infty$ is required for the zeros flow to converge to the spectrum. Note in passing (see below) that the same limit is also required in Braak’s solution.
Discussion {#sec:disc}
==========
Solving the spectral condition (\[cd2\]) implies an entirely new, efficient, and relatively general method in determining the spectrum. The method differs both from (i) a brute force numerical diagonalization, (ii) searching for zeros of functions determined by infinite continued fractions as in the Schweber method (cf. Eq. (A.16) of Ref. [@Schw]), and (iii) Braak’s approach. Only the lowest [*10-20*]{} energy levels are within the reach of both Braak’s solution [@Br3] and, as shown below, of the Schweber method [@Schw; @AMep] - you are invited to convince yourself by running numerical F77 code that has been made available on-line [@AMr]. A brute force numerical diagonalization allows one to determine above [*2000*]{} energy levels in double precision (cca 16 digits). However any deeper analytic insight is missig. Note in passing that the presently calculable [*1350*]{} energy levels per parity subspace have been obtained by the simplest stepping algorithm. Then the numerical limitation in calculating zeros are [*over-*]{} and [*underflows*]{}. Typically, with increasing $n$ the respective recurrences yield first increasing and then decreasing $\phi_n$. It is conceivable that the use of a more sophisticated algorithm could overcome the limit of the total number of calculable energy levels of ca. [*1350*]{} levels per parity subspace, or ca [*2700*]{} levels for the Rabi model in total, in double precision.
That expansion coefficients $\phi_n$ could be determined by orthogonal polynomials is, strictly speaking, not necessary for working of our method based on solving the spectral condition (\[cd2\]). The method could provide also an efficient numerical way of obtaining the spectra of the models which expansion coefficients $\phi_n$ [*cannot*]{} be given by orthogonal polynomials.
Comparison with Braak’s solution
--------------------------------
Braak [@Br] argued that a [*regular*]{} spectrum of the Rabi model in the respective parity eigenspaces is given by the zeros of transcendental functions $$G_\pm(\zeta)=\sum_{n=0}^\infty K_n(\zeta,\kappa)
\left[1\mp\frac{\Delta}{\zeta-n}\right]\kappa^n.
\label{sol}$$ The coefficients $K_n(\zeta,\kappa)$ are obtained recursively by solving the Poincaré difference equation $$K_{n+1} - \frac{f_n(\zeta)}{(n+1)}\,
K_n + \frac{1}{n+1}\, K_{n-1}=0
\label{sa8}$$ upwardly for $n\ge 1$, where $$f_n(\zeta)=2\kappa+\frac{1}{2\kappa}
\left(n-\zeta - \frac{\Delta^2}{n-\zeta}\right),
\label{f-n}$$ $\kappa$ and $\Delta$ are as in Eq. (\[rbmb2\]) (cf. Eq. (A8) of Schweber [@Schw], which has mistyped sign in front of his $b_{n-1}$, and Eqs. (4) and (5) of [@Br]). The initial condition is $$K_1/K_0=f_0(\zeta) = 2\kappa-\frac{1}{2\kappa}
\left(\zeta - \frac{\Delta^2}{\zeta}\right),
\nonumber %\label{rbc}$$ with $K_0$ being a normalization constant. Braak’s solution requires (i) to solve for an undetermined number of complicated functions $K_n(\zeta,\kappa)$ having poles at discrete values of $\zeta$ (cf. Sec. 5.1 of Ref. [@AMops]), (ii) to assemble the functions $K_n(\zeta,\kappa)$ into $G_\pm(\zeta)$ according to Eq. (\[sol\]), (iii) to solve for zeros of $G_\pm(\zeta)$. Thus it is not surprizing that Braak’s approach reaches its limits already at ca. [*20*]{} energy levels in double precision [@Br3]. Even if an additional analytic continuation step could increase the number of calculable energy levels in Braak’s approach to around [*100*]{} [@Br3], the number is still by an order of magnitude lower than what is possible within our approach.
In contrast, in our approach the structure of any $\phi_{n}(\upepsilon)$’s is clear - they are all determined by orthogonal polynomials. Further, only a [*single*]{} well-behaved $\phi_{N}(\upepsilon)$ of the degree $N=n+n_t$, $n_t>0$, is required to determine any first $n$ eigenvalues of the Rabi model arranged in increasing order as zeros of $\phi_{N}(\upepsilon)$. Importantly, our approach also provides an efficient registry of energy levels. Indeed, a given $\phi_{n}(\upepsilon)$ has $n$ distinct real zeros. Therefore any omission of energy level can be easily identified. The latter could be useful in any future statistical analysis of the spectra [@Ksc]. To reach unlimited precision, the limit $n\rightarrow\infty$ is required. However, the latter is also necessary in the definition of $G_\pm(\zeta)$.
Failure of Schweber’s method for higher order eigenvalues {#sc:schw}
---------------------------------------------------------
It is believed that the spectrum of the Rabi model can be formally determined by the Schweber quantization criterion expressed in terms of infinite continued fractions (cf. Eq. (A.16) of Ref. [@Schw] and Refs. [@AMep; @AMops]), $$0=F(x)\equiv a_0 + \frac{-b_{1}}{a_{1}-} \frac{b_{2}}{a_{2}-}
\frac{b_{3}}{a_{3}-}\cdots,
\label{fdfs}$$ where \[cf. Eq. (\[rbmb2\])\] $$a_n =\frac{1}{\kappa (n+1)}\,
[n - \upepsilon \pm(-1)^n\Delta],~~~~~
b_n=\frac{1}{n+1},$$ According to the Wallis formulas (Eqs. (III.2.1) of Ref. [@Chi]; Eqs. (4.2-3) of Ref. [@Gt]), the infinite continued fraction in Eq. (\[fdfs\]) can be expressed as the limit $$r_0=\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty} \frac{A_n}{B_n}\cdot
\label{r0l}$$ Here $A_n$ and $B_n$ are the $n$th [*partial numerator*]{} and the $n$th [*partial denominator*]{}, respectively. We have shown that the ratio on the r.h.s. of Eq. (\[r0l\]), also known as a [*convergent*]{}, can be expressed as the limit of the ratios of the polynomials [@AMops] $$r_0=\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty} \frac{P_{n-1}^{(1)}(x)}{P_n(x)},
\label{r0lo}$$ where $P_{n}^{(\alpha)}$ satisfy Eq. (\[chi3tra\]) for $\alpha=0,1$. The $n$th [*partial numerator*]{} $A_n$ in Eq. (\[r0l\]) is related to $P_{n-1}^{(1)}(x)$, whereas the $n$th [*partial denominator*]{} $B_n$ is related to $P_{n}(x)$. Any numerical method of computing $F(x)$ through Eqs. (\[r0l\]) and (\[r0lo\]) has to impose an unavoidable cutoff at some $n=N\gg 1$. For any finite $n$ the ratio in (\[r0lo\]) enables the partial fraction decomposition (PFD) (Theorem III-4.3 of Ref. [@Chi]), $$\frac{A_n}{B_n}=\frac{P_{n-1}^{(1)}(x)}{P_n(x)}=\sum_{l=1}^n
\frac{M_{nl}}{x-x_{nl}},
\label{pfdr}$$ where the numbers $M_{nl}$ are all [*positive*]{} and satisfy the condition $\sum_{l=1}^n M_{nl}=1$ [@AMops; @Chi].
Let $F_n(x)$ denote a finite-order approximation to $F(x)$ defined by Eq. (\[fdfs\]), which is obtained by approximating $r_0$ in Eqs. (\[r0l\]) and (\[r0lo\]) by the PFD in Eq. (\[pfdr\]). One finds $dF_n(x)/dx <0$ whenever the derivative exists [@AMops]. Consequently, $F_n(x)$ decreases from $+\infty$ to $-\infty$ between any two subsequent $x_{nl}<x_{n,l+1}$ and there is exactly one zero of $F_n(x)$ [@AMops] (cf. figs. 1,2 of Ref. [@AMep] and fig. 1 of Ref. [@AMops]). $F_n(x)$ has its zeros and poles [*interlaced*]{} on the real axis [@AMops]. As is the case of any associated OPS’s (see sec. III.4 of Ref. [@Chi]), the zeros of $P_{n}^{(\alpha)}(x)$ and $P_{n-1}^{(\alpha+1)}(x)$ are [*interlaced*]{} (Theorem III-4.1 of Ref. [@Chi]). Specifically, $$x_{nl}^{(\alpha)}<x_{n-1,l}^{(\alpha+1)}<x_{n,l+1}^{(\alpha)},
\hspace*{0.8cm} \alpha=-1,0.
\label{3p4p1}$$ (It is reminded that the superscript $\alpha=-1$ denotes the zeros of $\phi_n$’s.) The second of the rigorous sharp inequalities in Eq. (\[3p4p1\]) implies $$x_{n-1,l-1}^{(1)} < x_{nl} < x_{n+1,l+1}^{(-1)}.
\label{zridr}$$ (For the sake of notation the superscript $(0)$ for $\alpha=0$ will be suppressed in what follows.) The above scenario can be indeed confirmed numerically for a small number of the very first eigenvalues (cf. figs. 1,2 of Ref. [@AMep]; fig. 1 of Refs. [@AMops; @AMcm]).
![ An approximation of the spectrum in the case of the exactly solvable displaced harmonic oscillator by the zeros $x_{nl}$, $l=1,2,\ldots,n$, of the partial denominators $B_{n}$’s \[cf. Eq. (\[r0l\])\]. Similar to figure \[fgzrsg2\], shown is the difference of the approximants $\upepsilon_{nl}$ compared to the exact [*excited*]{} eigenvalues $\upepsilon_{l}=l-\kappa^2$, $l>0$, for $\kappa=0.2$ and different degree $n$ of $B_n$. The ground state energy $\upepsilon_{0}$ at $l=0$ is not accounted for by the OPS for $\alpha=0$. The precision in calculating zeros was set to five decimal places.[]{data-label="fgzrs"}](zeros.eps){width="\columnwidth"}
Nevertheless, any practical implementation of the Schweber method [*fails*]{} for higher order eigenvalues. Depending on the model parameters, one can determine only up to [*10*]{}-[*20*]{} eigenvalues, and that already in the exactly solvable limit of the displaced harmonic oscillator - cf. F77 code made available online [@AMr]. We have traced the failure down to a curious property of zeros of associated OPS - cf. data files [@AMdf]. Surprisingly enough, after a first few of initial zeros \[e.g. beginning with $l\gtrsim 2$ for $(\kappa,\Delta)=(0.2,0.4)$\] one finds that, in spite of the strict inequalities (\[zridr\]), $$x_{n-1,l-1}^{(1)} \simeq x_{nl} \simeq x_{n+1,l+1}^{(-1)}.
\label{zrid}$$ For $l\gtrsim 4$ and $(\kappa,\Delta)=(0.2,0.4)$ the zeros then coincide up to more than [*five*]{} decimal places (provided that $n$ is sufficiently large) - cf. data files [@AMdf]. Because of the coagulation of zeros (\[zrid\]), any singularity of $F_n(x)$ becomes [*numerically invisible*]{}. The coagulation can be undertood in that the position of zeros for each the OPS’s is largely determined by the respective sequences $$q^{(\alpha)}_n(x)
= \frac{\lambda_{n+\alpha}}{(x-c_{n+\alpha})(x-c_{n+\alpha+1})}\cdot
\nonumber %\label{qdf}$$ However, in the present case one finds that $$q^{(\alpha)}_{n-\alpha}(x)
=\frac{\kappa^2(n+1)}{(n-\upepsilon\pm (-1)^n\Delta)
(n+1-\upepsilon\mp (-1)^n\Delta)}
\nonumber %\label{qdfa}$$ do not depend on the value of $\alpha$. The coagulations of zeros is demonstrated in figure \[fgzrs\]. The latter shows that it is possible to determine a large part of the spectrum by looking at the zeros of the partial denominators $B_{n}$’s. Only marginally worse approximation property show the zeros of the partial numerators $A_{n}$’s (not shown). We emphasize that the failure of Schweber’s method is entirely down to the finite precision of numerical calculations. Although the rigorous theory underlying Schweber’s method [@Schw; @AMep; @AMops; @AMcm] is perfectly valid, a practical value of the method may be thus rather limited. The above conclusions are expected to apply also to alternative continued fraction expressions for the Rabi model studied by Ziegler [@Zg].
Algebraic solvability
---------------------
The Rabi model is a typical example of [*quasi-exactly solvable*]{} (QES) models in quantum mechanics [@TU; @Trb; @BD; @KUW; @KKT]. The QES models are distinguished by the fact that, for a chosen set of model parameters, a [*finite*]{} number of their eigenvalues and corresponding eigenfunctions can be determined [*algebraically*]{} [@TU; @Trb; @BD; @KUW; @KKT]. In the case of the Rabi model [@Rb], the latter eigenvalues correspond to the [*Juddian*]{} exact isolated solutions [@Jd; @Ks]. The possibility of any other polynomial solution can be excluded by recent results of Zhang [@Zh] (see also Sec. 4.2 of Ref. [@AMops]). In agreement with the no-go theorem of Zhang [@Zh], none of the zeros of any polynomial from any of the OPS $\{P_n^{(\alpha)}(x)\}$ coincides with the spectrum. The spectral points could only be reached in the limit $n\rightarrow\infty$.
Although the very notion of quantum integrability is the subject of ongoing dispute [@CM], it is largely accepted that if eigenvalues can be determined [*algebraically*]{} [@TU; @Trb; @BD; @KUW], this implies [*integrability*]{} and [*solvability*]{} [@CM]. Our results indicate that the algebraic solvability could be intricately linked with available precision. Conceptually, and from a broader perspective, the above properties of the QES Rabi model provide an example of that, numerically, there may be only very subtle difference between [*exactly*]{} and [*quasi-exactly*]{} solvable models, if the latter are characterized by discrete orthogonal polynomials. In general, any (i.e. not necessary QES) model that satisfies the spectral condition (\[cd2\]) and is characterized by discrete orthogonal polynomials could exhibit such a solvability.
Relation to the Jaynes and Cummings model and the effect of the RWA
-------------------------------------------------------------------
For dimensionless coupling strength $\kappa=g/\omega_c \lesssim 10^{-2}$, the physics of the Rabi model is known to be well captured by the analytically solvable Jaynes and Cummings (JC) model [@JC]. The latter is obtained from the former upon applying the rotating wave approximation (RWA), whereby the coupling term $\sigma_1 (\hat{a}^\dagger + \hat{a})$ in Eq. (\[rabih\]) is replaced by $(\sigma_+ \hat{a} + \sigma_-\hat{a}^\dagger)$, where $\sigma_\pm \equiv (\sigma_1 \pm i \sigma_2)/2$. The eigenstates of the JC model are linear combinations of the product states $|\psi_{1n}\rangle=|n\rangle|e\rangle$ and $|\psi_{2n}\rangle=|n+1\rangle|g\rangle$ in the Hilbert space ${\cal B}=L^2(\mathbb{R})\otimes\mathbb{C}^2$, where the respective $|e\rangle=(1,0)^t$ and $|g\rangle=(0,1)^t$, with the superscript $t$ indicating the transpose, stand for the excited and ground state in the spin space $\mathbb{C}^2$ [@Schw; @JC]. The product states $|\psi_{1n}\rangle$ and $|\psi_{2n}\rangle$ form a basis of an invariant subspace of the operator $$\hat{J}=\mathds{1} \hat{a}^\dagger \hat{a}
+\frac{1}{2}\,(\mathds{1}+\sigma_3),
\nonumber %\label{jop}$$ which generates a continuous $U(1)$ symmetry of the JC model [@Br; @JC]. The invariant subspace is characterized by the eigenvalue $n+1$ of $\hat{J}$. In terms of the parity operator $\hat{\Pi}=-\exp(i\pi \hat{J})$, each invariant subspace of $\hat{J}$ is positive or negative parity subspace depending on if $n$ is even or odd, respectively. Therefore, in each invariant subspace of $\hat{J}$, and hence for the eigenstates of the JC model, the parameter $w=\pm (-1)^n\Delta$ in Eq. (\[rbmb2\]) reduces to $w=\Delta$.
If $\kappa$ becomes small, the solution of the JC model [@JC] suggests to arrive at approximate solutions of Eq. (\[rbmb2\]) by setting all but two subsequent expansions coefficients $\phi_l$ and $\phi_{l+1}$ to zero. By forming corresponding $\varphi_\pm(z)=\phi_lz^l+\phi_{l+1}z^{l+1}$ according to Eq. (\[pss\]), substituting into Eq. (\[pregs\]), and unitary transforming by the operator $U$ given by Eq. (\[unop\]), one can verify that the corresponding parity eigenstates $\Phi^+$ and $\Phi^-$ \[cf. Eq. (\[pregs\])\] in the single-mode boson picture $\hat{H}_{sb}$ become $$\Phi(z) = \left(
\begin{array}{c}
\phi_l z^l
\\
\phi_{l+1} z^{l+1}
\end{array}\right)
\nonumber %\label{pregsjc}$$ in the conventional representation $\hat{H}_R$. Here we have used that $\Phi$ derives from the positive or negative parity eigenstate depending on if $l$ is even or odd, respectively. Note in passing that $\Phi(z)$ is yet undetermined linear combination of the JC states $|\psi_{1l}\rangle$ and $|\psi_{2l}\rangle$ in a given invariant subspace of $\hat{J}$. Obviously, upon imposing RWA onto $\hat{H}_R$ in Eq. (\[rabih\]) and substituting our $\Phi(z)$ as trial wave functions one would recover the JC model solution.
In order to investigate the effect of the RWA on the exact solution, we determine the eigenvalues of the JC model from the exact equations. Upon considering Eq. (\[rbmb2\]) for $n=l$ and $n=l+1$ one arrives at $$\begin{aligned}
\frac{\phi_{l+1}}{\phi_{l}} &=& - \frac{1}{\kappa(l+1)}\, [l-\upepsilon +\Delta],
\nonumber\\
\frac{\phi_{l}}{\phi_{l+1}} &=& - \frac{1}{\kappa}\, [l+1-\upepsilon -\Delta].
\label{jceq}\end{aligned}$$ One can recast Eqs. (\[jceq\]) in the matrix form $$\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
l+\Delta & (l+1)\kappa
\\
\kappa & l+1-\Delta
\end{array}
\right)\left(
\begin{array}{c}
\phi_{l}
\\
\phi_{l+1}
\end{array}
\right)
=\upepsilon \left(
\begin{array}{c}
\phi_{l}
\\
\phi_{l+1}
\end{array}
\right).
\nonumber %\label{mjce}$$ The secular equation reduces to a quadratic equation $$\upepsilon^2 -(2l+1)\upepsilon +l(l+1) + \Delta - \Delta^2 - \kappa^2 (l+1) = 0.
\nonumber$$ The eigenvalues are $$\upepsilon_{\pm}=l+\frac{1}{2} \pm \frac{1}{2} \sqrt{1-4\Delta +4\Delta^2 + 4\kappa^2 (l+1)}.
\nonumber$$ Given $\Delta=\omega_0/(2\omega_c)$, one finds $$1-4\Delta +4\Delta^2 = 1- \frac{2\omega_0}{\omega_c} + \frac{\omega_0^2}{\omega_c^2}
=\frac{(\omega_0- \omega_c)^2}{\omega_c^2}=\delta_c^2,
\nonumber$$ i.e. square of the normalized detuning parameter $\delta_c=(\omega_0 - \omega_c)/\omega_c$ of the JC model [@JC]. Note in passing that $\delta_c\ll 1$ in the RWA, because the latter is reliable only if $g|\omega_0-\omega_c|\ll \omega_0,\, \omega_c$. The eigenvalues can be thus recast as $$\upepsilon_{\pm}=l+\frac{1}{2} \pm \frac{1}{2} \sqrt{\delta_c^2 + 4\kappa^2 (l+1)},
\label{jcel}$$ which is the familiar form of the eigenvalues of the JC model [@JC].
Any exact regular solution of the Rabi model is characterized by [*infinite*]{} set of [*nonzero*]{} expansion coefficients $\phi_n$, which for sufficiently large $n$ behave as $\phi_n \sim (-\kappa)^n/n!$ \[cf. the Perron-Kreuser theorem (\[mins\]) and the recurrence Eq. (\[rbmb2\])\]. Interestingly, the RWA takes implicitly into account the effect of $\phi_n\ne 0$ for $n\ne l, l+1$. If the coefficients were ignored, Eq. (\[rbmb2\]) for $n=l-1$ and $n=l+2$ would require that additionally $$\phi_{l} = 0, \hspace*{1.2cm} \phi_{l+1}/(l+3) =0.
\nonumber$$ Afterwards one would find for $\upepsilon=\upepsilon_+$ $$\frac{\phi_{l+1}}{\phi_{l}} = \tan \frac{\theta}{2} = \frac{2\kappa}{D +\delta_c}
=\frac{D -\delta_c}{2(l+1)\kappa},$$ where we have substituted from (\[jcel\]) for $\upepsilon$, denoted $D=\sqrt{\delta_c^2 + 4\kappa^2 (l+1)}$, and used that $\Delta-(1/2)=\delta_c/2$. Because $$\tan \theta = \frac{2 \tan \frac{\theta}{2}} {1 - \tan^2 \frac{\theta}{2}},
\nonumber %$$ and $$\tan^2\frac{\theta}{2}=\frac{D - \delta_c}{D +\delta_c}\frac{1}{(l+1)},
\nonumber %$$ one can determine $\tan \theta$ as $$\tan \theta = \frac{4\kappa}{D + \delta_c} \frac{(l+1)[D + \delta_c]}{lD +(l+2)\delta_c}
= \frac{4(l+1)\kappa}{lD +(l+2)\delta_c}\cdot
\nonumber %$$ The latter would not coincide with $\tan \theta =2\kappa\sqrt{l+1}/\delta_c$ for the JC model solution [@JC]. Hence if one tries from the very outset to ignore in the exact solution all but a pair of expansion coefficients, one will arrive at the RWA energies but not to the RWA tangent value.
Open problems
-------------
In Sec. \[sc:rbm\] it has been alluded to that our polynomials underlying the Rabi model are [*non-classical*]{} [*discrete*]{} orthogonal polynomials [@NSU; @KS]. Various generalizations of the classical discrete orthogonal polynomials have been studied in the literature. However, they have been almost exclusively concerned with various generalizations of the Stieltjes weight function while maintaining an underlying lattice on which the polynomials are defined [@BFA; @Clr]. An ensuing problem has been to determine the recurrence coefficients [@BFA; @Clr].
In the case of the Rabi model, the recurrence coefficients are explicitly known \[cf. Eqs. (\[chi3tra\]), (\[cn\])\]. As we have seen in Sec. \[sc:mnr\], the lattice is equidistant only in the special limiting case $\Delta=0$. Then the polynomials are proportional to the Charlier polynomials, which are related to each other according to (cf. Eq. (VI-1.7) of Ref. [@Chi]) $$\Delta_+ C_n^{(\kappa^2)}(x) = n C_{n-1}^{(\kappa^2)} (x),
\label{chrc}$$ where $\Delta_+ u(x) = u(x+1)-u(x)$ denotes the forward finite difference operator [@NSU]. Their weight function (\[chwf\]) satisfies a special form of the [*Pearson*]{} difference equation $$\Delta_+ u(x) = \frac{\kappa^2 -x-1}{x+1}\, u(x).
\label{preq}$$ A non-zero value of $\Delta$ induces a [*norm-preserving*]{} deformation of the Charlier polynomials to [*non-classical*]{} discrete orthogonal polynomials and, at the same time, a nonuniform deformation of the underlying equidistant lattice. The spectrum of the Rabi model is then nothing but the discrete nonuniform lattice. The so-called $q$-analogs of the Charlier polynomials on [*nonuniform*]{} lattices with the lattice points $x(n)=\exp(2wn)$ and $x(n)=\sinh(2wn)$, respectively, with $w>0$ being some parameter, have been discussed in Sec. 3.6 of Ref. [@NSU]. Yet those extensions are still classical orthogonal polynomials that are distinguished by the fact that all their properties are unambiguously determined by the second-order difference equation of [*hypergeometric*]{} type which they satisfy [@NSU]. Contrary to the main line of research of the discrete orthogonal polynomials community [@BFA; @Clr], the problems here are (i) to characterize the class of [*non-classical*]{} [*norm-preserving*]{} extensions of the classical discrete Charlier polynomials which encompasses the polynomials presented here (e.g. in terms of a suitable second order difference equation), (ii) to find generalizations of Eqs. (\[chrc\]) and (\[preq\]) for $\Delta\ne 0$, and (iii) to determine the nonuniform lattice on which the polynomials are defined. The problems are typically intertwined, because the forward finite difference operator is expected to operate on $\Lambda$ (cf. Sec. 3 of Ref. [@NSU]), whereas a second order difference equation arises on combining a relation of the type (\[chrc\]) with the defining three-term recurrence (cf. Sec. VI-1 of Ref. [@Chi]). The required extension has to be such that the average density of lattice points is substantially preserved \[note that Eq. (\[enrl\]) only marginally depends on $\Delta$\].
Conclusions {#sec:conc}
===========
The spectrum of the Rabi model was shown to coincide with the support of the discrete Stieltjes integral measure in the orthogonality relations of recently introduced non-classical discrete orthogonal polynomials. This finding brings about a novel method of solving the Rabi, and similar to it, models. In the case of the Rabi model the method resulted in an analytic solution that is considerably simpler than Braak’s solution [@Br; @Br3]. The eigenfunctions can be determined in terms of orthogonal polynomials, whereas the eigenvalues are found as the polynomial zeros. Thus any omission of an energy level could easily be identified. The simplicity of our analytic solution was rewarded by the fact that the number of ca. [*1350*]{} calculable energy levels per parity subspace in double precision obtained by a simple stepping algorithm is almost two orders of magnitude higher than is possible to obtain by means of Braak’s solution [@Br; @Br3]. A valuable insight as to whether a model is integrable or chaotic is provided by the energy level statistics. Our results suggest that energy eigenvalues are rather closely distributed around a straight line [@Ksc].
Although we can rigorously prove our results only for $\kappa< 1$, numerics and exactly solvable example suggest that the main conclusions are valid also for $\kappa\ge 1$. Our results could thus provide a reliable point of departure for the calculation of the dynamics of the Rabi model and its long-time evolution for all values of the dimensionless coupling $\kappa$. The latter could be important to a great variety of physical systems, including cavity and circuit quantum electrodynamics, quantum dots, polaronic physics and trapped ions [@KGK; @BGA; @FLM; @NDH]. With new experiments rapidly approaching the limit of the [*deep strong*]{} coupling regime $\kappa \gtrsim 1$, one expect such systems to open up a rich vein of research on truly quantum effects with implications for quantum information science and fundamental quantum optics [@CRL; @KGK].
Acknowledgment
==============
Continuous support of MAKM is largely acknowledged.
[99]{}
S. Schweber, Ann. Phys. (N.Y.) [**41**]{}, 205 (1967).
V. Bargmann, Comm. Pure Appl. Math. [**14**]{}, 187 (1961).
A. Moroz, Europhys. Lett. [**100**]{}, 60010 (2012).
Y.-Z. Zhang, arXiv:1304.3979 \[quant-ph\].
A. Moroz, to appear in Ann. Phys. (N.Y.) (arXiv:1302.2565).
I. I. Rabi, Phys. Rev. [**49**]{}, 324 (1936).
W. Gautschi, SIAM Review [**9**]{}, 24 (1967).
T. S. Chihara, An Introduction to Orthogonal Polynomials (Gordon and Breach, New York, 1978).
A. F. Nikiforov, S. K. Suslov, V. B. Uvarov, Classical Orthogonal Polynomials of a Discrete Variable (Springer, Berlin, 1991).
W. Koepf and D. Schmersau, J. Comput. Appl. Math. [**90**]{}, 57 (1998).
A. V. Turbiner and A. G. Ushveridze, Phys. Lett. A [**126**]{}, 181 (1987).
A. V. Turbiner, Commun. Math. Phys. [**118**]{}, 467 (1988).
C. M. Bender and G. V. Dunne, J. Math. Phys. [**37**]{}, 6 (1996).
A. Krajewska, A. Ushveridze, and Z. Walczak, hep-th/9601088.
R. Koc, M. Koca, and H. Tütüncüler, J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. [**35**]{}, 9425 (2002).
R. L. Fulton and M. Gouterman, J. Chem. Phys. [**35**]{}, 1059 (1961).
D. Braak, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**107**]{}, 100401 (2011).
L. Boelen, G. Filipuk, and W. Van Assche, J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. [**44**]{}, 035202 (2011).
P. A. Clarkson, J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. [**46**]{}, 185205 (2013).
J. Casanova, G. Romero, I. Lizuain, J. J. García-Ripoll, and E. Solano, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**105**]{}, 263603 (2010).
C. V. L. Charlier, Ark. Mat. Astr. Fys. [**2**]{}, 1 (1905-6).
M. Kus, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**54**]{}, 1343 (1985).
D. Braak, Ann. Phys. (Leipzig) [**525**]{}, L23 (2013).
The source code can be freely downloaded from `http://www.wave-scattering.com/rabi.html`.
A. Moroz, arXiv:1205.3139 \[quant-ph\].
K. Ziegler, J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. [**45**]{}, 452001 (2012).
Data files \*gp2dp4n300.dat obtained for $(\kappa,\Delta)=(0.2,0.4)$ and $n=300$ are available from `http://www.wave-scattering.com/rabi.html`.
B. R. Judd, J. Phys. C: Solid State Phys. [**12**]{}, 1685 (1979).
M. Kus, J. Math. Phys. [**26**]{}, 2792 (1985).
Y.-Z. Zhang, J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. [**45**]{}, 065206 (2012).
J.-S. Caux and J. Mossel, J. Stat. Mech. P02023 (2011).
E. T. Jaynes and F. W. Cummings, Proc. IEEE [**51**]{}, 89 (1963).
G. Khitrova, H. M. Gibbs, M. Kira, S. W. Koch, and A. Scherer, Nat. Phys. [**2**]{}, 81 (2006).
J. Bourassa, J. M. Gambetta, A. A. Abdumalikov, Jr., O. Astafiev, Y. Nakamura, and A. Blais, Phys. Rev. A [**80**]{}, 032109 (2009).
P. Forn-Díaz, J. Lisenfeld, D. Marcos, J. J. García-Ripoll, E. Solano, C. J. P. M. Harmans, and J. E. Mooij, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**105**]{}, 237001 (2010).
T. Niemczyk, et al, Nat. Phys. [**6**]{}, 772 (2010).
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'A large portion of the car-buying experience in the United States involves interactions at a car dealership. At the dealership, the car-buyer relays their needs to a sales representative. However, most car-buyers are only have an abstract description of the vehicle they need. Therefore, they are only able to describe their ideal car in “car-speak”. Car-speak is abstract language that pertains to a car’s physical attributes. In this paper, we define car-speak. We also aim to curate a reasonable data set of car-speak language. Finally, we train several classifiers in order to classify car-speak.'
author:
- Habeeb Hooshmand and James Caverlee
bibliography:
- 'sample-bibliography.bib'
title: |
Understanding Car-Speak:\
Replacing Humans in Dealerships
---
Introduction {#sec:intro}
============
A large portion of the car-buying experience in the United States involves interactions at a car dealership [@deloitte2014; @kershner2010; @barley2015]. Traditionally, a car dealer listens and understands the needs of the client and helps them find what car is right based on their needs.
With the advent of the internet, many potential car buyers take to the web to research cars before going to a dealership in person [@deloitte2014; @barley2015]. However, nearly 50% of customers bought a car at the dealership based on the sales representative’s advice, not their own research [@kershner2010; @barley2015].
Throughout this interaction the dealer is acting as a type of translator or classifier. The dealer takes a natural language input (e.g. “I need a fast, family friendly, reliable car under \$20k”) and returns a list of suggestions. The dealer understands the ideas of “fast”, “family friendly”, and “reliable” and is able to come up with a reasonable recommendation based on this knowledge.
In this paper we aim to create a system that can understand car-speak based on some natural language input (we want to recreate the dealer from above). But how do we prepare a proper training set for a Natural Language model? What model is best suited to this problem? Can this model take a human out of the car-buying process? To answer these questions, the remainder of this paper makes the following contributions:
- Defining “car-speak” and its role in the car-buying process.
- Appropriate training data for a Natural Language model.
- A model that is able to properly classify car-speak and return a car.
We aim to accomplish these goals in a scientific manner, using real data and modern methods.
![Both of these cars can achieve high speeds. Which is “fast”?[]{data-label="fig:car-comparison"}](mercedes.png "fig:"){width="30.00000%"} ![Both of these cars can achieve high speeds. Which is “fast”?[]{data-label="fig:car-comparison"}](lambo.jpg "fig:"){width="35.00000%"}
Related Work {#sec:related_work}
============
There has been some work done in the field of car-sales and dealer interactions. However, this is the first work that specifically focuses on the
Deloitte has published a report on the entire car-buying process [@deloitte2014]. The report goes into great depth about the methods potential buyers use to find new cars to buy, and how they go about buying them. The report tells us that there are several unique phases that a potential buyer goes through before buying a car.
Verhoef et al. looked at the specifics of dealer interaction and how dealers retain customers [@verhoef2007]. Verhoef tells us how important dealers are to the car-buying process. He also explains how influential a dealer can be on what car the buyer purchases.
Jeff Kershner compiled a series of statistics about Dealership Sales [@kershner2010]. These statistics focus on small social interactions [@hare1965] between the dealer and the buyer.
Barley explains the increasing role of technology in the car-buying process [@barley2015]. Barley tells us that users prefer to use technology/robots to find the cars they want to buy instead of going to a dealer, due the distrust towards sales representatives.
What is Car-speak? {#sec:car-speak}
==================
When a potential buyer begins to identify their next car-purchase they begin with identifying their needs. These needs often come in the form of an abstract situation, for instance, “I need a car that goes really fast”. This could mean that they need a car with a V8 engine type or a car that has 500 horsepower, but the buyer does not know that, all they know is that they need a “fast” car.
The term “fast” is car-speak. Car-speak is abstract language that pertains to a car’s physical attribute(s). In this instance the physical attributes that the term “fast” pertains to could be the horsepower, or it could be the car’s form factor (how the car looks). However, we do not know exactly which attributes the term “fast” refers to.
The use of car-speak is present throughout the car-buying process. It begins in the *Research Phase* where buyers identify their needs [@deloitte2014]. When the buyer goes to a dealership to buy a car, they communicate with the dealer in similar car-speak [@barley2015] and convey their needs to the sales representative. Finally, the sales representative uses their internal classifier to translate this car-speak into actual physical attributes (e.g. ‘fast’ $ \longrightarrow $ ‘700 horsepower & a sleek form factor’) and offers a car to the buyer.
Understanding car-speak is not a trivial task. Figure \[fig:car-comparison\] shows two cars that have high top speeds, however both cars may not be considered “fast”. We need to mine the *ideas* that people have about cars in order to determine which cars are “fast” and which cars are not.
Gathering Car-speak Data
========================
We aim to curate a data set of car-speak in order to train a model properly. However, there are a few challenges that present themselves: What is a good source of car-speak? How can we acquire the data? How can we be sure the data set is relevant?\
------------------ ---------------------------------------------
**Car** **Excerpt**
Acura ILX “making it one of the\
& most **efficient** cars”
Audi A6 “best cars for **families**”
Chevrolet Impala “strong mix of **comfort** and\
& **safety** features”
Lexus ES “**luxurious** cabin **comfortable** seats”
Mercedes-Benz S “**handles like a sports sedan**\
& despite its large size”
Toyota Camry “top-notch **reliability** and\
& a **good value** proposition”
------------------ ---------------------------------------------
: Excerpts from car reviews.[]{data-label="table:quotes"}
**What is a good source of car-speak?** We find plenty of car-speak in car reviews. Table \[table:quotes\] provides excerpts from reviews with the car-speak terms **bolded**. Car reviews often describe cars in an abstract manner, which makes the review more useful for car-buyers. The reviews are often also about specific use-cases for each car (e.g. using the car to tow a trailer), so they capture all possible aspects of a car. The reviews are each written about a specific car, so we are able to map car-speak to a specific car model.
We choose the reviews from the U.S. News & World Report because they have easily accessible full-length reviews about every car that has been sold in the United States since 2006 [@usnews].\
**How can we acquire the data?** We can acquire this data using modern web-scraping tools such as beautiful-soup. The data is publicly available on <https://cars.usnews.com/cars-trucks> [@usnews]. These reviews also include a scorecard and justification of their reviews.\
**How can we be sure the data set is relevant?** On average vehicles on United States roads are 11.6 years old, making the average manufacturing year 2006-2007 [@bts2018; @hirsch2014]. In order to have a relevant data set we gather all of the available reviews for car models made between the years 2000 and 2018.
![The frequencies of the top 20 words in reviews.[]{data-label="fig:filtered_distro"}](word-dist.png){width="45.00000%"}
Translating Car-Speak
=====================
Our data set contains $3,209$ reviews about $553$ different cars from $49$ different car manufacturers. In order to accomplish our goal of translating and classifying car-speak we need to filter our data set so that we only have the most relevant terms. We then need to be able to weight each word in each review, so that we can determine the most relevant ideas in each document for the purpose of classification. Finally, we need to train various classification models and evaluate them.
Filtering the Data
------------------
We would like to be able to represent each car with the most relevant car-speak terms. We can do this by filtering each review using the NLTK library [@bird2009], only retaining the most relevant words. First we token-ize each review and then keep only the nouns and adjectives from each review since they are the most salient parts of speech [@hurlburt1954]. This leaves us with $10,867$ words across all reviews. Figure \[fig:filtered\_distro\] shows the frequency of the top 20 words that remain.
Words such as “saftey” and “luxury” are among the top words used in reviews. These words are very good examples of car-speak. Both words are abstract descriptions of cars, but both have physical characteristics that are associated with them as we discussed in Section \[sec:car-speak\].
TF-IDF {#sec:tf-idf}
------
So far we have compiled the most relevant terms in from the reviews. We now need to weight these terms for each review, so that we know the car-speak terms are most associated with a car. Using TF-IDF (Term Frequency-Inverse Document Frequency) has been used as a reliable metric for finding the relevant terms in a document [@ramos2003].
We represent each review as a vector of TF-IDF scores for each word in the review. The length of this vector is $10,867$. We label each review vector with the car it reviews. We ignore the year of the car being reviewed and focus specifically on the model (i.e Acura ILX, not 2013 Acura ILX). This is because there a single model of car generally retains the same characteristics over time [@yamawaki2002; @lansley2016].
Classification Experiments
--------------------------
We train a series of classifiers in order to classify car-speak. We train three classifiers on the review vectors that we prepared in Section \[sec:tf-idf\]. The classifiers we use are K Nearest Neighbors (KNN), Random Forest (RF), Support Vector Machine (SVM), and Multi-layer Perceptron (MLP) [@scikitlearn2011].
**KNN** **RF** **SVM** **MLP**
--------------------- ------------ -------- --------- ------------
**Precision Macro** **0.6133** 0.5968 0.6080 0.6094
**Recall Macro** **0.6086** 0.5947 0.605 0.6059
**F1 Macro** **0.5808** 0.5733 0.5801 0.5795
**F1 Micro** 0.6762 0.6687 0.6712 **0.6778**
: Evaluation metrics for all classifiers.[]{data-label="table:f1-scores"}
In order to evaluate our classifiers, we perform 4-fold cross validation on a shuffled data set. Table \[table:f1-scores\] shows the F1 micro and F1 macro scores for all the classifiers. The KNN classifier seem to perform the best across all four metrics. This is probably due to the multi-class nature of the data set.
Conclusion & Future Work
========================
In this paper we aim to provide an introductory understanding of car-speak and a way to automate car dealers at dealerships. We first provide a definition of “car-speak” in Section \[sec:car-speak\]. We explore what constitutes car-speak and how to identify car-speak.
We also gather a data set of car-speak to use for exploration and training purposes. This data set id full of vehicle reviews from U.S. News [@usnews]. These reviews provide a reasonable set of car-speak data that we can study.
Finally, we create and test several classifiers that are trained on the data we gathered. While these classifiers did not perform particularly well, they provide a good starting point for future work on this subject.
In the future we plan to use more complex models to attempt to understand car-speak. We also would like to test our classifiers on user-provided natural language queries. This would be a more practical evaluation of our classification. It would also satisfy the need for a computer system that understands car-speak.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'We prove the existence of hedgehogs for germs of complex analytic diffeomorphisms of $(\mathbb{C}^{2},0)$ with a semi-neutral fixed point at the origin, using topological techniques. This approach also provides an alternative proof of a theorem of Pérez-Marco on the existence of hedgehogs for germs of univalent holomorphic maps of $(\mathbb{C},0)$ with a neutral fixed point.'
address:
- 'Kansas State University, Kansas, United States'
- 'Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, United States'
- 'Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, United States'
- 'Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, United States'
author:
- Tanya Firsova
- Mikhail Lyubich
- Remus Radu
- Raluca Tanase
title: 'Hedgehogs for neutral dissipative germs of holomorphic diffeomorphisms of $(\mathbb{C}^{2},0)$'
---
Introduction {#sec:Intro}
============
Let $\alpha\in{\mathbb{R}}\setminus{\mathbb{Q}}$ and let $p_{n}/q_{n}$ be the convergents of $\alpha$ given by the continued fraction algorithm. We say that $\alpha$ satisfies the Brjuno condition if $$\label{eq:Brjuno}
\sum\limits_{n\geq 0}\frac{\log q_{n+1}}{q_{n}} < \infty.$$ Brjuno [@Brj] and Rüssmann [@Rus] showed that if $\alpha$ satisfies Bjruno’s condition, then any holomorphic germ with a fixed point with indifferent multiplier $\lambda = e^{2\pi i \alpha}$ is linearizable. The linearization is the irrational rotation with rotation number $\alpha$. Yoccoz [@Y1] proved that Brjuno’s condition is the optimal arithmetic condition that guarantees linearizability. If $\alpha$ does not verify inequality , then there exists a holomorphic germ $f(z)=\lambda z+{\mathcal{O}}(z^{2})$ which is non-linearizable around the origin, that is $f$ is not conjugate to the linear map $z\mapsto \lambda z$ via a holomorphic change of coordinates. The origin is called a [*Cremer*]{} fixed point.
The local dynamics of a non-linearizable map with a Cremer fixed point is complex and hard to visualize. In the ’90s, Pérez-Marco [@PM1] proved the existence of interesting invariant compact sets near the Cremer fixed point, called hedgehogs. Using deep results from the theory of analytic circle diffeomorphisms developed by Yoccoz [@Y2], Pérez-Marco [@PM2; @PM3; @PM4] showed that even if the map on a neighborhood of the origin is not conjugate to an irrational rotation, the points of the hedgehog are recurrent and still move under the influence of the rotation. Inou and Shishikura [@IS] built some models for the local dynamics near Cremer points for specific cases of quadratic polynomials with high type rotation numbers using near-parabolic renormalization.
In this paper we show the existence of non-trivial compact invariant sets for germs of diffeomorphisms of $({\mathbb{C}}^2,0)$ with semi-indifferent fixed points. The proof is purely topological and also provides an alternative proof for the existence of hedgehogs in dimension one.
A fixed point $x$ of a holomorphic germ $f$ of $({\mathbb{C}}^{2},0)$ is [*semi-indifferent*]{} (or [*semi-neutral*]{}) if the eigenvalues $\lambda$ and $\mu$ of the linear part of $f$ at $x$ satisfy $|\lambda|=1$ and $|\mu|<1$. In analogy with the one-dimensional dynamics, a semi-indifferent fixed point can be semi-parabolic, semi-Siegel or semi-Cremer, according to the arithmetic properties of the neutral eigenvalue $\lambda$. We say that an isolated fixed point $x$ is [*semi-parabolic*]{} if $\lambda=e^{2\pi i \alpha}$ and the angle $\alpha=p/q$ is rational. If $\alpha$ is irrational and there exists an injective holomorphic map $\varphi:{\mathbb{D}}\rightarrow {\mathbb{C}}^2$ such that $f(\varphi(\xi))=\varphi(\lambda \xi)$, for $\xi\in{\mathbb{D}}$, we call the fixed point [*semi-Siegel*]{}. Finally, if $\alpha$ is irrational and there does not exist an invariant disk on which the map is analytically conjugate to an irrational rotation, then the fixed point is called [*semi-Cremer*]{}. Note that in the latter case $\alpha$ does not satisfy the Brjuno condition .
Let $E^s$ and $E^c$ denote the eigenspaces of $Df_0$ corresponding to the dissipative eigenvalue $\mu$ and respectively to the neutral eigenvalue $\lambda$. Let $B$ be a neighborhood of $0$ and $E^s_x$ and $E^c_x$ not necessarily invariant continuous distributions such that $E^s_0=E^s$, $E^c_0=E^c$, and $T_xB=E^s_x\oplus E^c_x$ for all $x\in B$. We define the vertical cone $\mathcal{C}^{v}_{x}$ to be the set of vectors in the tangent space at $x$ that make an angle less than or equal to $\alpha$ with $E^{s}_x$, for some $\alpha>0$. The horizontal cone $\mathcal{C}^{h}_{x}$ is defined in the same way, with respect to $E^{c}_x$.
The map $f$ is [*partially hyperbolic*]{} on $B$ (see Pesin [@P]) if there exist two real numbers $\overline{\mu}$ and $\underline{\lambda}$ such that $0<|\mu|<\overline{\mu}<\underline{\lambda}<1$ and a family of invariant cone fields $\mathcal{C}^{h/v}$ on $B$, $$\label{eq:inv}
Df_x(\mathcal{C}_x^{h})\subset \mbox{ Int } \mathcal{C}_{f(x)}^{h}\cup\{0\}, \ \ \ Df^{-1}_{f(x)}(\mathcal{C}_{f(x)}^{v})\subset \mbox{ Int } \mathcal{C}_{x}^{v}\cup\{0\},$$ such that for every $x\in B$ we have $$\label{eq:Cn}
\underline{\lambda}\,\|v\|\leq \|Df_x(v)\|\leq 1/\underline{\lambda}\,\|v\|,\ \ \ \ \ \mbox{for}\ v\in \mathcal{C}_x^{h},$$ $$\label{eq:Cs}
\|Df_x(v)\|\leq \overline{\mu}\, \|v\|,\ \ \ \ \ \mbox{for}\ v\in \mathcal{C}_{x}^{v},$$ for some Riemannian metric $\|\cdot\|$.
If $f$ is partially hyperbolic on $B$, then the rate of contraction along $E^s_x$ dominates the behavior of $Df_x$ along the complementary direction $E^c_x$. This domination ensures the existence of local center manifolds $W^c_{\rm loc}(0)$ relative to $B$ as graphs of functions $\varphi_f: E^c\cap B\rightarrow E^s$, as discussed in Section \[sec:centermfd\].
\[thm:Hedgehog\] Let $f$ be a germ of holomorphic diffeomorphisms of $({\mathbb{C}}^{2},0)$ with a semi-indifferent fixed point at $0$ with eigenvalues $\lambda$ and $\mu$, where $|\lambda|=1$ and $|\mu|<1$. Consider an open ball $B\subset {\mathbb{C}}^{2}$ centered at $0$ such that $f$ is partially hyperbolic on a neighborhood $B'$ of $\overline{B}$.
There exists a set $\mathcal{H}\subset \overline{B}$ such that:
- $\mathcal{H}\Subset W^{c}_{\rm loc}(0)$, where $W^{c}_{\rm loc}(0)$ is any local center manifold of the fixed point $0$ corresponding to the neutral eigenvalue $\lambda$, constructed relative to $B'$.
- $\mathcal{H}$ is compact, connected, completely invariant and full.
- $0\in \mathcal{H}$, $\mathcal{H}\cap\partial B\neq \emptyset$.
- Every point $x\in\mathcal{H}$ has a well defined local strong stable manifold $W^{ss}_{\rm loc}(x)$, consisting of points from $B$ that converge asymptotically exponentially fast to $x$. The strong stable set of $\mathcal{H}$ is laminated by vertical-like holomorphic disks.
We say that $\mathcal{H}$ is [*completely invariant*]{} if $f(\mathcal{H})\subset \mathcal{H}$ and $f^{-1}(\mathcal{H})\subset \mathcal{H}$. The set $\mathcal{H}$ is [*full*]{} if its complement in $W^{c}_{\rm loc}(0)$ is connected. The local strong stable manifold $W^{ss}_{\rm loc}(x)$ of a point $x\in\mathcal{H}$ is defined as the set $$\label{eq:Wssx}\{y\in B : f^{n}(y)\in B\ \forall n\geq 1,\ \lim\limits_{n\rightarrow \infty} \mbox{dist}(f^n(y),f^n(x))/\overline{\mu}^{n} = 0\},$$ where $\overline{\mu}$ is the constant of partial hyperbolicity from .
We call the set $\mathcal{H}$ from Theorem \[thm:Hedgehog\] a [*hedgehog*]{}. The most intriguing case is when the argument of $\lambda$ is irrational and $\mathcal{H}$ is not contained in the closure of a linearization domain. This happens for instance, when the origin is semi-Cremer. Theorem \[thm:Hedgehog\] is applicable to the local study of dissipative polynomial automorphisms of ${\mathbb{C}}^2$ with a semi-indifferent fixed point.
The theorem generalizes directly to the case of holomorphic germs of diffeomorphisms of $({\mathbb{C}}^n,0)$, for $n>2$, which have a fixed point at the origin with exactly one eigenvalue on the unit circle and $n-1$ eigenvalues inside the unit disk.
*Acknowledgement.* We are grateful to Romain Dujardin for reading an earlier version of the paper and for providing valuable comments. The first author was supported by NSF grant DMS-1505342. The second author was supported by NSF grants DMS-1301602 and DMS-1600519.
Center manifolds of the semi-indifferent fixed point {#sec:centermfd}
====================================================
Let $f:({\mathbb{C}}^2,0)\rightarrow({\mathbb{C}}^2,0)$, $f(x,y)=(\lambda x + f_1(x,y), \mu y + f_2(x,y))$ be a holomorphic germ with a semi-indifferent fixed point at the origin. We also refer to $f$ as a neutral dissipative germ of $({\mathbb{C}}^2,0)$.
The semi-indifferent fixed point has a well-defined unique analytic strong stable manifold $W^{ss}(0)$ corresponding to the dissipative eigenvalue $\mu$. It consists of points that are attracted to $0$ exponentially fast, and defined as $$\label{eq:Wss}
W^{ss}(0):=\{x\in{\mathbb{C}}^{2} : \lim\limits_{n\rightarrow \infty} \mbox{dist}(f^{n}(x), 0)/\mu^{n}=\mbox{const}.\}.$$
The semi-indifferent fixed point also has a (non-unique) center manifold $W^{c}_{\rm loc}(0)$ of class $C^k$ for some integer $k\geq1$, tangent at $0$ to the eigenspace $E^c$ of the neutral eigenvalue $\lambda$. There exists a ball $B_{\delta}$ (where the size of $\delta$ depends on $k$) centered at the origin in which the center manifold is locally the graph of a $C^k$ function $\varphi_{f}: E^c\rightarrow E^s$ and has the following properties:
- **Local Invariance:** $f(W^c_{\rm loc}(0))\cap B_{\delta}\subset W^c_{\rm loc}(0)$.
- **Weak Uniqueness:** If $f^{-n}(x)\in B_{\delta}$ for all $n\in{\mathbb{N}}$, then $x\in W^c_{\rm loc}(0)$. Thus center manifolds may differ only on trajectories that leave the neighborhood $B_{\delta}$ under backward iterations.
- **Shadowing:** Given any point $x$ such that $f^{n}(x)\rightarrow 0$ as $n\rightarrow \infty$, there exists a positive constant $k$ and a point $y\in W^c_{\rm loc}(0)$ such that $\|f^{n}(x)-f^{n}(y)\|<k\overline{\mu}^n$ as $n\rightarrow \infty$. In other words, every orbit which converges to the origin can be described as an exponentially small perturbation of some orbit on the center manifold.
Consider the space of holomorphic germs $g$ of $(B_{\delta},0)$ which are $C^k$-close to $f$ such that $g$ has a semi-indifferent fixed point at the origin. We will later consider a sequence of germs with a semi-parabolic fixed point which converges uniformly to a germ with a semi-Cremer fixed point. Proposition \[prop:family\] shows that even if the center manifold of $g$ is not unique, it may be chosen to depend continuously on $g$ for the $C^k$ topology. Let $E^{c}(\delta)=E^{c}\cap B_{\delta}$.
\[prop:family\] The map $g$ has a $C^k$ center manifold defined as the graph of a $C^k$ function $\varphi_g: E^c(\delta)\rightarrow E^s(\delta)$ such that the map $(g,x)\mapsto \varphi_g(x)$ is $C^k$ with respect to $g$.
We refer to [@S] (Chapter 5, Appendix III) and [@HPS] for the theory of stable and center manifolds. For a proof of Proposition \[prop:family\] see Theorem 5.1 and §5A in [@HPS].
Assume that the map $f$ is partially hyperbolic on an open set $B'$, as in Theorem \[thm:Hedgehog\]. We consider local center manifolds defined with respect to the ball $B_{\delta}=B'$, satisfying the three properties above. By using a cut-off function we can construct a $C^{k}$-smooth extension $\tilde{f}$ of $f$ to ${\mathbb{C}}^{2}$ and make the center manifold $W^{c}(0)$ globally defined (see [@R], [@V]). The extension $\tilde{f}$ can be chosen such that $\tilde{f}=f$ on $B_{\delta}$, $\tilde{f}=Df_0$ on the complement of $B_{2\delta}$ in ${\mathbb{C}}^{2}$, and $\|\tilde{f}-Df_{0}\|_{C^{1}}<\epsilon$ for some small $\epsilon$, which depends on the constants of partial hyperbolicity $\overline{\mu}$ and $\underline{\lambda}$ from and . The proof of the existence of the center manifold for the modified function follows the usual contracting argument: consider the space of graphs of Lipschitz maps $h:E^c\rightarrow E^s$. The fact that the strong contraction along $E^s$ (and in the vertical cones $\mathcal{C}^v_x$, $x\in{\mathbb{C}}^{2}$) dominates the behavior of $Df$ along $E^c$ (and in the horizontal cones $\mathcal{C}^h_x$) ensures that the action of $\tilde{f}$ on the space of graphs is a contraction, hence it has a unique fixed point, which is the center manifold $W^c(0)$. This is globally defined and homeomorphic to ${\mathbb{R}}^2$, but clearly non-unique for the initial function $f$ as it depends on the choice of the extension function $\tilde{f}$.
To obtain the $C^k$-smoothness of the center manifold, it suffices to assume that the constants $\overline{\mu}$ and $\underline{\lambda}$ satisfy $\overline{\mu} \underline{\lambda}^{-j}<1$ for $1\leq j \leq k$ on $B_{\delta}$, condition which is true if $\delta$ is small, since $|\mu|<1$ and $|\lambda|=1$. We will only use center manifolds of class $C^1$, so the condition $0<\overline{\mu}<\underline{\lambda}<1$ in the definition of partial hyperbolicity suffices for our purposes.
Semi-parabolic germs {#sec:semiparabolic}
====================
In this section we discuss the local structure of a germ $f$ of holomorphic diffeomorphisms of $({\mathbb{C}}^2,0)$ with a semi-parabolic fixed point at the origin and we show the existence of big invariant petals. For simplicity, we call $f$ a [*semi-parabolic germ*]{}. Throughout the section, denote the eigenvalues of $Df_0$ by $\lambda=e^{2\pi i p/q}$ and $\mu$, where $|\mu|<1$ and $p/q$ is a rational number with $gcd(p,q)=1$. The following result is Proposition 3.3 from [@RT].
\[thm:normalform3\] Let $f$ be a semi-parabolic germ of transformation of $({\mathbb{C}}^{2},0)$, with eigenvalues $\lambda$ and $\mu$, with $\lambda=e^{2\pi i p/q}$ and $|\mu|<1$. There exists a neighborhood $U$ of $0$ and local coordinates $(x,y)$ on $U$ in which $f$ has the form $f(x,y)=(x_{1},y_{1})$, where $$\label{eq:NF3}
\left\{\begin{array}{l}
x_{1}= \lambda (x+x^{\nu q+1} + Cx^{2\nu q+1}+ a_{2\nu q+2}(y)x^{2\nu q +2}+\ldots )\\
y_{1}= \mu y + xh(x,y)
\end{array}\right.$$ and $C$ is a constant. The multiplicity of the fixed point as a solution of the equation $f^{q}(x,y)=(x,y)$ is $\nu q +1$. We call $\nu$ the semi-parabolic multiplicity of the fixed point.
In this section, we will only deal with semi-parabolic multiplicity $\nu=1$. Otherwise we would have $\nu$ cycles of $q$ petals, invariant under $f^{q}$. Using the results of Ueda [@U1; @U2] and Hakim [@Ha], we can describe the local dynamics of semi-parabolic germs as follows:
\[thm:InvPetals\] Let $f$ be a semi-parabolic germ of transformation of $({\mathbb{C}}^{2},0)$, with eigenvalues $\lambda$ and $\mu$, with $\lambda=e^{2\pi i p/q}$ and $|\mu|<1$. Assume that the semi-parabolic multiplicity is $1$. Let $U$ be the normalizing neighborhood from Proposition \[thm:normalform3\]. Inside $U$, there exist $q$ attracting petals $\mathcal{P}_{{\rm att}, j}$ and $q$ repelling petals $\mathcal{P}_{{\rm rep}, j}$ for $1\leq j\leq q$. The attracting petals are two-dimensional and are a local base of convergence for $f$. The repelling petals are one-dimensional and are a local base of convergence for $f^{-1}$.
There are several ways to define local attractive and repelling petals. We will define fat attractive petals as in [@RT Section 4]. Consider the sets $$\label{eq:Delta}
\Delta_{r}^{\pm} =\{x\in {\mathbb{C}}:\left({\rm Re}(x)\pm r\right)^{2}+\left(|{\rm Im}(x)|-r\right)^{2}<2r^{2}\}.$$ and the coordinate transformation $T:(x,y)\mapsto (x^{q},y)$. Geometrically, $\Delta_r^+$ is the union of two complex disks of radius $\sqrt{2}r$ centered at $-r\pm ir$. Let $\mathcal{P}_{{\rm att}, j}$, $1\leq j\leq q$, be the preimages under $T$ of the set $\{x\in \Delta_{r}^{+}, |y|<r'\}$, for some $r,r'>0$ sufficiently small.
A construction of repelling petals is done by Ueda in [@U2] for $\lambda=1$. Ueda shows that the local repelling petal is a smooth graph $\{y=\psi(x), |x-r|<r\}$, for some $r>0$ sufficiently small. However, using the same techniques from [@U2] we can construct a larger local repelling petal which is a smooth graph $\{y=\psi(x), x\in\Delta_{r}^{-}\}$ for some $r>0$ sufficiently small. Similarly, when $\lambda=e^{2\pi i p/q}$, there are $q$ fat repelling petals $\mathcal{P}_{{\rm rep}, j}$, $1\leq j\leq q$, which can be defined as the preimages under $T$ of a smooth graph $\{y=\psi(x), x\in \Delta_{r}^{-}\}$, for $r>0$ sufficiently small.
Let ${\mathcal{P}_{\rm att}}$ and ${\mathcal{P}_{\rm rep}}$ denote the union of the $q$ attractive, and respectively of the $q$ repelling petals. We have $f(\overline{{\mathcal{P}_{\rm att}}})\subset {\mathcal{P}_{\rm att}}\cup W^{ss}(0)$ and all points in ${\mathcal{P}_{\rm att}}$ are attracted to the semi-parabolic fixed point at the origin in forward time. Similarly $f^{-1}(\overline{{\mathcal{P}_{\rm rep}}})\subset {\mathcal{P}_{\rm rep}}\cup\{0\}$ and all points in ${\mathcal{P}_{\rm rep}}$ are attracted to the origin in backward time.
The repelling and attracting petals, sliced by a center manifold, alternate as we turn around the origin. By construction, the intersection of an attracting petal with the two adjacent repelling petals consists of two open disjoint disks. More precisely, let $D^{1}_{j}$ and $D^{2}_{j}$ be the two connected components of $\mathcal{P}_{{\rm att}, j}\cap \mathcal{P}_{\rm rep}$. Then $$\label{eq:Pinv}
\mathcal{P}^{k}_{{\rm inv},j}=\bigcup_{n\in{\mathbb{Z}}} f^{nq}(D^{k}_{j}),\ \ \mbox{for}\ k=1, 2\ \ \mbox{and}\ \ 1\leq j\leq q$$ are $2q$ completely invariant local petals. They are contained in the union of ${\mathcal{P}_{\rm rep}}$ and ${\mathcal{P}_{\rm att}}$. We view these invariant petals as small, because they are [*a priori*]{} defined only on the neighborhood $U$ where the map $f$ is conjugate to the normal form .
In Section \[sec:proof\] we prove the existence of hedgehogs for holomorphic germs of diffeomorphisms of $({\mathbb{C}}^2,0)$ with a semi-neutral fixed point at the origin. Following the original strategy of Pérez-Marco, we construct the hedgehog as a Hausdorff limit of invariant petals for approximating germs with a semi-parabolic fixed point at $0$. However, the normalizing domains on which the semi-parabolic germs can be conjugate to their corresponding normal forms given in Proposition \[thm:normalform3\] necessarily shrink to $0$ as the sequence converges to a semi-Cremer germ, because the semi-Cremer germ is non-linearizable. Therefore we first need to construct big invariant petals before applying the construction in Section \[sec:proof\].
Let $B\Subset B'$ be as in Theorem \[thm:Hedgehog\] such that $f$ is partially hyperbolic on $B'$. There exist a horizontal cone field $\mathcal{C}^h$ which is forward invariant and a vertical cone field $\mathcal{C}^v$ which is backward invariant on $B'$, as in Equation . We say that an analytic curve $\gamma$ is [*vertical-like*]{}/[*horizontal-like*]{} if for any point $y$ on $\gamma$, the tangent space to $\gamma$ at $y$ is contained in the vertical/horizontal cone at $y$. Let $W^{ss}_{\rm loc}(0)$ be the local stable manifold of the semi-indifferent fixed point, i.e. the connected component of $W^{ss}(0)\cap B$ which contains $0$. We further assume that $W^{ss}_{\rm loc}(0)$ is vertical-like.
We show that the invariant petals are big with respect to the ball $B$ (a natural way to express this is to ask that they touch the boundary of $B$). In dimension one, Pérez-Marco achieves this using the Uniformization Theorem and analytic circle diffeomorphisms, tools which are not readily available in the two-dimensional setting. The main obstruction is that, while each local invariant petal is contained in a complex analytic line (the asymptotic curve $\Sigma$ introduced below), the union of the $2q$ petals belongs to a (non-unique) center manifold of class $C^k$ for some $k\geq 1$, which is not complex or real analytic (see e.g. [@vS]). Instead of complex methods we will use some topological tools: Brouwer’s Plane Translation Theorem \[thm:Brouwer\] and covering space theory.
Using Theorem \[thm:InvPetals\], we define the asymptotic curve(s) $\Sigma$ to be the set of points in the domain of $f$, different from $0$, which are attracted to $0$ under backward iterations of $f$. The set $\Sigma$ has $q$ connected components which contain $0$ in the boundary, and each is a $f^{q}$-invariant Riemann surface immersed in ${\mathbb{C}}^2$. If $f$ is a global diffeomorphism of ${\mathbb{C}}^2$, Ueda [@U2] showed that these are biholomorphic to ${\mathbb{C}}$.
\[prop:horizontal\] The set $\Sigma_{B}=\{x\in \Sigma : f^{-n}(x)\in B\ \mbox{for all}\ n\geq 0\}$ is horizontal-like.
Let $x\in\Sigma_{B}$. There exists $m>0$ such that $y=f^{-m}(x)\in {\mathcal{P}_{\rm rep}}$. The repelling petal ${\mathcal{P}_{\rm rep}}$ is horizontal-like from [@U2] and the construction above. Therefore any tangent vector to $\Sigma$ at $y$ belongs to the horizontal cone at $y$, and all forward iterates $f^{i}(y), 0\leq i\leq m$, remain in $B$, so $T_{x}\Sigma$ is contained in the horizontal cone at $x$.
Let $\mathcal{P}$ be the union of the $2q$ connected components of the set $$\label{eq:Pmax}
\{x\in B\setminus \{0\} : f^{ n}(x)\in B\ \forall n\in{\mathbb{Z}}\ \ \mbox{and}\ f^{n}(x)\rightarrow0\ \mbox{as}\ n\rightarrow \pm\infty \}$$ which contain $0$ in their boundaries. We refer to $\mathcal{P}$ as the set of maximal invariant petals relative to the ball $B$. By definition $\mathcal{P}\subset \Sigma_B$, hence it is horizontal-like by Proposition \[prop:horizontal\]. Each component of $\mathcal{P}$ contains a local invariant petal as defined by Equation and Theorem \[thm:InvPetals\] and is invariant by $f^{q}$ (see Figure \[fig:petals\]).
![Maximal invariant petals for $q=3$, relative to the ball $B$. Some petals touch the boundary of $B$.[]{data-label="fig:petals"}](invpetals.pdf)
Let $\overline{\mathcal{P}}$ and $\partial \mathcal{P}$ denote the closure, respectively the boundary of the set $\mathcal{P}$ in ${\mathbb{C}}^{2}$. In the following two propositions we collect a couple of elementary results about $\mathcal{P}$.
\[prop:Popen\] The set $\mathcal{P}$ is open rel $\Sigma$ and its connected components are simply connected.
Let us first notice that the only point of intersection of the vertical-like local strong stable manifold $W^{ss}_{\rm loc}(0)$ and the horizontal-like set $\overline{\mathcal{P}}$ is $0$, by transversality. If $x\in W^{ss}(0)\cap \overline{\mathcal{P}}$ then there exists a positive integer $m$ such that $f^{m}(x)\in W^{ss}_{\rm loc}(0)\cap \overline{\mathcal{P}}$, which implies that $x$ is the fixed point $0$, which does not belong to $\mathcal{P}$. Therefore $W^{ss}(0)\cap \mathcal{P}=\emptyset$.
We now show that $\mathcal{P}$ is open relative to $\Sigma$. Let $\mathcal{B}_{\rm par}(0)= \bigcup_{n\geq 0}f^{-n}({\mathcal{P}_{\rm att}})$ be the basin of the semi-parabolic fixed point $0$. If $x\in \mathcal{P}$ then $x\in \mathcal{B}_{\rm par}(0)$, which is open in ${\mathbb{C}}^{2}$. Moreover, since ${\mathcal{P}_{\rm att}}$ and ${\mathcal{P}_{\rm rep}}$ are bases of convergence for $f$ on $\mathcal{B}_{\rm par}(0)$ and respectively for $f^{-1}$ on $\Sigma$, there exists a first iterate $n$ such that $f^{n}(x)\in {\mathcal{P}_{\rm att}}$ and a first iterate $m$ such that $f^{-m}(x) \in {\mathcal{P}_{\rm rep}}$. There exists a neighborhood $U\subset\Sigma$ of $x$ such that $f^{n}(U)\subset {\mathcal{P}_{\rm att}}$, $f^{-m}(U)\subset {\mathcal{P}_{\rm rep}}$ and $\bigcap_{-m<i<n}f^{-i}(U)\subset B$. Hence $U$ is an open set (rel $\Sigma$) contained in $\mathcal{P}$.
An immediate application of the Maximum Modulus Principle shows that each connected component of the set $\mathcal{P}$ is simply connected. Suppose that $\gamma$ is a non-trivial loop in $\mathcal{P}$. The set $\mathcal{P}$ is contained in $\Sigma$, so by eventually considering an iterate $f^{-nq}(\gamma)$ we may assume that $\gamma$ is contained in a local repelling petal $\mathcal{P}_{{\rm rep}, j}$ which is simply connected. Let $D$ denote the small disk bounded by $\gamma$ in $\mathcal{P}_{{\rm rep}, j}$. For each $n$, the map $\|f^{n}\|^{2}$ is subharmonic on $D$, so it attains its maximum on $\gamma$. This implies that for every point in $D$, all forward and backward iterates belong to $B$, so $\{f^{n}\}_{n\in {\mathbb{Z}}}$ is a normal family on the open set $\mathcal{P}\cup D$. Let $f^*$ be the limit of any convergent subsequence. $f^*$ is a holomorphic function which is identically $0$ on $\mathcal{P}$, hence it must vanish identically on $D$ as well. In conclusion, for every point in $D$, all forward and backward iterates converge to $0$. It follows that $D$ belongs to $\mathcal{P}$, hence $\gamma$ is null homotopic and henceforth $\mathcal{P}$ is simply connected.
\[prop:E\]
- $\overline{\mathcal{P}}$ and $\partial \mathcal{P}$ are completely invariant.
- Let $W^c(0)$ be any center manifold of the semi-parabolic fixed point, defined locally around $0$ as graph of a function $\varphi_f: E^c \cap B' \rightarrow E^s$. The set $\overline{\mathcal{P}}$ is connected, and compactly contained in $W^c(0)$.
- The boundary $\partial \mathcal{P}$ cannot contain any attracting or hyperbolic fixed points of $f^q$.
By construction, the set $\mathcal{P}$ is completely invariant, hence its closure and its boundary are also completely invariant. By the weak uniqueness property of center manifolds, the set $\overline{\mathcal{P}}$ belongs to every center manifold $W^c(0)$ locally defined as a graph of a function on $E^c\cap B'$.
Since we do not know the dynamics of $f$ on the boundary of $\mathcal{P}$, we cannot [*a priori*]{} assume that the boundary of $\mathcal{P}$ in contained in $\Sigma\cup\{0\}$. In any case, the sets $\partial{\mathcal{P}}$ and $\overline{\mathcal{P}}$ are contained in $\overline{B}$ and compactly contained in $W^c(0)$, since $W^{c}(0)$ is properly embedded into the bigger ball $B'$. The connectedness of $\overline{\mathcal{P}}$ follows from the fact that each connected component of $\mathcal{P}$ contains $0$ in its boundary.
For part c), assume that $z\in\partial\mathcal{P}$ is a fixed point of $f^{q}$ different from $0$. If $z$ is attracting then its basin of attraction $\mathcal{B}_{\rm att}(z)$ is open and points in $\mathcal{B}_{\rm att}(z) \cap \mathcal{P}$ converge both to $z$ and to $0$ under forward iterations of $f^q$, which is impossible. If $z$ is hyperbolic, then it has a stable and an unstable manifold. Let $$\label{eq:Wuloc}
W^{u}_{\rm loc}(z)=\{x\in B': f^{-nq}(x) \in B'\ \forall n\in{\mathbb{N}}\ \ \mbox{and}\ f^{-nq}(x)\rightarrow z \mbox{ as } n\rightarrow\infty\}$$ denote the local unstable manifold relative to $B'$. Since $z$ belongs to the center manifold(s) at $0$, by the weak uniqueness property, $W^{u}_{\rm loc}(z)$ belongs to all $W^c(0)$, so they must coincide in a neighborhood of $z$. This is again a contradiction, since any neighborhood of $z$ in $W^c(0)$ contain points from $\mathcal{P}$, which will therefore be forced to converge under backward iterations to $z$, as well as to $0$. This is impossible, since $z\neq 0$.
We can use the local dynamics as in the proof of Proposition \[prop:E\] to exclude the possibility of having a semi-Siegel or another semi-parabolic fixed point in the boundary of $\mathcal{P}$. The only case that one cannot elementary exclude, is the existence of a semi-Cremer fixed point in $\partial\mathcal{P}$.
We now show that the closure of $\mathcal{P}$ meets the boundary of the ball $B$. For this we need some topological tools about homeomorphisms of the plane. Consider a fixed point free orientation-preserving homeomorphism $h$ of ${\mathbb{R}}^2$.
\[def:DT\] A domain of translation for $h$ is an open connected subset of ${\mathbb{R}}^{2}$ whose boundary is $\ell\cup h(\ell)$ where $\ell$ is the image of a proper embedding of ${\mathbb{R}}$ in ${\mathbb{R}}^{2}$, such that $\ell$ separates $h^{-1}(\ell)$ and $h(\ell)$.
Let $ U(D)=\bigcup_{n\in{\mathbb{Z}}}h^n(D)$, where $D$ be the closure of a domain of translation for $h$. The set $U(D)$ is open and connected and $h:U(D)\rightarrow U(D)$ is conjugate to the translation $T:{\mathbb{R}}^2\rightarrow {\mathbb{R}}^2$ given by $T(x,y)=(x+1,y)$.
\[thm:Brouwer\] Suppose that $h:{\mathbb{R}}^{2}\rightarrow {\mathbb{R}}^{2}$ is an orientation-preserving homeomorphism of the plane without fixed points. Then every point is contained in some domain of translation.
\[lemma:boundary-pt\] Let $U\subset {\mathbb{R}}^{2}$ be a simply connected bounded domain. Let $h$ be an orientation-preserving homeomorphism of ${\mathbb{R}}^{2}$ without fixed points in $U$. Suppose $C\subset U$ is a connected, invariant set for $h$ such that $\overline{C} \cap\partial U =\{z_{0}\}$. Then $z_0$ is a fixed point of $h$ and $h^{n}(z)\rightarrow z_{0}$ as $n\rightarrow \pm \infty$, for all $z\in C$.
Let $O$ be the connected component of ${\mathbb{R}}^{2}\setminus {\rm Fix}(h)$ that contains $U$, where ${\rm Fix}(h)$ denotes the fixed points of the homeomorphism $h$. Since $C$ is invariant by $h$, we have $h(O)=O$. Let $\tilde{O}$ be the universal cover of $O$ and $p:\tilde{O}\rightarrow O$ be the covering map. Then $\tilde{O}$ is homeomorphic to ${\mathbb{R}}^{2}$. In fact, the only simply connected surfaces without boundary are ${\mathbb{S}}^{2}$ and ${\mathbb{R}}^{2}$, but ${\mathbb{S}}^{2}$ cannot be the universal cover of $O$ since $O$ is not compact.
Let $x_{0}$ be a point in $C$ and let $\tilde{x}_{0}$ be a point in the fiber $p^{-1}(x_{0})$. Let $i:U\hookrightarrow O$ be the inclusion of $U$ into $O$. By hypothesis, the set $U$ is open and simply connected, hence there exists a lift $s:(U,x_{0})\rightarrow (\tilde{O},\tilde{x}_{0})$ such that $p\circ s = i$. Let $\tilde{U}$ be the connected component of $p^{-1}(U)$ which contains $\tilde{x}_{0}$. Then $\tilde{U}=s(U)$ and the restriction $p:\tilde{U}\rightarrow U$ is a homeomorphism whose inverse is the section $s$.
We now lift the homeomorphism $h:O\rightarrow O$ to the universal cover. The points $x_{0}$ and $h(x_{0})$ belong to $C$, so they also belong to $U$. Let $\tilde{x}_{1}=s(h(x_{0}))$. By general covering space theory, there exists a lift $\tilde{h}:\tilde{O}\rightarrow \tilde{O}$ such that $p \circ \tilde{h}=h\circ p$ and $\tilde{h}(\tilde{x}_{0})=\tilde{x}_{1}$.
The map $\tilde{h}$ is a homeomorphism of the plane $\tilde{O}$ because it is a lift which induces a homeomorphism on fundamental groups. Moreover, $\tilde{h}$ is orientation-preserving and does not have any fixed points since $h$ is orientation-preserving and does not have any fixed points in $O$. By Brouwer’s Plane Translation Theorem \[thm:Brouwer\], every point in $\tilde{O}$ is contained in some domain of translation.
Suppose $\overline{C} \cap\partial U =\{z_{0}\}$. Let $\tilde{C} = s(C)$. Then $\tilde{h}(\tilde{C})$ and $\tilde{C}$ are two non-disjoint connected components of $p^{-1}(C)$, so they must coincide. Therefore $\tilde{C}$ is invariant by $\tilde{h}$. Let $z$ be any point in $C$. Then $\tilde{z}=s(z)$ is a point in $\tilde{C}$. Let $D$ be the closure of a domain of translation containing $\tilde{z}$. The restriction of $\tilde{h}$ to $U(D)= \bigcup_{n\in {\mathbb{Z}}}\tilde{h}^{n}(D)$ is topologically conjugate to the translation $T$ on ${\mathbb{R}}^{2}$. This shows that $\tilde{h}^{n}(\tilde{z})\rightarrow\infty$ as $n\rightarrow\pm\infty$. The homeomorphism $h$ on $C$ is conjugate to $\tilde{h}$ on $\tilde{C}$. The sequence of iterates $h^{n}(z)$ has to converge to a point on the boundary of the set $O$, but the only point on the boundary of $O$ and $C$ is $z_{0}$. So $h^{n}(z)\rightarrow z_{0}$ as $n\rightarrow \pm\infty$.
\[rem:CL\] The idea of working in a covering space of a component of the complement of the set of fixed points, as in the proof of Lemma \[lemma:boundary-pt\], was also used by Brown [@B] to reprove the Cartwright-Littlewood Theorem.
\[thm:PBd\] If the boundary $\partial \mathcal{P}$ does not contain a fixed point of $f^{q}$ other than the semi-parabolic fixed point $0$, then $\overline{\mathcal{P}}\cap \partial{B}\neq \emptyset$.
We show that if $\partial \mathcal{P}$ does not contain any fixed point of $f^{q}$ different from $0$, then every point of the boundary converges to $0$ under forward and backward iterations.
By modifying $f$ if needed with a cut-off function outside $B'$, as discussed in Section \[sec:centermfd\], we can consider a global center manifold $W^{c}(0)\simeq {\mathbb{R}}^{2}$. Let $\mathcal{P}_0$ be any connected component of $\mathcal{P}$. It is invariant by $f^q$ and by Proposition \[prop:E\] $\overline{P}_0$ is compactly contained in $W^c(0)$. By Proposition \[prop:Popen\], $\mathcal{P}_{0}$ is open rel $\Sigma$ (hence also open rel $W^c(0)$) and simply connected. The map $f^q$ is analytic on $\mathcal{P}_{0}$, hence orientation-preserving. The boundary of $\mathcal{P}_{0}$ contains no fixed points of $f^{q}$ different from $0$ by assumption, but it could presumably be a complicated topological set (see Figure \[fig:intricate\]). It could be non-locally connected or even the common boundary of three disjoint connected open sets (lakes of Wada).
![An illustration of a set $\mathcal{P}_{0}$ with a complicated boundary.[]{data-label="fig:intricate"}](nbd1-bad-eps-converted-to.pdf)
In what follows, set $h:=f^{q}$. Let $\Omega={\mathbb{R}}^{2}\cup\{\infty\}\setminus \overline{\mathcal{P}}_{0}$ and denote by $\Omega_{0}$ the unbounded connected component of $\Omega$. The set $\Omega$ is an open subset of the sphere. By a standard result in topology, the set ${\mathbb{R}}^{2}\cup\{\infty\}\setminus\Omega$ is connected if and only if each connected component of $\Omega$ is simply connected. The closure of $\mathcal{P}_0$ is connected, hence $\Omega_{0}$ is simply connected, which implies that $\partial{\Omega_{0}}$ is a connected subset of $\partial{\mathcal{P}}_{0}$. Let $C = \partial{\Omega}_{0}$ denote the outer boundary of the set $\mathcal{P}_{0}$. It is compact, connected, and invariant under $h$. To simplify notation, let $C^{*}$ denote $C\setminus \{0\}$.
\[rem:analytic\] In principle, $C$ is the entire boundary of $\mathcal{P}_{0}$ (this would certainly be true is $h$ were analytic on $\overline{\mathcal{P}}_{0}$, by normality and the maximum modulus principle), but since the center manifold is not analytic, we do not know the topology of $\overline{\mathcal{P}}_{0}$, so we have to assume the most general situation.
From the dynamics of the semi-parabolic germ, we know that there is a neighborhood around $0$ on which $h(x)\neq x$ whenever $x\neq 0$. By assumption $h$ does not have any fixed points on $C^{*}$. By continuity of the map $h$, there exists an open, connected and simply connected set $U\supset C^{*}$ in the shape of a croissant, as shown in Figure \[fig:nbdU\], such that $h$ does not have any fixed points on $U$. The set $C$ intersects the boundary of $U$ only at $0$. The boundary of $U$ consists of two simple closed curves $C_{1}$ and $C_{2}$ touching at $0$.
![A croissant $U$ containing $C^{*}$, where $C$ is the outer boundary of the invariant petal $\mathcal{P}_{0}$.[]{data-label="fig:nbdU"}](nbd1-eps-converted-to.pdf)
Since $C_{1}$ and $C_{2}$ are simple closed curves, the Jordan-Schoenflies Theorem (see [@C]) allows us to extend the homeomorphism $h$ to a homeomorphism of the whole plane (which we also denote $h$). However, the homeomorphism $h$ constructed like this may have other fixed points outside of the domain $U$.
We now apply Lemma \[lemma:boundary-pt\] for the homeomorphism $h$ and the invariant set $C^{*}\subset U$. Hence $h^{n}(z)\rightarrow 0$ as $n\rightarrow \pm\infty$, for any point $z\in C^{*}$.
Suppose $\overline{\mathcal{P}}\cap \partial{B}= \emptyset$. Then $\overline{\mathcal{P}} \subset \{x\in B : f^{ n}(x)\in B\ \forall n\in{\mathbb{Z}}\}$. However, we have shown that all points on the outer boundary of $\mathcal{P}$, converge to $0$ under forward and backward iterations. So $\partial \mathcal{P}\subset \mathcal{P}$, which is open (rel $\Sigma$). This is a contradiction, so $\overline{\mathcal{P}}$ must intersect the boundary of the ball $B$.
From the proof of Theorem \[thm:PBd\] and the local dynamics around the semi-parabolic fixed point we also have the following immediate consequence:
\[prop:closure\] The set $\overline{\mathcal{P}}$ is simply connected.
Proof of the main theorem {#sec:proof}
=========================
We now have all the ingredients to complete the proof of Theorem \[thm:Hedgehog\].
\[lemma:approx\] Let $f$ be a germ of holomorphic diffeomorphisms of $({\mathbb{C}}^{2},0)$ with a semi-indifferent fixed point at $0$ with eigenvalues $\lambda=e^{2\pi i \alpha}$, $\alpha\notin {\mathbb{Q}}$, and $\mu$, with $|\mu|<1$. Suppose $p_n/q_n$ are the convergents of $\alpha$ given by the continued fraction algorithm. Consider a neighborhood $B'\subset {\mathbb{C}}^{2}$ of $0$, on which $f$ is partially hyperbolic. There exists a sequence $f_{n}\rightarrow f$ of germs of holomorphic diffeomorphisms of $({\mathbb{C}}^{2},0)$ such that
- $f_{n}$ has a semi-parabolic fixed point at $0$, with eigenvalues $\lambda_n$ and $\mu_n$, $\lambda_{n}=e^{2\pi i p_{n}/q_{n}}$ and $|\mu_n|<1$, of semi-parabolic multiplicity $1$.
- $f_{n}$ does not have other semi-neutral periodic points of period $\leq q_{n}$ inside $B'$.
- $f_{n}$ is partially hyperbolic on $B'$ for $n$ large enough.
Consider a sequence of semi-parabolic germs $$f_{n}(x,y)=\left(\lambda_n x+ h.o.t., \mu_{n} y + h.o.t.\right)$$ converging uniformly to $f$ on the neighborhood $B'$, with Jacobian matrix at 0 equal to $\mbox{Diag}(\lambda_n, \mu_{n})$, where $\lambda_{n}=e^{2\pi i p_{n}/q_{n}}$ and $0<|\mu_n|<1$. If $f_{n}$ does not satisfy property b) for some $n$, then we can make an arbitrarily small change of the germ $f_{n}$ while keeping the eigenvalue $\lambda_n$ fixed, so that any semi-neutral periodic point (different from the origin) of period $\leq q_{n}$ inside $B'$ becomes attracting or hyperbolic. Denote for simplicity the new germ also by $f_{n}$.
By perturbing the germ $f_{n}$ slightly if necessary while keeping the eigenvalue $\lambda_n$ fixed, we can ensure that the semi-parabolic multiplicity of the origin is one. In conclusion, there exists a sequence $f_{n}\rightarrow f$ satisfying the first two claims of the lemma. The convergence is uniform, so we can assume that $f_{n}$ is partially hyperbolic on $B'$, for $n$ sufficiently large.
We are now able to establish the existence of the set $\mathcal{H}$ from the main theorem and obtain some immediate properties of this set.
**Proof of Theorem \[thm:Hedgehog\].** Let $f$ be a germ of holomorphic diffeomorphisms of $({\mathbb{C}}^{2},0)$ with a semi-indifferent fixed point at $0$ with eigenvalues $\lambda$ and $\mu$, where $|\lambda|=1$ and $|\mu|<1$. Let $f_{n}$ be a sequence of semi-parabolic germs converging uniformly to $f$ as in Lemma \[lemma:approx\].
Consider a ball $B\subset {\mathbb{C}}^2$ centered at $0$ with $\overline{B}\subset B'$ and denote by $\mathcal{P}_{n}$ the maximal invariant petals of the semi-parabolic germ $f_{n}$ relative to the ball $B$ (see Equation ). Let $ \mathcal{H}$ be the limit of a convergent subsequence $(\overline{\mathcal{P}}_{n_k})_k$ in the Hausdorff topology of compact subsets of ${\mathbb{C}}^{2}$. Since each set $\overline{\mathcal{P}}_{n}$ is compact, connected and completely invariant under $f_n$, the Hausdorff limit of any convergent subsequence of $(\overline{\mathcal{P}}_{n})_n$ will also be compact, connected, and completely invariant under $f$.
By part b) of Lemma \[lemma:approx\] and part c) of Lemma \[prop:E\] it follows that $\partial \mathcal{P}_n$ cannot contain any fixed points of $f^{q_n}$ other than $0$. Therefore, we can apply Theorem \[thm:PBd\] to conclude that $\overline{\mathcal{P}}_{n}\cap \partial B\neq \emptyset$ for every $n$, hence $\mathcal{H}\cap\partial B \neq \emptyset$.
Part a) of the theorem is an easy consequence of the weak uniqueness property of center manifolds, since all center manifolds defined relative to the neighborhood $B' \supset \overline{B}$ contain the maximal invariant set of $f$ in $B$. The existence of the strong stable foliation in part d) follows by general theory of partially hyperbolic systems.
Let $\tilde{f}$ be a smooth extension of $f$ to ${\mathbb{C}}^{2}$ such that $\tilde{f}=f$ on $B'$, as in Section \[sec:centermfd\]. Let $W^c(0)$ be the global center manifold of $\tilde{f}$. If $\mathcal{H}$ is not full relative to $W^c(0)$, then we will replace it by $\hat{\mathcal{H}}=\mathcal{H}\cup \Omega$, where $\Omega$ is the union of the bounded connected components of the complement of $\mathcal{H}$ in $W^c(0)$. Clearly $\tilde{f}(\Omega)=\Omega\subset B'$, which implies that $f(\Omega)=\Omega$. Since $f$ is a diffeomorphism on $B'$, it follows that $f^{-n}(\Omega)=\Omega$ for all $n\geq 1$. In particular all backward iterates of $\Omega$ never escape the set $B'$, hence using the weak uniqueness property once more, we conclude that the set $\Omega$ belongs to all center manifolds defined relative to $B'$. Therefore, the set $\hat{\mathcal{H}}$ is full and satisfies all the other properties of the theorem.
Note that the tools outlined in Section \[sec:semiparabolic\] and in the current section also apply to one-dimensional germs of holomorphic diffeomorphisms of $({\mathbb{C}},0)$ with a neutral fixed point at $0$. In this context, the role of the center manifold is taken by the ambient complex plane ${\mathbb{C}}$. Using Theorem \[thm:PBd\] and Lemma \[lemma:boundary-pt\], we can construct the hedgehog $\mathcal{H}$ relative to a domain $B$ as a Hausdorff limit of a sequence of maximal invariant petals defined relative to $B$, corresponding to a sequence of parabolic germs $f_n$ converging to $f$. This gives an alternative proof to the theorem of Pérez-Marco, stated below.
\[thm:PerezMarco\] Let $f(z)=\lambda z + {\mathcal{O}}(z^{2})$, with $|\lambda|=1$, be a local holomorphic diffeomorphism, and $B$ a Jordan domain around the neutral fixed point $0$. Assume that $f$ and $f^{-1}$ are defined and univalent in a neighborhood of $\overline{B}$. There exists a compact, connected, full set $\mathcal{H}$ containing $0$, such that $\mathcal{H}\cap \partial B \neq \emptyset$, and which is completely invariant under $f$.
[**Associated circle homeomorphism.**]{} We can associate to $(f,\mathcal{H})$ a homeomorphism of the unit circle as in [@PM1]. Consider a global center manifold $W^c(0)$ which contains the hedgehog $\mathcal{H}$. $W^c(0)$ is homeomorphic to ${\mathbb{R}}^2$, and we can put a reference complex structure on the global center manifold and identify it with ${\mathbb{C}}$. The map $f$ induced on the copy of ${\mathbb{C}}$ will only be $C^1$-smooth. By the Uniformization Theorem, there exists a Riemann map $\psi:\hat{{\mathbb{C}}}-\overline{{\mathbb{D}}}\rightarrow \hat{{\mathbb{C}}}-\mathcal{H}$ with $\psi(\infty)=\infty$. The map $g = \psi^{-1}\circ f \circ \psi$ is a $C^1$ diffeomorphism in a neighborhood of $\mathbb{S}^1$ in $\hat{{\mathbb{C}}}-\overline{{\mathbb{D}}}$. Since $g$ is uniformly continuous in this neighborhood, it extends to a homeomorphism on $\mathbb{S}^1$ with rotation number $\rho_g$. To show that $\rho_g$ is equal to $\alpha$, let $p_n/q_n$ be the convergents of $\alpha$ given by the continued fraction algorithm. Consider a sequence of semi-parabolic germs $f_n$ converging to $f$ as in Lemma \[lemma:approx\]. We can choose a family of $C^1$-smooth center manifolds $W^c(0)$ which depend $C^1$ on $f_n$. We build maximal invariants petals $\mathcal{P}_n$ relative to a ball $B$ of fixed size. After eventually passing to a convergent subsequence, the sets $\mathcal{P}_n$ converge in the Hausdorff topology to $\mathcal{H}$, so the uniformizing maps $\psi_n:\hat{{\mathbb{C}}}-\overline{{\mathbb{D}}}\rightarrow \hat{{\mathbb{C}}}-\mathcal{P}_n$ converge to $\psi$ in the Carathéodory kernel topology. The corresponding circle homeomorphisms $g_n$ converge to $g$. The rotation number depends continuously on the function. It is easy to see that the rotation number of the circle homeomorphism $g_n$ associated to the semi-parabolic germ $f_n$ is $p_n/q_n$. Therefore, the rotation number of $g$ is the limit of $p_n/q_n$, so it is equal to $\alpha$.
The sets $\mathcal{P}_{n}$ used in the proof of Theorem \[thm:Hedgehog\] are locally connected. However one cannot expect $\mathcal{H}$ to be locally connected, since this property is not preserved under taking Hausdorff limits. The following proposition supports this claim.
\[prop:nlc\] Let $f$ be a holomorphic germ of diffeomorphisms of $({\mathbb{C}}^2,0)$ with an irrational semi-indifferent fixed point at the origin. Let $\mathcal{H}$ be the hedgehog constructed in Theorem \[thm:Hedgehog\] and denote by ${\rm int^c}(\mathcal{H})$ the interior of $\mathcal{H}$ relative to a center manifold. If $0\notin{\rm int^c}(\mathcal{H})$, then $\mathcal{H}$ is not locally connected.
Suppose that $\mathcal{H}$ is locally connected and consider a center manifold $W^{c}(0)$ of the fixed point $0$ which contains $\mathcal{H}$. We can identify $W^c(0)$ with ${\mathbb{C}}$ by a homeomorphism $\phi:W^c(0)\rightarrow {\mathbb{C}}$, and denote by $K=\phi(\mathcal{H})$ the hedgehog in the new coordinates. By the Carathéodory Theorem, since $K$ is locally connected, the Riemann map $\psi :{\mathbb{C}}-{\mathbb{D}}\rightarrow {\mathbb{C}}-K$ has a continuous extension $\psi:{\mathbb{S}}^1\rightarrow K$. The function $f$ on the hedgehog $\mathcal{H}$ is therefore conjugate to an orientation-preserving homeomorphism $h:{\mathbb{S}}^1\rightarrow {\mathbb{S}}^1$ of the unit circle. The map $h$ has a well defined rotation number $\alpha\notin {\mathbb{Q}}$, where $\alpha$ is the argument of the neutral eigenvalue of $Df_0$. However, this is not possible, since by construction the map $h$ has a proper completely invariant closed set on ${\mathbb{S}}^1$, given by $\psi^{-1}\circ\phi(0)$.
Appendix: Alternative approach in dimension one {#sec:App}
===============================================
This section is of independent interest. We keep the same notations as in Section \[sec:semiparabolic\]. We present a more direct proof that the closure of the maximal invariant set $\mathcal{P}$ defined in meets the boundary of the ball $B$, in the case when we know the topology of $\overline{\mathcal{P}}$ (that it is simply connected). This follows from the topological theory of parabolic germs in the plane of Le Roux [@LR].
As observed in Remark \[rem:analytic\], a specific case when we already know that $\overline{\mathcal{P}}$ is simply connected is when $f$ is analytic on a neighborhood of $\overline{\mathcal{P}}$. This is true in dimension one. Let $f(z) = \lambda z +{\mathcal{O}}(z^{2})$ be a germ of holomorphic diffeomorphisms of $({\mathbb{C}},0)$ with a parabolic fixed point at $0$ of multiplier $\lambda=e^{2\pi i p/q}$ and consider $B$ a domain containing the origin such that $f$ and $f^{-1}$ are defined and univalent in a neighborhood of $\overline{B}$. Thus in this section we give yet another way of showing that the local invariant petals of the one-dimensional parabolic germ $f$ extend to the boundary of $B$, which provides an alternative proof of Theorem \[thm:PerezMarco\].
Let $\mathcal{P}_{0}$ be a connected component of $\mathcal{P}$; it contains $0$ in its closure. As usual, we say that an open set $U\subset {\mathbb{R}}^{2}$ is a [*Jordan domain*]{} if its closure is homeomorphic to the closed unit disk in the plane.
\[prop:U-nbd\] If the boundary $\partial \mathcal{P}_{0}$ does not contain any fixed points of $f^{q}$ other than $0$, then there exists a Jordan domain $U\subset {\mathbb{R}}^{2}$ containing $\overline{\mathcal{P}}_{0}$ such that $f^{q}(x)\neq x$ for all $x\in U\setminus\{0\}$.
Proposition 2.2 from [@LR], stated below as Lemma \[lemma:extension\], is a useful topological result that allows us to extend the germ $f^{q}$ of $(U, 0)$ to a homeomorphism $h$ of ${\mathbb{R}}^{2}$ with a unique fixed point at $0$. The homeomorphism $h$ extends to a homeomorphism $h:{\mathbb{S}}^2\rightarrow{\mathbb{S}}^2$ with only two fixed points, at $0$ and at $+\infty$. We then use Theorem \[thm:LR\] below to show that $\overline{\mathcal{P}}_{0}$ is contained in a translation domain for the homeomorphism $h$.
\[lemma:extension\] Let $U$ and $V$ be two closed Jordan domains in ${\mathbb{R}}^{2}$ containing $0$ and $h:U\rightarrow V$ a homeomorphism with a unique fixed point at $0$. Suppose $W\subset U$ is an open, connected set containing $0$ such that $h(W)\subset U$. Then there is a homeomorphism $\widehat{h}:{\mathbb{R}}^{2}\rightarrow {\mathbb{R}}^{2}$ which coincides with $h$ on $W$ and has only one fixed point at $0$.
Consider $U$ as in Proposition \[prop:U-nbd\] and denote $f^{q}$ by $h$. Since $\mathcal{P}_{0}$ is invariant by $f^{q}$, there exists an open, connected set $W\supset \mathcal{P}_{0}$ such that $W$ and $f^{q}(W)$ are both subsets of $U$.
Let $S$ denote the point $0$ and $N$ denote $+\infty$ on the sphere ${\mathbb{S}}^{2}={\mathbb{R}}^{2}\cup\{+\infty\}$. With a small abuse of notation, let $h:{\mathbb{S}}^{2}\rightarrow{\mathbb{S}}^{2}$ be an orientation-preserving homeomorphism with only two fixed points $\{S,N\}$ given by Lemma \[lemma:extension\]. We now introduce some terminology for the dynamics of the homeomorphism $h$ on the sphere and refer to [@LR] for more details. An [*attractive petal based at $S$*]{} is a closed topological disk $P_{S}\subset {\mathbb{S}}^{2}$ such that $S\in \partial P_{S}$, $N\notin P_{S}$ and $h(P_{S})\subset {\rm int}(P_{S})\cup\{S\}$. A [*repelling petal based at $S$*]{} is an attractive petal based at $S$ for $h^{-1}$. Similarly, one can define attractive and repelling petals based at $N$.
\[def:croissants\] An [*attractive croissant for the dynamics $N$-$S$*]{} for the homeomorphism $h$ is a closed topological disk $D\subset {\mathbb{S}}^{2}$ such that $N, S\in \partial D$, $h(D)\subset {\rm int}(D)\cup\{S,N\}$ and for any neighborhood $W_{N}$ of $N$ there exists an attractive petal $P_{S}$ based at $S$ such that $P_{S}\subset D$ and $D\setminus P_{S}\subset W_{N}$. A [*repelling croissant for the dynamics $S$-$N$*]{} for $h$ is an attractive croissant for the dynamics $N$-$S$ for $h^{-1}$.
\[thm:LR\] Let $h:{\mathbb{S}}^{2}\rightarrow{\mathbb{S}}^{2}$ be an orientation-preserving homeomorphism of the sphere with only two fixed points $\{S,N\}$ such that $Index(N)=1-q<1$.
There exists $q$ [*attracting croissants*]{} for the dynamics $N$-$S$ and $q$ [*repelling croissants*]{} for the dynamics $S$-$N$. The attracting and repelling croissants are cyclically alternating on the sphere and they intersect only at $S$ and $N$.
![The Brouwer domain $U(\ell)$ containing the invariant petal $\mathcal{P}_{0}$ on the sphere.[]{data-label="fig:sphere"}](Brdomain2-eps-converted-to.pdf)
The two lines that form the boundary of an attractive/repelling croissant and connect $S$ to $N$ are called [*Brouwer lines*]{} and they can be regarded as geodesics on the Euclidean sphere. Let $\ell$ be a Brouwer line bounding an attractive croissant for the dynamics $N$-$S$ given by Theorem \[thm:LR\]. So $\ell$ connects $S$ to $N$, but does not contain $S$ or $N$. Suppose that $h(\ell)$ is to the right of $\ell$ and $h^{-1}(\ell)$ is to the left of $\ell$. Let $D$ be the open topological disk on the sphere bounded by $\ell$ and $h(\ell)$. Define the domain $U(\ell)=\bigcup_{n\in{\mathbb{Z}}}h^{n}(D\cup\ell)$; it is called a Brouwer domain generated by $\ell$. By [@LR Section 3.2], we know that there exists a homeomorphism $\phi:{\mathbb{R}}^{2}\rightarrow U(\ell)$ which conjugates the restriction $h:U(\ell)\rightarrow U(\ell)$ to the translation $T$ on ${\mathbb{R}}^{2}$, $T(x,y)=(x+1,y)$. So $U(\ell)$ is a domain of translation (see Figure \[fig:sphere\]).
The index of the semi-parabolic fixed point is $1+q$ because we have not modified the homeomorphism in a small neighborhood around 0. By Lefschetz’s formula, the sum of the indexes of the fixed points of $h$ is the Euler characteristic of the sphere, so the index at $S$ is $1+q$ if and only if the index at $N$ is $1-q$. So Theorem \[thm:LR\] is applicable and in view of the discussion above, there exists some Brouwer line $\ell$ such that $\mathcal{P}_{0}\subset U(\ell)$. It follows that the semi-parabolic map $f^{q}$ is conjugated to a translation in a neighborhood of the invariant petal $\mathcal{P}_{0}$ inside the domain $U(\ell)$ on the sphere. Let $x\in \partial \mathcal{P}_{0}\setminus\{0\}$. This shows that there is a neighborhood $N_{\epsilon}(x)$ around $x$ such that if $y\in N_{\epsilon}(x)$ then $y$ converges to $0$ under forward or backwards iterations of $f^{q}$. In particular all points on the boundary of $\mathcal{P}_{0}$ converge to $0$ under forward or backwards iterations.
This gives us a mechanism of extending the invariant set $\mathcal{P}$ until it touches the boundary of $B$.
[99999]{}
M. Brown, [*A short short proof of the Cartwright-Littlewood theorem*]{}, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc., 65 (1977), p. 372.
A.D. Brjuno, Analytical form of differential equations. Transactions of the Moscow Mathematical Society [**25**]{}, 131-288 (1971); [**26**]{}, 199-239 (1972).
S. Cairns, [*An elementary proof of the Jordan-Schoenflies theorem*]{}, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc., vol. 2 (1951), pp. 860-867.
J. Franks, [*A new proof of the Brouwer plane translation theorem*]{}, Ergod. Th. and Dynam. Sys., 12 (1992), pp. 217-226.
M. Hakim, [*Attracting domains for semi-attractive transformations of ${\mathbb{C}}^{p}$*]{}, Publ. Mat. 38 (1994), no. 2, 479-499.
M. Hirsch, C. Pugh, M. Shub, [*Invariant manifolds*]{}, Lecture Notes in Mathematics, vol. 583, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1977.
H. Inou, M. Shishikura, [*The renormalization for parabolic fixed points and their perturbation*]{}, Manuscript 2008.
F. Le Roux, [*Homéomorphismes de surfaces - Théorèmes de la fleur de Leau-Fatou et de la variété stable*]{}, Astérisque 292 (2004).
Y. Pesin, [*Lectures on Partial Hyperbolicity and Stable Ergodicity*]{}. Zürich Lectures in Advanced Mathematics, EMS, 2004.
R. Pérez-Marco, [*Fixed points and circle maps*]{}, Acta Math., 179 (1997), 243-294.
R. Pérez-Marco, [*On a question of Dulac and Fatou*]{}, C. R. Acad. Sci. Paris, Série I, 1995, 1045-1048.
R. Pérez-Marco, [*Hedgehog’s dynamics I*]{}, Manuscript 2004.
R. Pérez-Marco, [*Sur les dynamiques holomorphes non linéarisables et une conjecture de V. I. Arnol’d*]{}, Ann. Sci. École Norm. Sup. (4), 26(5):565-644, 1993.
C. Robinson, [*Dynamical Systems: Stability, Symbolic Dynamics, and Chaos*]{}, 2nd ed., Studies in Advanced Mathematics, CRC Press, 1999.
R. Radu, R. Tanase, [*A structure theorem for semi-parabolic Hénon maps*]{}, [arXiv:1411.3824 ]{}
H. Rüssmann [*Über die Iteration analytischer Funktionen*]{}, J Math. Mech. 17 (1967), pp. 523-532.
M. Shub, [*Global Stability of Dynamical Systems*]{}, Springer-Verlag, 1987.
T. Ueda, [*Local structure of analytic transformations of two complex variables I*]{}, J. Math. Kyoto Univ., 26(2) (1986), 233-261.
T. Ueda, [*Local structure of analytic transformations of two complex variables II*]{}, J. Math. Kyoto Univ. 31 (1991), no. 3, 695-711.
A. Vanderbauwhede, [*Centre manifolds, normal forms and elementary bifurcations*]{}, in Dynamics Reported, A series in dynamical systems and their applications, Vol. 2, Wiley, Chichester, 1989, 89-169.
S. van Strien, [*Center manifolds are not $C^{\infty}$*]{}, Math. Z. 166(2), 143-145 (1979).
J. C. Yoccoz, [*Analytic linearization of circle diffeomorphisms*]{}, Dynamical systems and small divisors (Cetraro, 1998) Lecture Notes in Math., vol. 1784, Springer, Berlin, 2002, pp. 125-173.
J. C. Yoccoz, [*Petits diviseurs en dimension 1*]{}, Astérisque No. 231 (1995).
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'Map based visual inertial localization is a crucial step to reduce the drift in state estimation of mobile robots. The underlying problem for localization is to estimate the pose from a set of 3D-2D feature correspondences, of which the main challenge is the presence of outliers, especially in changing environment. In this paper, we propose a robust solution based on efficient global optimization of the consensus maximization problem, which is insensitive to high percentage of outliers. We first introduce *translation invariant measurements* (TIMs) for both points and lines to decouple the consensus maximization problem into rotation and translation subproblems, allowing for a two-stage solver with reduced search space. Then we show that (i) the rotation can be estimated by minimizing TIMs using only *1-dimensional branch-and-bound* (BnB), (ii) the translation can be estimated by running 1-dimensional search for each of the three axes with *prioritized progressive voting*. Compared with the popular randomized solver, our solver achieves deterministic global convergence without requiring an initial value. Furthermore, ours is exponentially faster compared with existing BnB based methods. Finally, our experiments on both simulation and real-world datasets demonstrate that the proposed method gives accurate pose estimation even in the presence of 90% outliers (only 2 inliers).'
author:
- |
Yanmei Jiao$^{1}$, Yue Wang$^{1}$, Bo Fu$^{1}$, Qimeng Tan$^{2}$, Lei Chen$^{2}$, Minhang Wang$^{3}$,\
Shoudong Huang$^{4}$ and Rong Xiong$^{1}$[^1]
bibliography:
- 'appendix.bib'
title: '**Globally optimal consensus maximization for robust visual inertial localization in point and line map** '
---
Introduction
============
Visual inertial navigation system is popular for state estimation of mobile robots, autonomous vehicles and augmented reality applications. Many efforts have been paid to build accurate, consistent and efficient visual inertial odometry [@li2013high][@leutenegger2015keyframe][@forster2016manifold]. However, its inherent drift is unacceptable in long-term operation, requiring absolute pose estimation for correction. Map based visual inertial localization is therefore an important component in a complete navigation system, of which the goal is to estimate the absolute pose from a set of corresponding 2D image feature points and global 3D map points. In this problem, one main challenge is the robustness of the solver against outliers, i.e. incorrect feature correspondences. When high percentage of correspondences is outlier, the performance of the general pose estimator may be severely degenerated.
Pose estimation with outliers is often stated as a consensus maximization problem. One popular solution is random sample consensus (RANSAC), which has lots of variants [@fischler1981random][@choi1997performance] and has been employed in many visual localization methods [@meer1991robust][@hartley2003multiple]. The advantage of RANSAC is the simplicity for implementation, and the effectiveness in many scenarios with moderate percentage of outliers. However, RANSAC cannot tolerate extreme percentage of outliers, say 90%. In addition, it cannot guarantee the deterministic global optimality due to the probabilistic convergence.
![The projected map points on the map image (left column) and the detected image key points on the query image (right column), with inlier correspondences in red and outliers in blue. The initial correspondences found by feature descriptor matching (top), and the consensus set correspondences searched by RANSAC (middle) and proposed consensus maximization algorithm (bottom). []{data-label="fig.overview"}](overview){width="50.00000%"}
In contrast to RANSAC, another solution to consensus maximization is global optimization based methods. It gives globally optimal solution without relying on an initial value [@brown2015globally][@campbell2017globally], while it cannot perform in real-time due to the considerable computation time. Most existing global optimization methods aim at general pose estimation problems. They employ branch-and-bound (BnB) as the basic framework to reduce the search space [@olsson2008branch], or mixed integer programming for further acceleration [@li2009consensus][@chin2016guaranteed]. But the computational cost is still unsatisfactory as the pose space $SE(3)$ is coupled. Even inertial measurement is provided, it cannot be easily substituted into the problem for decoupling.
In this paper, we propose a deterministic visual inertial localization solution to achieve global convergence with much higher efficiency. The key idea is to divide $SE(3)$ search space into multiple 1-D search spaces. Specifically, inspired by the decoupling idea in [@yang2019polynomial], we build intermediate cost function for both point and line features, *translation invariant measurements* (TIMs), to decouple consensus maximization into two cascaded subproblems only related to rotation $SO(3)$ and translation $\mathbb{R}^3$ respectively. Based on TIMs, the globally optimal rotation is then searched by *1-dimensional BnB* in $[-\pi,\pi]$ with the aid of inertial measurements. For the translation, $\mathbb{R}^3$ search is replaced with three 1-dimensional $\mathbb{R}$ search for each axis using *prioritized progressive voting*. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first solver for visual inertial localization with deterministic global optimality. In summary, our contributions include
- TIMs based formulation of visual inertial localization that decouples the problem and enables 1D BnB based global optimization of the rotation.
- Prioritized progressive voting method that replaces $\mathbb{R}^3$ space search with three $\mathbb{R}$ search for global optimization of the translation.
- Experiments on simulation and real-world cross-session datasets that validate the effectiveness and efficiency of the proposed method against comparative methods.
The remainder of the paper is organized as follows: Section II reviews the related literatures. Section III presents the decoupling of the consensus maximization problem. Section IV introduces the solutions of the subproblems. Section V demonstrates the experimental settings and results, followed by Section VI concluding the paper.
Related Works
=============
Visual localization
-------------------
Visual localization and navigation for mobile robots has been studied extensively in the robotics and computer vision communities in the recent decade. A general visual navigation system has two components: visual odometry, which estimates the relative pose and has drift in long term [@nister2004visual][@Geiger2011IV], and visual localization, which eliminates the drift by registering the image on a global map [@furgale2010visual][@tang2018topological]. More recently, inertial sensors are employed in the system to improve the accuracy and robustness [@mourikis2007multi][@lynen2015get][@schneider2018maplab]. Specifically, the inertial sensor has globally observable pitch and roll measurements, reducing the degrees of freedom (DoF) in visual inertial localization problem to 4. In [@li2013high][@qin2018vins], the reduction is utilized when formulating the pose estimation given a set of inlier feature correspondences. However, few works have been done on outliers elimination when inertial measurements are provided.
Random sample consensus
-----------------------
For robust localization given the feature correspondences containing outliers, RANSAC is the most popular solution employed in many visual navigation system. To deal with the visual localization without inertial measurements, i.e. 6DoF, there have been many variants. In [@gao2003complete][@lepetit2009epnp][@wang2018efficient], point feature correspondences based RANSAC are studied. In [@dhome1989determination][@chen1990pose][@ramalingam2011pose], RANSAC is extended to line features. When inertial measurements are provided, the DoF of the problem is reduced, which is utilized by RANSAC to improve the robustness in [@kneip2011robust][@kukelova2010closed], and extended to both point and line correspondences in [@jiao20192]. As RANSAC is developed on randomized sampling theory, it is simple to implement and has good performance on scenarios with moderate outliers. But its disadvantage is also obvious, including low tolerance against extreme outliers, local convergence and no guarantee of the optimality [@speciale2017consensus].
Outlier resistent estimator
---------------------------
Another branch to reject outliers is to refer other forms of cost functions instead of the squared error [@mactavish2015all]. In [@zhou2016fast], Geman-McClure cost function is utilized for 3D-3D registration, which is insensitive to outliers. In [@bosse2016robust], M-estimators in several typical robotics problems are presented. Switchable cost function is employed to solve pose graph optimization with outlier loop closures [@sunderhauf2012switchable][@lee2013robust]. A more compact solver for such cost function is dynamic covariance scaling which is introduced in [@agarwal2013robust]. More recently, in [@yang2020graduated], several forms of robust cost functions are unified and solved using graduated non-convexity without an initial guess, which demonstrates good performance in 3D-3D registration, pose graph optimization, and is extended to non-minimal solver for shape reconstruction from an image in [@yang2020perfect]. Alternatively, in [@tzoumas2019outlier], the outlier rejection is solved by adaptively removing the measurements with large errors, which is simple but show superior performance than RANSAC. These methods achieve deterministic convergence, while some of them offer certifiable optimality (or sub-optimality guarantees).
Global optimization method
--------------------------
Global optimization methods are proposed to achieve the global optimality and deterministic convergence. In this branch of literatures, Branch-and-Bound (BnB) is mostly used, which gradually prunes the solution space by coarse-to-fine division. In [@breuel2003implementation], BnB is used to solve the 2D-2D registration problems. In [@olsson2008branch], a general framework for point, line and plane features is proposed to solve 3D-3D registration via BnB. Integrated with mixed integer programming, the BnB optimization can converge faster [@li2009consensus][@chin2016guaranteed]. In [@speciale2017consensus], the linear matrix inequality constraints are introduced to mixed integer programming, resulting in a general-purpose faster BnB for all 2D-2D, 2D-3D and 3D-3D geometric vision problems. In the works mentioned above, the rotation is modeled as a rotation matrix with matrix level constraints. Thus it is unclear about the incorporation of inertial measurements. In addition, there are also specialized globally optimal algorithms focusing on one class of problem. In [@yang2015go][@liu2018efficient], pairs of features are used to decouple the 3D-3D registration. In [@yang2019polynomial], TEASER is proposed to decoupled scaled 3D-3D registration, achieving a fast three-stage optimization. These works show that it is possible to have superior performance with *specialized* algorithms rather than only the *general-purpose* framework, even also accelerated.
In this paper, we follow the idea of specialized solver to bridge the gap of globally optimal deterministic solution for visual inertial localization, which is a robust 3D-2D pose estimation problem with inertial measurements. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first work to study this problem in the context of global optimality. We expect this solution to be accurate and efficient.
Decoupling Translation and Rotation
===================================
The underlying problem of visual inertial localization is the pose estimation from 3D-2D correspondences with outliers. Formally, given a set $\mathfrak{P}$ consisting of correspondences between 3D global points $p_i \in \mathbb{R}^3$ and 2D visual points $u_i \in \mathbb{R}^2$, they satisfy $$\label{3d2d}
u_i = \pi(Rp_i+t,K) + o_i + e_i$$ where $R \in SO(3)$ and $t \in \mathbb{R}^3$ is the camera pose to be estimated, $\pi$ is the camera projection function with known intrinsic parameters $K$, $|e_i| < n_i$ is assumed to be bounded random measurement noise, $o_i$ is zero for inlier while an arbitrary number for outlier. To deal with outliers, the robust pose estimation generally begins with consensus maximization problem as $$\begin{aligned}
\label{costrt}
&\max_{R,t,\{z_i\}}\sum z_i \\
&s.t.~~~~ z_i |u_i - \pi(Rp_i+t,K)| \leq n_i,~~i \in \mathfrak{P}\end{aligned}$$ where $z_i$ is binary, indicating whether $o_i$ is zero. To solve the problem in global, general BnB algorithms search in $SE(3)$, which is a coupled space of $SO(3)$ and $\mathbb{R}^3$. But this probably leads to exponential computational complexity in bad cases. For local techniques like RANSAC, inliers may be estimated conservatively, i.e. inliers regarded as outliers, especially when the noise is unavoidable.
Translation invariant measurements
----------------------------------
### Point-TIM
Inspired by the minimal solution in RANSAC, we develop an intermediate measurement which is invariant to the translation of the pose. Mathematically, given an image key point $u_i$, we have an un-normalized direction vector from the camera center as $$\label{lineeq}
\tilde{u}_i \triangleq \left(
\begin{array}{c}
\tilde{u}_{i,x} \\
\tilde{u}_{i,y} \\
1 \\
\end{array}
\right) = K^{-1}\left(
\begin{array}{c}
u_i \\
1 \\
\end{array}
\right)$$ Then the corresponding world point $p_i$ is transformed to the camera coordinates and satisfies $$\label{linep}
\frac{R_1 p_i + t_x}{\tilde{u}_{i,x}} = \frac{R_2 p_i + t_y}{\tilde{u}_{i,y}} = R_3 p_i + t_z$$ where $R\triangleq (R_1^T,R_2^T,R_3^T)^T$ and $t \triangleq (t_x,t_y,t_z)^T$. Based on (\[linep\]), we have two constraints from a correspondence. Naturally, given another correspondence $u_j$ and $p_j$, we can have two more constraints as $$\label{linep2}
\frac{R_1 p_j + t_x}{\tilde{u}_{j,x}} = \frac{R_2 p_j + t_y}{\tilde{u}_{j,y}} = R_3 p_j + t_z$$ According to (\[linep\]) and (\[linep2\]), we have linear constraints of the translation $t$. With proper variable substitutions among the constraints, and the globally observable pitch and roll angles from inertial measurements, we can eliminate $t$, reduce $SO(3)$ to $[-\pi,\pi]$, and derive TIM as $$\label{tim}
d_p(\alpha) = d_{p,1} \sin \alpha + d_{p,2} \cos \alpha + d_{p,3}$$ where $\alpha$ is the unknown yaw angle, $d_{p,1}$, $d_{p,2}$, $d_{p,3}$ and the derivation details are presented in the Appendix. Now we substitute the constraints which are related to both $R$ and $t$ in (\[costrt\]) with the TIM, leading to $$\begin{aligned}
\label{costr}
&\max_{R(\alpha),\{z_{ij}\}}\sum z_{ij} \\
&s.t.~~~~ z_{ij} |d_{p,ij}(\alpha)| \leq n_{ij},~~i,j \in \mathfrak{P}\end{aligned}$$ where $n_{ij}=\min(n_i,n_j)$, $z_{ij}=1$ indicates the $i$-th and $j$-th correspondence derived the constraint are inliers.
### Line-TIM
Similar to a pair of point correspondences, given a set of line correspondences $\mathfrak{L}$, it is also possible to develop TIM. Given the end points of the image line segment $u_{k1}$ and $u_{k2}$, we have two un-normalized directions as (\[lineeq\]), denoted as $\tilde{u}_{k1}$ and $\tilde{u}_{k2}$.
Then following the fact that the point $p_k$ on the world line lies on the plane spanned by the rays from camera center along direction $\tilde{u}_{k1}$ and $\tilde{u}_{k2}$, we have $$\label{sp}
(\tilde{u}_{k1} \times \tilde{u}_{k2})^T(Rp_k+t) = 0$$ which is a constraint for both rotation and translation. Since arbitrary number of points can be sampled from a line, we sample another point on the same world line to formulate the constraint as (\[sp\]). Then only one line correspondence can lead to line-TIM after proper substitution as $$\label{timl}
d_l(\alpha) = d_{l,1} \sin \alpha + d_{l,2} \cos \alpha + d_{l,3}$$ where the line-TIM has the same form as point-TIM in (\[tim\]), but the coefficients are different. The derivation details are also presented in the Appendix.
**TIMs based rotation only problem.** Note that either (\[tim\]) or (\[timl\]) is only related to the yaw angle. By combining them together, we have a general consensus maximization problem with TIM constraints only related to rotation compatible to the map having both point and line features as $$\begin{aligned}
\label{costrtim}
&\max_{R(\alpha),\{z_{*}\}}\sum z_{*} \\
&s.t.~~~~ z_{ij} |d_{p,ij}(\alpha)| \leq n_{ij},~~i,j \in \mathfrak{P}\\
&~~~~~ z_k |d_{l,k}(\alpha)| \leq n_k,~~k \in \mathfrak{L}\end{aligned}$$
Two-stage consensus maximization solver
---------------------------------------
With TIMs for both point and line correspondences, we decouple the original consensus maximization problem into rotation only problem, and translation only problem when the rotation is fixed. Accordingly, the proposed solver has two stages in cascade:
- We estimate the rotation $\hat{R}$ by $R(\hat{\alpha})$ based on the TIMs in (\[costrtim\]). This estimator solves a 1D optimization problem and is described in Section \[er\].
- We estimate the translation $\hat{t}$ based on the original consensus maximization in (\[costrt\]) where the rotation is assigned with $\hat{R}$. This estimator solves a $\mathbb{R}^3$ optimization problem and is described in Section \[et\].
Estimators of Rotation and Translation
======================================
BnB based optimization for rotation {#er}
-----------------------------------
We employ BnB strategy to solve problem (\[costrtim\]). The cost function in (\[costrtim\]) relates to $\alpha$ and $z_{*}$. But it is obvious that when $\alpha$ is determined, $\{z_{*}\}$ is simply derived by evaluating the constraints. So we denote the cost function as $E(\alpha)$ that is explained as the number of inliers given a yaw angle $\alpha$.
**Upper bound of cost function.** We then derive the upper bound of $E(\alpha)$ on the subset $\mathbb{A}$, denoted as $\overline{E}(\mathbb{A})$, where $\alpha \in \mathbb{A} \subseteq[-\pi,\pi]$. Recall (\[tim\]) and (\[timl\]), as the forms of point-TIM and line-TIM are the same, we denote them as $d(\alpha)$. The lower bound of $|d(\alpha)|$ on $\mathbb{A}$, denoted as $\underline{d}(\mathbb{A})$, is derived as $$\label{timlb}
\underline{d}(\mathbb{A}) = \min |a_1 \sin(\alpha + a_2) + d_3|$$ where the derivation of the coefficients are introduced in Appendix. Note that $\underline{d}(\mathbb{A})$ can be solved analytically without any iterations. Now we formulate a consensus maximization problem as $$\begin{aligned}
\label{costlb}
&\max_{R(\alpha),\{z_{*}\},\alpha \in \mathbb{A}}\sum z_{*} \\
&s.t.~~~~ z_{ij} \underline{d}_{p,ij}(\mathbb{A}) \leq n_{ij},~~i,j \in \mathfrak{P}\\
&~~~~~ z_k \underline{d}_{l,k}(\mathbb{A}) \leq n_{k},~~k \in \mathfrak{L}\end{aligned}$$ where the problem is defined on $\mathbb{A}$, and the TIMs constraints are replaced with tight lower bounds, relaxing the constraints and yielding an optimistic estimation of $\hat{z}_{*}$. We then have $$\begin{aligned}
\label{costub}
E(\alpha) \leq \overline{E}(\mathbb{A}) = \sum \hat{z}_{*},~~\alpha \in \mathbb{A}\end{aligned}$$ as a tight upper bound. The equality exists when all constraints give the same $\alpha$ with $d_{p,ij}(\alpha) = \underline{d}_{p,ij}(\mathbb{A})$ and $d_{l,k}(\alpha) = \underline{d}_{l,k}(\mathbb{A})$, which is only possible when noise is free.
**Accelerate BnB optimization.** With (\[costrtim\]-\[costub\]), we have the BnB search for globally optimal rotation, of which the pseudo code is listed in Algorithm \[bnb1\]. Note that the main idea of BnB is to prune the solution space $\mathbb{A}$ when its upper bound $\overline{E}(\mathbb{A})$ is smaller than the current best estimates $E^*$. Therefore, if we have a fast solution to initialize a good $E^*$, most solution spaces can be pruned at early stage, significantly improving the search efficiency. To implement this idea, we use RANSAC [@jiao20192] to generate a rough initial $E^*$. In addition, we introduce a heuristics to balance the global optimality and the efficiency. The best $M$ estimated $\alpha$ during RANSAC is utilized to initialize $M$ subsets among $[-\pi,\pi]$. Each subset centers at each estimated $\alpha$ with a width $w$. When $w$ is large, global optimality is emphasized and vice versa. Another implementation trick is to store the respective inliers when evaluating (\[costlb\]) on each subset $\mathbb{A}$. When $\mathbb{A}$ is further divided into smaller subsets, only the stored inliers within $\mathbb{A}$ are evaluated, instead of all constraints, saving lots of computational cost. These techniques are all shown to accelerate the search in the experimental ablation study without drop of accuracy.
Initialize partition of $[-\pi,\pi]$ into subsets $\{\mathbb{A}_{i}\}$.\
Initialize best estimation $E^{*}$, $\alpha^{*}$.\
Insert $\{\mathbb{A}_{i}\}$ into queue $q$.\
Prioritized progressive voting for translation {#et}
----------------------------------------------
When $R(\hat{\alpha})$ is estimated, the co-linear and co-planar constraints (\[linep\]) and (\[sp\]) are all linear constraints for $t$. Thus we can transform the consensus maximization problem with point and line constraints as $$\begin{aligned}
\label{costlsys}
&\max_{t,\{z_i\}}\sum z_i \\
&s.t.~~~~ z_i |A_i t+b_i| \leq n_{i},~~i \in \mathfrak{P} \cup \mathfrak{L}\end{aligned}$$ where $A_i \in \mathbb{R}^{1\times3}$ and $b_i \in \mathbb{R}$ are the coefficients for linear constraints derived from (\[linep\]) or (\[sp\]) with estimated $R(\hat{\alpha})$. However, this problem still has coupled constraints for $t$ so that $\mathbb{R}^3$ search is indispensable.
![The voting illustration of $\hat{t}_x$. Each $\hat{t}_{ij,x}$ derived by $i$-th and $j$-th correspondence votes for the interval if $[\omega_{i},\omega_{i+1}]\subseteq[\underline{t}_{ij,x},\overline{t}_{ij,x}]$, which means the corresponding consensus set contains i and j.[]{data-label="fig.vote"}](vote){width="50.00000%"}
**Decoupled linear constraints.** Note that for a point correspondence constraint (\[linep\]), we have two linear equations, while for a line correspondence constraint (\[sp\]), we have one. Therefore, given a pair of correspondences including at least one point correspondence, say the $i$-th point correspondence and the $j$-th point or line correspondence, it is sufficient to solve $\hat{t}_{ij}$ for this small linear system (see Appendix for details), then we have $$\begin{aligned}
\label{costpsys}
&\max_{t,\{z_{ij}\}}\sum z_{ij} \\
&s.t.~~~~ z_{ij} |\hat{t}_{ij}-t| \leq n_{ij},~~i \in \mathfrak{P},j \in \mathfrak{P} \cup \mathfrak{L}\end{aligned}$$ Now we find that the constraints are decoupled for each dimension of $t$. Set the $x$-dimension as example, we have $$\begin{aligned}
\label{cost1d}
&\max_{t_x,\{z_{ij}\}}\sum z_{ij} \\
&s.t.~~~~ z_{ij} |\hat{t}_{ij,x}-t_x| \leq n_{ij,x},~~i \in \mathfrak{P},j \in \mathfrak{P} \cup \mathfrak{L}\end{aligned}$$ arriving at the resultant three dimension-wise linear constrained consensus maximization problems.
**Dimension-wise voting algorithm.** We use a voting algorithm to solve the problem. We first specify the noise bound $n_{ij,x}$ in (\[cost1d\]). Given the noise bound $n_{i}$ in (\[costlsys\]), we have the noise bound for $t$ following the techniques in [@mccormick1976computability] [@sherali1992new] as $$\label{tbound}
\underline{t}_{ij} \leq \hat{t}_{ij} \leq \overline{t}_{ij}$$ The details can be found in Appendix.
Still taking $x$-dimension as example, each estimated $\hat{t}_{ij,x}$ defines an interval $[\underline{t}_{ij,x},\overline{t}_{ij,x}]$. If the real $t_x$ lies in this interval, then the real inlier set contains the two correspondences deriving $\hat{t}_{ij,x}$. According to [@yang2019polynomial], the insight is that the inlier set only changes its membership when real $t_x$ enters a new interval. Besides, given $K$ estimations, the *maximum number of possible consensus sets, i.e. the cardinality of the solution space, is $2K-1$*, where $K$ is in *quadratic* w.r.t the number of correspondences. This complexity enables a voting algorithm for all $2K-1$ sets. By counting the unique correspondences of the votes in each set, we get the corresponding consensus set. Then the maximal consensus set can lead to an estimation of $\hat{t}_x$. An illustrative case is shown in Fig. \[fig.vote\] and the pseudo code is listed in Algorithm \[vt\] with $x$-dimension as example. For simplicity, we replace $\hat{t}_{ij,x}$ with $\hat{t}_{k,x}$ in the pseudo code. Following the similar idea in [@yang2019polynomial], by repeating the voting algorithm for three times, $\hat{t}$ is estimated as $[\hat{t}_x$, $\hat{t}_y$, $\hat{t}_z]^T$.
Initialize key-value map $S$.\
$\omega = sort([ \underline{t}_{1,x},\overline{t}_{1,x},\underline{t}_{2,x},\overline{t}_{2,x},..,\underline{t}_{K,x},\overline{t}_{K,x} ])$.\
**Prioritized progressive voting algorithm.** When the number of inliers is high, independent voting along three dimensions is possible. But when the number of inliers is low and outlier rate is high, independent dimension-wise voting may lead to failure. The reason is that, though it is almost impossible that there are more outliers than inliers having the similar $t$, *it is possible that there are more outliers than inliers having the similar* $t_x$. In such scenario, search along $x$-dimension leads to incorrect $\hat{t}_x$, which cannot be corrected in the successive voting along $y$ or $z$-dimension.
To deal with such scenario while keeping a low computational complexity, we propose a prioritized progressive voting for translation in Algorithm \[voting\]. The main idea is that we progressively vote on the three dimensions, but there is a priority, i.e. number of votes, for early termination. The experimental results show that the computational complexity of prioritized progressive voting is almost similar to the dimension-wise voting. Otherwise, it is also possible to use 3D BnB translation search for better accuracy, but it is slower because of the coupled multi-dimensional solution space. Finally, we apply nonlinear refinement to achieve the best accuracy when the maximum consensus set is found.
Initialize best estimation $E^{*}=0$.\
$S_x = Voting(\{\hat{t}_{k,x}\}, \{\underline{t}_{k,x}\}, \{\overline{t}_{k,x}\})$.\
Sort $S_x$ in decreasing cardinality.\
Experimental Results
====================
In the experiments, we evaluate the proposed consensus maximization solver on (i) the feasibility and effectiveness of the subproblem solvers, (ii) the accuracy and robustness compared with existing methods, and (iii) the performance in real world visual inertial localization applications. We implement the proposed solver in MATLAB on a desktop with CPU Intel i7-7700 3.60GHz and 8G RAM.
Ablation study
--------------
We build the synthetic world consisting of 3D points and lines in the cube $[-1,1]^3$. The 2D image projections are generated with randomly sampled camera poses in $[-2,2]^3 \times [-\pi,\pi]^3$, as well as their inlier correspondences. All the projected 2D image points are added with bounded random noise $e_{i}$ with the bound $n_i=2$. Each outlier correspondence is generated from other randomly sampled camera pose different to ground truth pose. The total number of correspondences is fixed as 50. Specifically, there are 50 point correspondences when evaluating point only methods, while 25 point and 25 line correspondences for the point and line methods. We vary the outlier percentage from 10% to 90% with a step of 10%. Statistic performance indicators are evaluated with an average of 100 Monte Carlo runs. Denoting the ground truth pose as $[R_{gt}|t_{gt}]$, we compute the translation error as $\triangle T=|\hat{t}-t_{gt}|$ in meter and the rotation error as the angle of $\triangle R=\hat{R}R_{gt}^{T}$ in degree.
**BnB heuristics.** We first evaluate the heuristics introduced in Section \[er\] from the aspect of accuracy and efficiency. As shown in Fig. \[fig.yawTime\], with the heuristics, the efficiency is improved while the accuracy stays similar. Since the final pose is refined by nonlinear optimization, slight rotation error after BnB can be ignored. As a baseline, we also show the error of estimated rotation giving the most inliers in RANSAC, of which the performance is much worse, indicating inconsistency between the identified inliers and the real inliers. In following experiments, heuristics are applied with BnB as default setting. **Translation voting.** We then compare the voting strategies introduced in Section \[et\]. Now we can evaluate the final accuracy after nonlinear refinement. In addition to efficiency and accuracy, we also evaluate the consistency between the estimated consensus set and the real inlier set (CCI) using precision and recall. As shown in Fig. \[fig.time\], the computation of the prioritized progressive voting is slightly higher than the dimension-wise voting. More importantly, the increased time keeps almost consistent w.r.t outlier rate and correspondences number, which might be explained as no complexity growth for prioritized progressive voting. The CCI and accuracy are shown in the right columns in Tab. \[table.robustness\]. We see that all variants achieve perfect CCI, naturally leading to high accuracy. **Sensitivity to noisy inertial measurements.** As inertial measurements are noisy, it is necessary to evaluate the sensitivity of the proposed method. We add Gaussian noise with zero mean and increasing standard deviation up to 5 degree on both pitch and roll angle. The threshold to judge a successful localization is 0.1m for translation error and 0.5 degree for rotation error as in [@miraldo2018minimal]. The result is shown in Fig. \[fig.imu\], indicating that the proposed algorithm can achieve over 90% success rate when the noise increases to 5 degree. This level of noise is far more than the pitch and roll estimations in practice [@bloesch2015robust]. In addition, we can find that the performance is better when employing prioritized progressive search.
![The sensitivity experiment result using proposed algorithm with dimension-wise voting (solid) and prioritized progressive voting (dash).[]{data-label="fig.imu"}](imu3){width="45.00000%"}
Comparison on synthetic datasets
--------------------------------
The comparative methods include the RANSAC-based methods EPnP[@lepetit2009epnp], P3P[@gao2003complete], 2-Entity[@jiao20192] and globally optimal method LMI[@speciale2017consensus]. We use the OpenCV[@itseez2015opencv] implementation of EPnP and P3P. For LMI, we modify their open source code in MATLAB following the paper, since only code for 3D-3D registration is released. In addition, we control the evaluation data having rotation angle less than $60\degree$ and add it as the constraint of LMI, as suggested in [@speciale2017consensus]. The 2-Entity RANSAC is implemented in MATLAB and we select the mixed sampling strategy which utilize both points and lines for pose estimation. All methods are followed by nonlinear refinement on the identified consesus set. We still use the synthetic dataset as in the ablation study.
![(a) The number of inliers in the estimated maximal consensus set w.r.t increasing outliers of successful estimation. (b) The number of inliers in the estimated maximal consensus set for 100 runs when the outlier rate is 80%.[]{data-label="fig.robustness"}](inliers2){width="50.00000%"}
**Efficiency of globally optimal methods.** We first compare the efficiency between the proposed method and the LMI. We evaluate the computational cost with respect to the number of feature correspondences and the percentage of outliers. The result is shown in Fig. \[fig.time\], the computational cost of LMI is significantly higher than the proposed methods both for increasing number of correspondences, and the percentage of outliers. The growing gap may also indicate that the complexity of LMI is higher than ours.
**Deterministic convergence.** The vital difference between RANSAC and globally optimal method is the convergence. We compare the number of inliers in the estimated maximal consensus set with respect to increasing outliers when the final pose estimation is successful. The result is shown in Fig. \[fig.robustness\], which indicates that the proposed solution achieves deterministic perfect CCI, while RANSAC gives conservative estimations with less inliers and LMI finds optimistic estimations by incorrectly regarding outliers as inliers. In addition, both RANSAC and LMI fail when the outlier rate is 90%. The results for all 100 runs when the outlier rate is 80% are also shown in Fig. \[fig.robustness\]. We can see that the proposed algorithm deterministically finds the globally optimal consensus, while RANSAC achieves global optimality probabilistically.
**Robustness and accuracy.** We finally show the performance of all methods on the synthetic data, including accuracy, precision and recall to measure the CCI, with respect to percentage of outliers ranging from 60% to 90%. Note that we only evaluate the accuracy for successful trials, since result on incorrectly identified consensus set can lead to very large error, disturbing the accuracy. The result in Tab. \[table.robustness\] first confirms that CCI is highly related to the accuracy, validating the feasibility of maximizing consensus set. RANSAC gives consistent conservative estimations, as the precision remains at a higher level compared with the recall. For LMI, the estimation is prone to regard the outliers as inliers, thus the recall is higher compared with precision. Considering that LMI, P3P and EPnP are designed for general visual localization, the better performance achieved by 2-Entity and the proposed method, designed for visual inertial localization, is reasonable. But we can still summarize that superior result can be found by specialized globally optimal method.
[1.0]{}
\[table.robustness\]
Comparison on visual inertial localization
------------------------------------------
Finally, we evaluate all the methods on a real world cross-session visual inertial localization task. The dataset employed is YQ-dataset[@ding2018laser]. In the dataset, there are three sessions collected in summer 2017, denoted as 2017-0823, 2017-0827 and 2017-0828, and one session in winter 2018 after snow denoted as 2018-0129. The 3D map is built with 2017-0823 session and the other three sessions are used to evaluate the localization performance, indicating the changing environment. The details to obtain the 3D-2D point and line correspondences can be found in Appendix. For evaluation, we compute the ground truth relative pose between the query camera and the map by aligning the synchronized LiDAR scans. For the pitch and roll angle, we use the estimation of visual inertial odometry [@mur2017visual].
[1.0]{}
\[table.real\]
**Selected cases performance.** We first select several typical examples for evaluation as in [@speciale2017consensus] and the results are shown in Tab. \[table.real\]. The Exp01, Exp02 and Exp03 are cases with pure point features where Exp03 has lines as disturbance and the outlier rate in these three cases are all more than 50%. The RANSAC-based methods perform poorly compared with the global optimization methods. One thing to note is that in real world dataset, dimension-wise voting brings slight performance drop, but still achieves superior performance against comparative methods. Also note that in Exp03, the proposed method gives optimistic results by regarding 2 outliers as inliers, which may be caused by unknown noise bound thus inappropriate threshold in real world data. In Exp04, Exp05 and Exp06, the utilization of good line features promotes the performance of point line methods obviously (2-Entity and ours). Overall, the results still confirm the conclusions in simulation. **Full dataset performance.** Finally, we arrive at the success rate on the whole three sessions as shown in Fig. \[fig.session\]. As LMI is too slow to finish all the dataset, here we only show the result of ours and RANSAC methods. We first see that the proposed globally optimal methods consistently outperform the RANSAC methods on all three sessions. The other fact is that progressive prioritized voting brings the best accuracy over the one with dimension-wise voting, because of the consideration on extremely low number of inliers.
Conclusions
===========
In this paper, we propose a robust solver designed for visual inertial localization problem, achieving global optimization of the consensus maximization problem with deterministic convergence, even when the percentage of outliers is very high, say 90%. The key step in our solver is the derivation of *translation invariant measurements* for both points and lines, thus decoupling the problem into two smaller subproblems. Then we propose 1D BnB and prioritized progressive voting to find globally optimal rotation and translation respectively, accelerating the search efficiency. The effectiveness of the proposed method is validated on both synthetic and real world dataset.
Derivation of TIMs
==================
With the aid of inertial measurements, the pitch and roll angle between the current query camera frame and the gravity-aligned world reference frame are globally observable, such that the rotation estimation of the query camera with respect to the world can be formulated as $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq.Rwc}
{R_{{\mathcal{W}}{\mathcal{C}}}}&=R_{z}(\alpha)R_{y}(\check{\beta})R_{x}(\check{\gamma})\nonumber\\
&=\begin{bmatrix}
c\alpha & -s\alpha & 0 \\
s\alpha & c\alpha & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 1
\end{bmatrix}
\begin{bmatrix}
c\check{\beta} & 0 & s\check{\beta} \\
0 & 1 & 0 \\
-s\check{\beta} & 0 & c\check{\beta}
\end{bmatrix}
\begin{bmatrix}
1 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & c\check{\gamma} & -s\check{\gamma} \\
0 & s\check{\gamma} & c\check{\gamma}
\end{bmatrix}\nonumber\\
&\triangleq\begin{bmatrix}
a_{11} c\alpha+b_{11} s\alpha & a_{12} c\alpha+b_{12} s\alpha & b_{13} s\alpha \\
a_{21} c\alpha+b_{21} s\alpha & a_{22} c\alpha+b_{22} s\alpha & a_{23} c\alpha\\
a_{31} & a_{32} & a_{33}
\end{bmatrix}\end{aligned}$$ where $\check{\beta}$ and $\check{\gamma}$ denote the observed pitch and roll angle provided by inertial measurements, $\alpha$ denotes the yaw angle to be estimated, $\sin \alpha \triangleq s\alpha$, $\cos \alpha \triangleq c\alpha$. Therefore, the rotation matrix is only determined by the estimation of yaw, which is the same in ${R}$, as $R=R_{{\mathcal{W}}{\mathcal{C}}}^{T}$. Thus the degrees of freedom (DoF) of the rotation matrix estimation can be reduced to 1 with the aid of inertial measurements, that is $$\label{eq.R}
R=R(\alpha)=\begin{bmatrix}
a_{11} c\alpha+b_{11} s\alpha & a_{21} c\alpha+b_{21} s\alpha & a_{31} \\
a_{12} c\alpha+b_{12} s\alpha & a_{22} c\alpha+b_{22} s\alpha & a_{32} \\
b_{13} s\alpha & a_{23} c\alpha & a_{33}
\end{bmatrix}$$
Derivation of point-TIM
-----------------------
The collinearity of each 2D-3D point features is utilized to derive the point-TIM as shown in Fig. \[fig.coordinates\]. Mathematically, given an image key point $u_i$, we have an un-normalized direction vector from the camera center as $$\label{lineeq}
\tilde{u}_i \triangleq \left(
\begin{array}{c}
\tilde{u}_{i,x} \\
\tilde{u}_{i,y} \\
1 \\
\end{array}
\right) = K^{-1}\left(
\begin{array}{c}
u_i \\
1 \\
\end{array}
\right)$$
According to the projection geometry, the optical center of camera frame $C={\bf{0}}_{3\times1}$, the 2D point $\tilde{u}_{1}$ and the corresponding 3D point $p_{1}$ lie on the same line, which is denoted as $\{C,\tilde{u}_{1},{Rp_{1}+t}\}_{L}$. By solving the line equation from the first two points and substituting the third point into the equation, we have $$\label{linep}
\frac{R_1 p_1 + t_x}{\tilde{u}_{1,x}} = \frac{R_2 p_1 + t_y}{\tilde{u}_{1,y}} = R_3 p_1 + t_z$$ where $R\triangleq (R_1^T,R_2^T,R_3^T)^T$ and $t \triangleq (t_x,t_y,t_z)^T$. Based on (\[linep\]), we have two constraints from a correspondence as $$\label{p1constraint1}
\tilde{u}_{1,x}(R_{2}p_{1}+t_{y})-u_{1,y}(R_{1}p_{1}+t_{x})=0$$ $$\label{p1constraint2}
\tilde{u}_{1,x}(R_{3}p_{1}+t_{z})-(R_{1}p_{1}+t_{x})=0$$
![The illustration of 2D-3D point and line features.[]{data-label="fig.coordinates"}](coordinate){width="40.00000%"}
Naturally, given another correspondence $u_2$ and $p_2$, according to $\{C,\tilde{u}_{2},{Rp_{2}+t}\}_{L}$ $$\label{linep2}
\frac{R_1 p_2 + t_x}{\tilde{u}_{2,x}} = \frac{R_2 p_2 + t_y}{\tilde{u}_{2,y}} = R_3 p_2 + t_z$$ Then we can have two more constraints as $$\label{p2constraint1}
\tilde{u}_{2,x}(R_{2}p_{2}+t_{y})-u_{2,y}(R_{1}p_{2}+t_{x})=0$$ $$\label{p2constraint2}
\tilde{u}_{2,x}(R_{3}p_{2}+t_{z})-(R_{1}p_{2}+t_{x})=0$$ Combining (\[p1constraint1\]) - (\[p1constraint2\]), $t_y$ and $t_z$ can be eliminated, then substituted into (\[p2constraint1\]) - (\[p2constraint2\]), $t_x$ can also be eliminated, resulting in an constraint only relating to $R$. Recall (\[eq.R\]), by reorganizing the coefficients, we have the point-TIM as $$\label{tim}
d_p(\alpha) = d_{p,1} \sin \alpha + d_{p,2} \cos \alpha + d_{p,3}$$
Derivation of line-TIM
----------------------
Each line feature correspondence can be represented by a pair of start point and end point of the line segment as shown in Fig. \[fig.coordinates\]. According to the projection geometry, the optical center of the camera, the 2D line segment $(u_{31},u_{32})$ and the 3D line $(p_{3},p_{4})$ lie on the same plane. Then the four points $C$, $u_{31}$, $u_{32}$ and $p_{3}$ are coplanar, denoted as $\{C,u_{31},u_{32},p_{3}\}_{P}$. Similarly, $\{C,u_{31},u_{32},p_{4}\}_{P}$ also holds. By solving the plane equation from the first three points and substituting the fourth point into it, we have: $$\label{sp1}
(\tilde{u}_{31} \times \tilde{u}_{32})^T(Rp_3+t) = 0$$ That is $$\begin{aligned}
\label{lineconstraints1}
&(u_{31,y}-u_{32,y})(R_{1}p_{3}+t_{x})-(u_{31,x}-u_{32,x})(R_{2}p_{3}+t_{y})\nonumber\\
&+(u_{31,x}u_{32,y}-u_{32,x}u_{31,y})(R_{3}p_{3}+t_{z})=0\end{aligned}$$ Similarly, for $\{C,u_{31},u_{32},p_{4}\}_{P}$, we have: $$\label{sp2}
(\tilde{u}_{31} \times \tilde{u}_{32})^T(Rp_4+t) = 0$$ That is $$\begin{aligned}
\label{lineconstraints2}
&(u_{31,y}-u_{32,y})(R_{1}p_{4}+t_{x})-(u_{31,x}-u_{32,x})(R_{2}p_{4}+t_{y})\nonumber\\
&+(u_{31,x}u_{32,y}-u_{32,x}u_{31,y})(R_{3}p_{4}+t_{z})=0\end{aligned}$$ With (\[lineconstraints1\])-(\[lineconstraints2\]), the $t$ can be eliminated resulting in $$\begin{aligned}
\label{lineconstraint}
&[(u_{31,y}-u_{32,y})R_{1}-(u_{31,x}-u_{32,x})R_{2}\nonumber\\
&+(u_{31,x}u_{32,y}-u_{32,x}u_{31,y})R_{3}](p_3-p_4)=0\end{aligned}$$ Recall (\[eq.R\]), (\[lineconstraint\]) can be reorganized to line-TIM as $$\label{timl}
d_l(\alpha) = d_{l,1} \sin \alpha + d_{l,2} \cos \alpha + d_{l,3}$$
Derivation of TIMs’ lower bound
-------------------------------
Recall (\[tim\]) and (\[timl\]), as the forms of point-TIM and line-TIM are the same, we denote them as $d(\alpha)$. That is $$\label{tims}
\begin{split}
d(\alpha) &= d_{1} \sin \alpha + d_{2} \cos \alpha + d_{3} \\
&=\sqrt{d_1^2+d_2^2} (\sin \alpha \cos a_2 + \cos \alpha \sin a_2)+d_3 \\
&=a_1 \sin (\alpha + a_2)+d_3
\end{split}$$ where $a_1=\sqrt{d_1^2+d_2^2}$, $\sin a_2 = \frac{d_2}{a_1}$, $\cos a_2 = \frac{d_1}{a_1}$.
Then the lower bound of $|d(\alpha)|$ on $\mathbb{A}$, denoted as $\underline{d}(\mathbb{A})$, is derived as $$\label{timlb}
\underline{d}(\mathbb{A}) = \min |a_1 \sin(\alpha + a_2) + d_3|$$
Derivation of Translation Bound
===============================
After the rotation estimation, we get the optimal yaw angle $\hat{\alpha}$. As shown in Fig. \[fig.coordinates\], according to $\{C,\tilde{u}_{1},{R(\hat{\alpha})p_{1}+t}\}_{L}$, we have $$\label{pointL1}
\tilde{u}_{1}\times(R(\hat{\alpha})p_{1}+t)=0$$ which is equal to $$\label{pointL12}
\tilde{u}_{1\times}(R(\hat{\alpha})p_{1}+t)=0$$ where $a_{\times}$ denotes the symmetric matrix of vector $a$. Then (\[pointL12\]) can be written as $$\label{pointL123}
\begin{bmatrix}
0 & -1 & \tilde{u}_{1,y} \\
1 & 0 & -\tilde{u}_{1,x} \\
-\tilde{u}_{1,y} & \tilde{u}_{1,x} & 0
\end{bmatrix}
\begin{bmatrix}
t_x+h_1 \\
t_y+h_2 \\
t_z+h_3
\end{bmatrix}=
\begin{bmatrix}
0 \\
0 \\
0
\end{bmatrix}$$ where $R(\hat{\alpha})p_{1}\triangleq(h_1,h_2,h_3)^T$. Then two equations of translation can be derived as $$\label{pointcon11}
-t_y-h_2+\tilde{u}_{1,y}(t_z+h_3)=0$$ $$\label{pointcon12}
t_x+h_1-\tilde{u}_{1,x}(t_z+h_3)=0$$ Similarly, with another point correspondence $\{C,\tilde{u}_{2},{R(\hat{\alpha})p_{2}+t}\}_{L}$, we have $$\label{pointL2}
\begin{bmatrix}
0 & -1 & \tilde{u}_{2,y} \\
1 & 0 & -\tilde{u}_{2,x} \\
-\tilde{u}_{2,y} & \tilde{u}_{2,x} & 0
\end{bmatrix}
\begin{bmatrix}
t_x+h_4 \\
t_y+h_5 \\
t_z+h_6
\end{bmatrix}=
\begin{bmatrix}
0 \\
0 \\
0
\end{bmatrix}$$ where $R(\hat{\alpha})p_{2}\triangleq(h_4,h_5,h_6)^T$. Then we have another two equations as $$\label{pointcon21}
-t_y-h_5+\tilde{u}_{2,y}(t_z+h_6)=0$$ $$\label{pointcon22}
t_x+h_4-\tilde{u}_{2,x}(t_z+h_6)=0$$ Combining (\[pointcon11\])-(\[pointcon12\]) and (\[pointcon21\])-(\[pointcon22\]), the translation can be solved as $$\begin{aligned}
\label{pointresult}
t_x=\frac{\tilde{u}_{1,x}}{\tilde{u}_{1,y}-\tilde{u}_{2,y}}(\tilde{u}_{2,y}(h_6-h_3)+h_2-h_5)-h_1 \\
t_y=\frac{\tilde{u}_{1,y}}{\tilde{u}_{1,y}-\tilde{u}_{2,y}}(\tilde{u}_{2,y}(h_6-h_3)+h_2-h_5)+h_2 \\
t_z=\frac{1}{\tilde{u}_{1,y}-\tilde{u}_{2,y}}(h_2-h_5-\tilde{u}_{1,y}h_3+\tilde{u}_{2,y}h_6)\end{aligned}$$
In addition, the translation can also be solved with one point and one line correspondence. According to (\[sp1\]) $$\label{line1}
(\tilde{u}_{31}\times\tilde{u}_{32})^T(R(\hat{\alpha})p_3+t) = 0$$ we have $$\label{linen}
\tilde{u}_{31} \times\tilde{u}_{32}=
\begin{bmatrix}
\tilde{u}_{1,y}-\tilde{u}_{2,y} \\
\tilde{u}_{1,x}+\tilde{u}_{2,x} \\
\tilde{u}_{1,x}\tilde{u}_{2,y}-\tilde{u}_{2,x}\tilde{u}_{1,y}
\end{bmatrix}
\triangleq
\begin{bmatrix}
n_1 \\
n_2 \\
n_3
\end{bmatrix}$$ Then (\[sp1\]) can be written as $$\label{line11}
\begin{bmatrix}
n_1 & n_2 & n_3
\end{bmatrix}
\begin{bmatrix}
t_x+m_1 \\
t_y+m_2 \\
t_z+m_3
\end{bmatrix}=0$$ where $R(\hat{\alpha})p_3+t\triangleq(m_1,m_2,m_3)^T$. Similarly, with (\[sp2\]), we have $$\label{line21}
\begin{bmatrix}
n_1 & n_2 & n_3
\end{bmatrix}
\begin{bmatrix}
t_x+m_4 \\
t_y+m_5 \\
t_z+m_6
\end{bmatrix}=0$$ where $R(\hat{\alpha})p_4+t\triangleq(m_4,m_5,m_6)^T$. Thus, combining (\[pointcon11\])-(\[pointcon12\]) and (\[line11\])-(\[line21\]), the translation can be solved as $$\begin{aligned}
\label{lineresult}
t_z=&(-n_1\tilde{u}_{1,x}h_3+n_1h_1-n_1m_1-n_2\tilde{u}_{1,y}h_3-n_2h_2 \nonumber\\
&-n_2m_2-n_3m_3)/(n_1\tilde{u}_{1,x}+n_2\tilde{u}_{1,y}+n_3)\end{aligned}$$ $$\begin{aligned}
\label{lineresult2}
t_y=\tilde{u}_{1,y}(t_z+h_3)+h_2 \\
t_x=\tilde{u}_{1,x}(t_z+h_3)-h_1\end{aligned}$$
Recall (\[3d2d\]), there is *unknown but bounded* [@milanese1989estimation] noise on the detected image features, such that $|e_i| < n_i$, and we have $$\label{featurebound}
\underline{u}_i = u_{i}-n_i, \overline{u}_i = u_i+n_i$$ With this feature bound of $u_{i}$, the un-normalized direction vector $\tilde{u_{i}}$ can also be bounded after linear transformations. Then the bound of the derived translation $[\ \underline{t}_{ij},\overline{t}_{ij}\ ]$ can be computed with the following relaxation [@mccormick1976computability] [@sherali1992new]: $$\label{eq.18}
\begin{split}
f&=ab, \ \underline{a}\leq a \leq \overline{a}, \ \underline{b}\leq b \leq \overline{b}, \\
f &\geq \max(\underline{a}b+\underline{b}a-\underline{a}\underline{b},\overline{a}b+\overline{b}a-\overline{a}\overline{b})\\
f &\leq \min(\overline{a}b+\underline{b}a-\overline{a}\underline{b},\underline{a}b+\overline{b}a-\underline{a}\overline{b})
\end{split}$$
Real World Experiment Details
=============================
The dataset employed in real world cross-session visual inertial localization task is YQ-dataset[@ding2018laser]. In the dataset, there are three sessions collected at summer 2017 in three days, denoted as 2017-0823, 2017-0827 and 2017-0828, and one session collected in winter 2018 after snow, denoted as 2018-0129. The 3D map is built with 2017-0823 session and the 3D-2D point feature correspondences are obtained by running visual inertial SLAM [@mur2017visual]. For evaluation, we compute the ground truth of the relative pose between the query camera and the map by aligning the synchronized LiDAR scans. For the pitch and roll angle, we use the estimation generated by visual inertial odometry [@mur2017visual]. To get the 3D-2D feature matches between the query image and the map, we exploited the following steps:
- Obtain the camera poses and the 3D-2D point matches in the map using visual inertial SLAM software [@mur2017visual].
- Run Line3D++ algorithm [@hofer2017efficient] to get the 3D-2D line matches in the map.
- For the query session, we get the 3D-2D points/lines match based on the descriptors of LibVISO2 [@Geiger2011IV] and LBD [@zhang2013efficient].
[^1]: $^{1}$Yanmei Jiao, Yue Wang, Bo Fu, Rong Xiong are with the State Key Laboratory of Industrial Control and Technology, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, P.R. China. $^{2}$Qimeng Tan and Lei Chen are with the Beijing Key Laboratory of Intelligent Space Robotic System Technology and Applications, Beijing Institute of Spacecraft System Engineering, Beijing, P.R. China. $^{3}$Minhang Wang is with the Application Lab, Huawei Incorporated Company, P.R. China. $^{4}$Shoudong Huang is with the Center for Autonomous Systems (CAS), the University of Technology, Sydney, Australia. Yue Wang is the corresponding author [[email protected]]{}.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
author:
-
title: 'Low-Level Augmented Bayesian Optimization for Finding the Best Cloud VM'
---
=1
Cloud Computing; Performance Optimization; Bayesian Optimization; Machine Learning; Low-level Metrics
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: |
Recently, Xie-Cao [@XC] obtained a Second Main Theorem for moving hypersurfaces located in subgeneral position with index which is extended the result of Ru [@R3]. By using some methods due to Son-Tan-Thin [@STT], Quang [@Q2] and Xie-Cao [@XC], we shall give a Schmidt’s Subspace Theorem for moving hypersurface targets in subgeneral position with index intersecting algebraic variety. Our result is a extension the Schmidt’s Subspace Theorem due to Son-Tan-Thin [@STT] and Quang [@Q2].
[*Keywords*]{}: Diophantine approximation, Schmidt’s Subspace Theorem.\
Mathematics Subject Classification 2010. 11J68, 11J25, 11J97.
author:
- 'Tingbin Cao[^1] and Nguyen Van Thin[^2]'
title: 'Schmidt’s subspace theorem for moving hypersurface targets in subgeneral position with index in algebraic variety '
---
Some definitions and result
===========================
Let $k$ be an algebraic number field of degree $d$. Denote $M(k)$ by the set of places (i.e., equivalent classes of absolute values) of $k$ and write $M_{\infty}(k)$ for the set of Archimedean places. From $v \in M(k)$, we choose the normalized absolute value $| . |_{v}$ such that $| . |_{v}=| . |$ on $\Q$ (the standard absolute value) if $v$ is archimedean, whereas for $v$ non-archimedean $|p|_{v}=p^{-1}$ if $v$ lies above the rational prime $p$. Denote by $k_v$ the completion of $k$ with respect to $v$ and by $d_v=[k_v: \Q_v]$ the local degree. We put $\Vert.\Vert_{v}=| . |_{v}^{d_v/d}$. Then norm $||.||_v$ satisfies the following properties:
$(i)$ $||x||_v\ge 0$, with equality if and only if $x=0;$
$(ii)$ $||xy||_v=||x||_v||y||_v$ for all $x, y \in k;$
$(iii)$ $||x_1+\dots+x_n||_v\le B_v^{n_v}\cdot \max \{||x_1||_v, \dots, ||x_n||_v\}$ for all $x_1, \dots, x_n \in k$, $n\in \N$, where $n_v=d_v/d$, $B_v=1$ if $v$ is non-archimedean and $B_v=n$ if $v$ is archimedean.\
Moreover, for each $x\in k\setminus \{0\}$, we have the following product formula: $$\prod_{v\in M(k)}\Vert x\Vert_{v}=1.$$ For $v\in M(k)$, we also extend $\Vert .\Vert_{v}$ to an absolute value on the algebraic closure $\overline{k}_v.$
For $x\in k$, the logarithmic height of $x$ is defined by $h(x)=\sum_{v\in M(k)} \log^{+}\Vert x\Vert_{v} $, where $\log^{+}\Vert x\Vert_{v}= \log \max \{\Vert x\Vert_{v}, 1\}.$ For ${\bf x}=[x_0: \dots : x_M] \in \mathbb P^M(k)$, we denote $x=(x_0,\dots,x_M)\in k^{M+1}.$ We set $\Vert x\Vert_{v}=\max_{0 \le i \le M}\Vert x_i\Vert_{v},$ and define the logarithmic height of ${\bf x}$ by $$\begin{aligned}
\label{ct11s}
h({\bf x})=\sum_{v\in M(k)} \log \Vert x\Vert_{v}.\end{aligned}$$ For a positive integer $d$, we set $$\begin{aligned}
{\mathcal}T_d := \big\{ (i_0,\dots,i_M) \in \N_0^{M+1}:
i_0 + \dots + i_M = d \big\}.\end{aligned}$$ Let $Q$ be a homogeneous polynomial of degree $d$ in $k[x_0,\dots, x_M].$ We write $$\begin{aligned}
Q= \sum\limits_{I \in {\mathcal}T_{d}} a_{I}x^I.\end{aligned}$$ A (fixed) hypersurface $D$ of degree $d$ in $\mathbb P^M(k)$ is the zero set of a homogeneous polynomial $Q,$ that is $$D=\{(x_0:\dots:x_M)\in \mathbb P^M(k): Q(x_0,\dots,x_n)=0\}.$$ Set $\Vert Q\Vert_v:=\sum_{I\in \mathcal T_d}\Vert a_I\Vert_v.$ The height of $Q$ (or $D$) is denoted by $h(Q)$ (or $h(D)$) and given by $$\begin{aligned}
h(Q):=\sum_{v\in M(k)}\log\Vert Q\Vert_v.\end{aligned}$$ Let $D$ be a hypersurface which is defined by the zero of homogeneous polynomial $Q.$ For each $v\in M(k),$ the Weil function $\lambda_{D,v}$ is defined by $$\begin{aligned}
\lambda_{D,v}({\bf x}):=\log\frac{\Vert x\Vert^d_v\cdot \Vert Q\Vert_v}{\Vert Q(x)\Vert_v}, \quad {\bf x}\in \P^M(k)\setminus D.\end{aligned}$$
Let $\Lambda$ be an infinite index set. We call a moving hypersurface $D$ in $\P^M(k)$ of degree $d,$ indexed by $\Lambda$ is collection of hypersurfaces $\{D(\alpha)\}_{\alpha\in\Lambda}$ which are defined by the zero of homogeneous polynomials $\{Q(\alpha)\}_{\alpha\in \Lambda}$ in $k[x_0,\dots,x_M]$ respectively. Then, we can write $Q=\sum_{I\in\mathcal T_d}a_I x^I,$ where $a_I$’s are functions from $\Lambda$ into $k$ having no common zeros points, and called it by moving homogeneous polynomial.
Throughout this paper, we consider an infinite index $\Lambda;$ a set ${\mathcal}Q:=\{D_1,\dots,D_q\}$ of moving hypersurfaces in $\P^M(k),$ indexed by $\Lambda,$ which are defined by the zero of moving homogeneous polynomials $\{Q_1,\dots,Q_1\}$ in $k[x_0,\dots,x_M]$ respectively, an arbitrary projective variety $V\subset\P^M(k)$ of dimension $n$ generated by the homogeneous ideal ${\mathcal}I(V)$. We write $$Q_j= \sum_{I\in \mathcal T_{d_j}}a_{j, I}x^{I}\;(j=1,\dots,q),\;\text{where} \;d_j=\deg Q_j.$$
Let $A\subset\Lambda$ be an infinite subset and denote by $(A,a)$ each set-theoretic map $a: A\to k.$ Denote by $\mathcal R_{A}^{0}$ the set of equivalence classes of pairs $(C,a)$, where $C\subset A$ is a subset with finite complement and $a: C \to k$ is a map; and the equivalence relation is defined as follows: $(C_1, a_1) \sim (C_2, a_2)$ if there exists $C \subset C_1\cap C_2$ such that $C$ has finite complement in $A$ and $a_1|_{C}=a_2|_{C}.$ Then $\mathcal R_{A}^{0}$ has an obvious ring structure. Moreover, we can embed $k$ into $\mathcal R_{A}^{0}$ as constant functions.
\[defi1.2s\] For each $j\in\{1,\dots,q\}$, we write $\mathcal T_{d_j}=\{I_{j,1}, \dots, I_{j, M_{d_j}}\},$ where $M_{d_j}:=\binom{d_j+M}{M}.$ A subset $A\subset \Lambda$ is said to be coherent with respect to ${\mathcal}Q$ if for every polynomial $ P\in k[x_{1,1}, \dots, x_{1, M_{d_1}}, \dots, x_{q,1}, \dots, x_{q, M_{d_q}}] $ that is homogeneous in $x_{j,1}, \dots, x_{j, M_{d_j}}$ for each $j=1, \dots, q$, either\
$ P(a_{1, I_{1,1}}(\alpha), \dots, a_{1, I_{1, M_{d_1}}}(\alpha), \dots, a_{q, I_{q,1}}(\alpha), \dots, a_{q, I_{q, M_{d_q}}}(\alpha))$ vanishes for all $\alpha \in A$ or it vanishes for only finitely many $\alpha \in A.$
By [@RV Lemma 2.1], there exists an infinite coherent subset $A\subset \Lambda$ with respect to ${\mathcal}Q.$ For each $j\in\{1,\dots,q\},$ we fix an index $I_{j}\in{\mathcal}T_{d_j}$ such that $a_{j, I_{j}}\not\equiv 0$ (this means that $a_{j, I_{j}}(\alpha)\ne 0$ for all, but finitely many, $\alpha\in A$), then $\dfrac{a_{j, I}}{a_{j, I_{j}}}$ defines an element of $\mathcal R_{A}^{0}$ for any $I \in \mathcal T_{d_j}$. This element given by the following function: $$\{\alpha \in A: a_{j, I_{j}}(\alpha) \ne 0\} \to k, \quad\alpha \mapsto \frac{a_{j, I}(\alpha)}{a_{j, I_{j}}(\alpha)}.$$ Moreover, by coherent, the subring of $\mathcal R_{A}^{0}$ generated over $k$ by such all elements is an integral domain [@G page 3]. We define $\mathcal R_{A, \mathcal Q}$ to be the field of fractions of that integral domain.
Denote by ${\mathcal}A$ the set of all functions $ \{\alpha \in A: a_{j, I_{j}}(\alpha) \ne 0\} \to k, \quad\alpha \mapsto \frac{a_{j, I}(\alpha)}{a_{j, I_{j}}(\alpha)}$ and $k_{{\mathcal}Q}$ the set of all formal finite sum $\sum_{m=1}^st_m\prod_{i=1}^sc_i^{n_i},$ where $t_m\in k,$ $c_i\in {\mathcal}A, n_i\in\N.$
Each pair $(\widehat b,\widehat c)\in k_{{\mathcal}Q}^2,$ ($\hat c(\alpha)\ne 0$ for all, but finitely many, $\alpha\in A$) defines a set-theoretic function, denoted by $\frac{\hat b}{\hat c}$, from $\{\alpha: \widehat c(\alpha)\ne 0\}$ to $k$, $\frac{\widehat b}{\widehat c}(\alpha):=\frac{\widehat b(\alpha)}{\widehat c(\alpha)}.$ Denote by $\widehat{\mathcal R}_{A, \mathcal Q}$ the set of all such functions. Each element $a\in\mathcal R_{A, \mathcal Q}$ is a class of some functions $\widehat{a}$ in $\widehat{\mathcal R}_{A, \mathcal Q}.$ We call that $\widehat{a}$ is a special representative of $a.$ It is clear that for any two special representatives $\widehat a_1,\widehat a_2$ of the same element $a\in\mathcal R_{A, \mathcal Q},$ we have $\widehat a_1(\alpha)=\widehat a_2(\alpha)$ for all, but finitely many $\alpha\in A.$ For a polynomial $P:=\sum_I a_Ix^I\in\mathcal R_{A,{\mathcal}Q}[x_0, \dots, x_M],$ assume that $\widehat a_I$ is a special representative of $a_I.$ Then $\widehat P:=\sum_I \hat a_Ix^I$ is called a special representative of $P.$ For each $\alpha\in A$ such that all functions $\widehat a_I$’s are well defined at $\alpha,$ we set $\widehat P(\alpha):=\sum_I \hat a_I(\alpha)x^I\in k[x_0,\dots,x_M];$ and we also say that the special representative $\widehat P$ is well defined at $\alpha.$ Note that each special representative $\widehat P$ of $P$ is well defined at all, but finitely many, $\alpha\in A.$ If $\widehat P_1, \widehat P_2$ are two special presentatives of $P,$ then $\widehat P_1(\alpha)= \widehat P_2(\alpha)$ for all, but finitely many $A.$
\[defi1.5s\] A sequence of points $x=[x_0:\dots : x_M]: \Lambda \to V$ is said to be $V-$algebraically non-degenerate with respect to $\mathcal Q$ if for each infinite coherent subset $A\subset \Lambda$ with respect to $\mathcal Q$, there is no homogeneous polynomial $P\in \mathcal R_{A,{\mathcal}Q}[x_0, \dots, x_M] \setminus \mathcal I_{A, {\mathcal}Q}(V)$ such that $\widehat P(\alpha)(x_0(\alpha), \dots, x_M(\alpha)) =0$ for all, but finitely many, $\alpha\in A$ for some (then for all) representative $\widehat P$ of $P,$ where $\mathcal I_{A, {\mathcal}Q}(V)$ is the ideal in $\mathcal R_{A, \mathcal Q}[x_0,\dots,x_M]$ genarated by ${\mathcal}I(V).$
\[new1\] Let $m\ge n$ be a positive integer. We say that the family moving hypersurfaces ${\mathcal}Q$ is in $m$-strictly subgeneral position with respective to $V$ if for any subset $I\subset \{1,\dots,q\}$ with $\# I\le m+1,$ $$\dim \Big(\cap_{i\in I}D_i(\alpha)\cap V(\overline k)\Big)\le m-\#I$$ for all, but finitely many $\alpha\in\Lambda,$ where $\overline k$ is the algebraic closure of $k.$
From Definition \[new1\], we get
\[rm1\] Let $m\ge n$ be a positive integer. The family moving hypersurfaces ${\mathcal}Q$ is in $m$-strictly subgeneral position with respective to $V$ implies that for each $1\le j_0<\dots <j_m \le q, q\ge m+1$, the system of equations $$Q_{j_i} (\alpha)(x_0, \dots, x_M)=0, \hspace{1cm} 0\le i \le m$$ has no solution $(x_0, \dots, x_M)$ satisfying $(x_0:\cdots: x_M) \in V(\overline k),$ for all, but finitely many $\alpha\in\Lambda.$ It means that ${\mathcal}Q$ is in $m$-subgeneral position with respective to $V.$
\[new2\] Let $\kappa$ be a positive integer such that $\kappa\le \dim V.$ We say that the family moving hypersurfaces ${\mathcal}Q$ is in $m$-strictly subgeneral position with index $\kappa$ in $V$ if ${\mathcal}Q$ is in $m$-strictly subgeneral position with respective to $V$ and for any subset $I\subset \{1,\dots,q\}$ such that $\# I\le \kappa,$ $$\text{codim} \Big(\cap_{i\in I}D_i(\alpha)\cap V(\overline k)\Big)\ge \# I$$ for all, but finitely many $\alpha\in\Lambda.$ Here we set $\dim \emptyset=-\infty.$
In 1997, Ru-Vojta [@RV] established the following Schmidt subspace theorem for the case of moving hyperplanes in projective spaces.
[**Theorem A.**]{}
*Let $k$ be a number field and let $S\subset M(k)$ be a finite set containing all archimedean places. Let $\Lambda$ be an infinite index set and let $\mathcal H:=\{H_1, \dots, H_q\}$ be a set of moving hyperplanes in $\mathbb P^{M}(k),$ indexed by $\Lambda.$ Let ${\bf x}=[x_0: \dots: x_M]: \Lambda \to \mathbb P^{M}(k)$ be a sequence of points. Assume that*
$(i)$ ${\bf x}$ is linearly nondegenerate with respect to $\mathcal H,$ which mean, for each infinite coherent subset $A\subset \Lambda$ with respect to ${\mathcal}H,$ $x_0|_A,\dots,x_M|_A$ are linearly independent over ${\mathcal}R_{A,{\mathcal}H},$
$(ii)$ $h(H_j(\alpha))=o(h({\bf x}(\alpha)))$ for all $\alpha\in \Lambda$ and $j=1, \dots, q$ (i.e. for all $\delta>0$, $h(H_j(\alpha))\leq\delta h({\bf x}(\alpha))$ for all, but finitely many, $\alpha\in \Lambda).$
Then, for any $\varepsilon >0,$ there exists an infinite index subset $A\subset \Lambda$ such that $$\sum_{v\in S}\max_K\sum_{J\in K}\lambda_{H_j(\alpha), v}({\bf x}(\alpha)) \le (M+1+\varepsilon)h({\bf x}(\alpha))$$ holds for all $\alpha \in A.$ Here the maximum is taken over all subsets $K$ of $\{1,\dots,q\}$, $\#K=M+1$ such that $H_j(\alpha), j\in K$ are linearly independent over $k$ for each $\alpha\in\Lambda.$
One of the most important developments in recent years in Diophantine approximation is Schmidt’s subspace theorems for fixed hypersurfaces of Corvaja-Zannier [@CZ] and Evertse-Ferretti [@EF; @EF2]. Motivated by their paper, Ru [@R2; @R3] obtained important results on the Second Main Theorem for fixed hypersurfaces. Later, Dethloff-Tan [@DT] generalized these Second Main Theorems of Ru to the case of moving results. Basing on method of Dethloff-Tan [@DT], Chen-Ru-Yan [@CRY3] and Le [@G] extended Theorem A to the case of moving hypersurfaces in the projective spaces. In 2019, Dethloff-Tan [@DT1] extended the result of Ru [@R3] for moving target. Via Vojta’s dictionary, the Second Main Theorem in Nevanlinna theory corresponds to Schmidt’s Subspace Theorem in Diophantine approximation. In 2018, Son-Tan-Thin [@STT] gave the counterpart of Second Main Theorem due to Dethloff-Tan [@DT1] in Diophantine approximation. In 2018, Quang [@Q2] obtainted the Schmidt’s subspace theorem for moving hypersurface in subgeneral position. In 2019, Xie-Cao [@XC] have been obtained the Second Main Theorem for moving hypersurfaces located in subgeneral position with index.
In this paper, by using some methods due to Son-Tan-Thin [@STT] and Quang [@Q2], Xie-Cao [@XC], we give a Schmidt’s Subspace Theorem for moving hypersurfaces in $m$-subgeneral position with index $\kappa$ as follows:
\[Schmidt\] Let $k$ be a number field and let $S \subset M(k)$ be a finite set containing all archimedean places. Let ${\bf x}=[x_0: \dots: x_M]: \Lambda \to V$ be a sequence of points. Assume that
$(i)$ ${\mathcal}Q$ is in $m$-strictly subgeneral position with index $\kappa$ in $V$ and ${\bf x}$ is $V-$ algebraically nondegenerate with respect to $\mathcal Q;$\
par
$(ii)$ $h(D_j(\alpha))=o(h({\bf x}(\alpha)))$ for all $\alpha\in\Lambda$ and $j=1, \dots,q$ (i.e. for all $\delta>0$, $h(D_j(\alpha))\leq\delta h({\bf x}(\alpha))$ for all, but finitely many, $\alpha\in \Lambda).$
Then, for any $\varepsilon >0,$ there exists an infinite index subset $A\subset \Lambda$ such that $$\sum_{v\in S}\sum_{j=1}^{q}d_j^{-1}\lambda_{D_j(\alpha), v}({\bf x}(\alpha)) \le \left(\left(\dfrac{m-n}{\max \{1,\min \{m-n,\kappa\}\}}+1\right)(n+1)+\varepsilon\right)h({\bf x}(\alpha))$$ holds for all $\alpha \in A.$
\[remark\] (i) By replacing $Q_j$ by $Q_j^{\frac{d}{d_j}},$ where $d=\text{lcm}\{d_1,\dots,d_q\},$ in Theorem \[Schmidt\], we may assume that $D_1,\dots,D_q$ have the same degree $d.$
\(ii) By replacing $Q_j= \sum_{I\in \mathcal T_{d}}a_{j, I}x^{I}$ by $Q'_j = \sum\limits_{I \in {\mathcal}T_{d}} \dfrac{a_{jI}}{a_{jI_{j}}}x^I$, in Theorem \[Schmidt\], we may assume that $Q_j\in\mathcal R_{A, \mathcal Q}[x_0,\dots,x_M].$
Our result is a extension the Schmidt’s Subspace Theorem due to Son-Tan-Thin [@STT] and Quang [@Q2].
Some Lemmas
===========
We write $$\begin{aligned}
Q_j = \sum\limits_{I \in {\mathcal}T_{d}} a_{jI}x^I, \quad (j = 1,\dots,q).\end{aligned}$$ Let $A\subset\Lambda$ be an infinity coherent subset with respect to ${\mathcal}Q.$ For each $j\in\{1,\dots,q\},$ we fix an index $I_{j}\in{\mathcal}T_{d}$ such that $a_{j, I_{j}}\not\equiv 0$ (this means that $a_{j, I_{j}}(\alpha)\ne 0$ for all but finitely many $\alpha\in A$), then $\dfrac{a_{jI}}{a_{jI_{j}}}$ defines an element of $\mathcal R_{A}^{0}$ for any $I \in \mathcal T_{d}$. Set $$\begin{aligned}
Q'_j = \sum\limits_{I \in {\mathcal}T_{d}} \dfrac{a_{jI}}{a_{jI_{j}}}x^I, \quad (j = 1,\dots,q).\end{aligned}$$ Let $ t=(\dots, t_{jI},\dots)$ be a family of variables. Set $$\begin{aligned}
\widetilde{Q_j} = \sum\limits_{I \in {\mathcal}T_{d}} t_{jI}x^I\in k[t,x].\end{aligned}$$ We have $\widetilde{Q_j}(\dots,\dfrac{a_{jI}}{a_{jI_{j}}}(\alpha),\dots,x_0,\dots, x_M)=Q'_j(\alpha)(x_0,\dots,x_M)$ for all $\alpha\in A$ outside a finite subset.
Assume that the ideal ${\mathcal}I(V)$ of $V$ is generated by homogeneous polynomials $\mathcal P_1,\dots,\mathcal P_s.$ Since ${\mathcal}Q$ is in $m$-subgeneral position on $V$, for each $J:=\{j_0,\dots,j_m\}\subset\{1,\dots,q\},$ there is a subset $A_J\subset A$ with finite complement such that for all $\alpha\in A_J,$ the homogeneous polynomials $$\mathcal P_1,\dots,\mathcal P_s,Q'_{j_0}(\alpha),\dots,Q'_{j_m}(\alpha)\in k[x_0,\dots,x_M]$$ have no common non-trivial solutions in $\overline{k}^{M+1}.$ Denote by $$_{k[t]}(\mathcal P_1,\dots, \mathcal P_s, \widetilde{Q}_{j_0},\dots,\widetilde{Q}_{j_m})$$ the ideal in the ring of polynomials in $x_0,\dots, x_M$ with coefficients in $k[t]$ generated by $\mathcal P_1,\dots,\mathcal P_s,\widetilde{Q}_{j_0},\dots,\widetilde{Q}_{j_m}.$ A polynomial $\widetilde R$ in $k[t]$ is called an [*inertia form*]{} of the polynomials $$\mathcal P_1,\dots, \mathcal P_s, \widetilde{Q}_{j_0},\dots,\widetilde{Q}_{j_m}$$ if it has the following property: $$\begin{aligned}
x_i^N\cdot \widetilde {R}\in \;_{k[t]}(\mathcal P_1,\dots, \mathcal P_s, \widetilde {Q}_{j_0},\dots,\widetilde{Q}_{j_m})\end{aligned}$$ for $i=0,\dots,M$ and for some non-negative integer $N$ (see e.g. [@Z]). It follows from the definition that the set ${\mathcal}I$ of inertia forms of polynomials $\mathcal P_1,\dots,$ $\mathcal P_s,$ $\widetilde{Q}_{j_0},$ $\dots,$ $\widetilde{Q}_{j_m}$ is an ideal in $k[t].$
It is well known that $(s+m+1)$ homogeneous polynomials $$\mathcal P_i(x_0,\dots,x_M), \widetilde{Q_j}(\dots,t_{jI},\dots,x_0,\dots, x_M), i\in\{1,\dots,s\},$$ $j\in J$ have no common non-trivial solutions in $x_0,\dots,x_M$ for special values $t_{jI}^0$ of $t_{jI}$ if and only if there exists an inertia form $\widetilde {R_J}^{t_{jI}^0}$ such that $\widetilde R_J^{t_{jI}^0}(\dots,t_{jI}^0,\dots)\ne 0$ (see e.g. [@Z page 254]). For each $\alpha\in A_J,$ choose $\widetilde {R_J}^{\alpha}\in{\mathcal}I$ with respect to the special values $t_{jI}^\alpha:= \dfrac{a_{jI}}{a_{jI_{j}}}(\alpha).$ Set $R_J^{\alpha}:=\widetilde R_J^{\alpha}(\dots,\dfrac{a_{jI}}{a_{jI_{j}}},\dots).$ Then $R_J^{\alpha}$ is a special presentative of an element $\mathcal R_{A,{\mathcal}Q}.$ By construction, we have $$\begin{aligned}
\label{t1}
R_J^{\alpha}(\alpha)\ne 0 \;\text{ for all} \;\alpha\in A_J \;(\text{and hence, for all, but finitely many,}\;\alpha\in A).\end{aligned}$$ Since $k[t]$ is Noetherian, ${\mathcal}I$ is generated by finite polynomials $\widetilde{R}_{J_1},\dots,\widetilde{R}_{J_p}.$ For each $\alpha,$ we write $\widetilde {R_J}^{\alpha}=\sum_{\ell=1}^p \widetilde{G}^{\alpha}_\ell\widetilde {R}_{J_\ell},$ $\widetilde G^{\alpha}_{\ell}\in k[t].$ We have that $G^\alpha_{\ell}:=\widetilde G^{\alpha}_\ell(\dots,\dfrac{a_{jI}}{a_{jI_{j}}},\dots),$ and $R_{J\ell}:=\widetilde {R}_{J\ell}(\dots,\dfrac{a_{jI}}{a_{jI_{j}}},\dots)$ are special representatives of elements in $\mathcal R_{A,{\mathcal}Q}.$ It is clear that $R_J^{\alpha}=\sum_{\ell=1}^p G^{\alpha}_{\ell} R_{J\ell}.$ Hence, by (\[t1\]), we have $$\begin{aligned}
0\ne R_J^{\alpha}(\alpha)=\sum_{\ell=1}^pG^\alpha_{\ell} (\alpha) R_{J_\ell}(\alpha)\end{aligned}$$ for all, but finitely many $\alpha\in A.$ Therefore, there is $\ell_0\in\{1,\dots,p\}$ such that $$\begin{aligned}
\label{t2}
R_{J_{\ell_0}}(\alpha)\ne 0 \quad \text{for all, but finitely many}\quad \alpha\in A.\end{aligned}$$ Furthermore, by the definition of the inertia forms, there are a non-negative integer $N,$ polynomials $b_{i\ell}\in\mathcal R_{A, {\mathcal}Q}[x_0, \dots, x_M]$ with $\deg b_{ij_k}=N-d$ and $\deg b_{i\ell}=N-\deg P_\ell$ such that $$\begin{aligned}
\label{ct17s}
R_{J_{\ell_0}}\cdot x_i^{N}=\sum_{k=0}^{m}b_{i j_k}\cdot Q'_{j_k}+\sum_{\ell=1}^{s}b_{i\ell}\cdot \mathcal P_\ell,\end{aligned}$$ for all $0\le i\le M$.
Let ${\bf x}: \Lambda \to V\subset P^{M}(k)$ be a map. A map $(C, a) \in \mathcal R_{A}^{0}$ is called small with respect to ${\bf x}$ if and only if $$h(a(\alpha))=o(h({\bf x}(\alpha))),$$ which means that, for every $\varepsilon >0$, there exists a subset $C_{\varepsilon}\subset C$ with finite complement such that $h(a(\alpha))\le \varepsilon h({\bf x}(\alpha))$ for all $\alpha \in C_{\varepsilon}.$ We denote by $\mathcal K_{\bf x}$ the set of all such small maps. Then, $\mathcal K_{\bf x}$ is subring of $ \mathcal R_{A}^{0}$. It is not an entire ring, however, if $(C, a)\in \mathcal K_x$ and $a(\alpha)\ne 0$ for all but finitely $\alpha \in C$, then we have $(C\setminus \{\alpha: a(\alpha)=0\}, \dfrac{1}{a})\in \mathcal K_{\bf x}.$ Denote by $\mathcal C_{\bf x}$ the set of all positive functions $g$ defined over $\Lambda$ outside a finite subset of $\Lambda$ such that $$\log^{+}(g(\alpha)) =o(h({\bf x}(\alpha))).$$ Then $\mathcal C_{\bf x}$ is a ring. Moreover, if $(C, a)\in \mathcal K_{\bf x}$, then for every $v\in M(k)$, the function $||a||_v: C\to \mathbb R^{+}$ given by $\alpha \mapsto ||a(\alpha)||_v$ belongs to $\mathcal C_{\bf x}$. Furthermore, if $(C, a)\in \mathcal K_{\bf x}$ and $a(\alpha)\ne 0$ for all but finitely $\alpha \in C$, the function $g: \{\alpha|a(\alpha) \ne 0\}\mapsto \dfrac{1}{||a(\alpha)||_v}$ also belongs to $\mathcal C_{\bf x}.$
From (\[t2\]) and (\[ct17s\]), similarly to Lemma 2.2 in [@G], under the assumption of Theorem \[Schmidt\] and Remark \[remark\], we have the following result.
\[lem21s\] Let $A\subset \Lambda$ be coherent with respect to ${\mathcal}Q.$ Suppose that $\mathcal Q$ is in $m-$subgeneral position with respective to $V.$ Then for each $J\subset\{1,\dots,q\}$ with $|J|=m+1,$ there are functions $l_{1, v}, l_{2, v}\in\mathcal C_{\bf x}$ such that $$l_{2, v}(\alpha)||x(\alpha)||_v^{d}\le \max_{j\in J}||Q_j(\alpha)(x(\alpha))||_v\le l_{1, v}(\alpha)||x(\alpha)||_v^{d}$$ for all $\alpha \in A$ ouside finite subset and all $v\in S.$
For each positive integer $\ell$ and for each vector sub-space $W$ in $k[x_0, \dots, x_M]$ (or in $\mathcal R_{A, {\mathcal}Q}[x_0, \dots, x_M]$), we denote by $W_\ell$ the vector space consisting of all homogeneous polynomials in $W$ of degree $\ell$ (and of the zero polynomial).
By the usual theory of Hilbert polynomials, for $N>>0$, we have $$\begin{aligned}
H_V(N)&:=&\dim_k \dfrac{k[x_0, \dots, x_M]_N}{\mathcal I(V)_N}\\
&=&\dim_{\overline {k}} \dfrac{\overline {k}[x_0, \dots, x_M]_N}{\mathcal I(V(\overline k))_N}
=\deg V. \dfrac{N^n}{n!}+O(N^{n-1}).\end{aligned}$$
Using the method in the proof of [@Q2 Lemma 3.1 ] and [@XC Lemma 3.3], we get the result as follow:
\[lm1\] Let $Q_1, \dots, Q_{m+1}$ be homogeneous polynomials in $\mathcal R_{\Lambda}^{0}[x_0, \dots, x_M]$ of the same degree $d\ge 1,$ in $m-$subgeneral position with index $\kappa$ in $V.$ Then for an infinitely subset $A\subset \Lambda$ which is coherent with respect to $\{Q_1,\dots, Q_{m+1}\},$ there exists $n$ homogeneous polynomials $P_1=Q_1,\dots,P_{\kappa}=Q_{\kappa},P_{\kappa+1},\dots, P_{n+1}$ in $\mathcal R_{\Lambda}^{0}[x_0, \dots, x_M]$ of the form $$P_t=\sum_{j=\kappa+1}^{m-n+t}c_{tj}Q_j, c_{tj}\in k,\quad t=\kappa+1, \dots, n+1,$$ such that the system of equations $$P_{t} (\alpha)(x_0, \dots, x_M)=0, \hspace{1cm} 1\le t \le n+1$$ has no solution $(x_0, \dots, x_M)$ satisfying $(x_0:\cdots: x_M) \in V(\overline k),$ for all $\alpha\in\Lambda$ outside a finite subset of $\Lambda.$
We assume that $Q_i\; (1\le i\le m+1)\;$ has the following form: $$Q_i=\sum_{I\in\mathcal T_d}a_{i,I}x^{I}.$$ By the definition of $m$-strictly subgeneral position, there exists an infinite subset $A'$ of $A$ with finite complement such that, for all $\alpha\in A',$ the system of equations $$Q_i(\alpha)(x_0,\dots,x_M)=0,\;\,\, 1\le 1\le m+1,$$ has only the trivial solution $(0,\dots,0)$ in $\overline k.$ We note that $A'$ is coherent with respect to $\{Q_i\}_{i=1}^{m+1}.$ Replacing $A$ by $A'$ if necessary, we may assume that $A'=A.$ We fix $\alpha_0\in A.$ For each homogeneous polynomial $Q\in k[x_0,\dots, x_M],$ we will denote $$D^{*}=\{(x_0:\dots:x_M)\in\mathbb P^M(\overline k): Q(x_0,\dots,x_M)=0\}.$$ Setting $P_1=Q_1,\dots,P_{\kappa}=Q_{\kappa},$ we build $P_{\kappa+1},\dots,Q_{n+1}$ as follows. First we see that $$\dim \left(\cap_{i=1}^{t}D_i^{*}(\alpha_0)\cap V(\overline k)\right)\le m-t\; \text{for}\; t=m-n+\kappa+1,\dots,m+1,$$ where $\dim \emptyset=-\infty$ and for any $1\le l\le \kappa,$ we have $$\begin{aligned}
\dim\Big(\cap_{j=1}^{l}D_j^{*}(\alpha_0)\cap V(\overline k)\Big)=n-l.\end{aligned}$$ Indeed, it is obvious $\dim \Big(\cap_{j=1}^{\kappa}D_j^{*}(\alpha_0)\cap V(\overline k)\Big)\ge n-l,$ and by the definition of $m$-strictly subgeneral position with index $\kappa,$ we get $\dim \Big(\cap_{j=1}^{l}D_j^{*}(\alpha_0)\cap V(\overline k)\Big)\le n-l.$ In particular, we have $$\begin{aligned}
\dim\Big(\cap_{j=1}^{\kappa}D_j^{*}(\alpha_0)\cap V(\overline k)\Big)=n-\kappa.\end{aligned}$$
[**Step 1.**]{} We will construct $P_{\kappa+1}$ as follows. For each irreducible component $\Gamma$ of dimension $n-\kappa$ of $\cap_{j=1}^{\kappa}D_j^{*}(\alpha_0)\cap V(\overline k),$ we put $$\begin{aligned}
V_{1\Gamma}=\Big\{c=(c_{\kappa+1},\dots,c_{m-n+\kappa+1})\in k^{m-n+1},\Gamma\subset D_c^{*}(\alpha_0),\; \text{where}\; Q_c=\sum_{j=\kappa+1}^{m-n+\kappa+1}c_jQ_j\Big\}.\end{aligned}$$ Then $V_{1\Gamma}$ is a subspace of $k^{m-n+1}.$ Since $$\dim \Big(\cap_{i=1}^{m-n+\kappa+1}D_i^{*}(\alpha_0)\cap V(\overline k)\Big)\le n-\kappa-1,$$ there exists $i\in \{\kappa+1,\dots,m-n+\kappa+1\}$ such that $\Gamma\not\subset D_i^{*}(\alpha_0).$ Since the set of irreducible components of dimension $n-\kappa$ of $\cap_{j=1}^{\kappa}D_j^{*}(\alpha_0)\cap V(\overline k)$ is at most countable, we have $$k^{m-n+\kappa}\setminus \cup_{\Gamma}V_{1\Gamma}\ne \emptyset.$$ Hence there exists $(c_{1(\kappa+1)},\dots,c_{1(m-n+\kappa+1)})\in k^{m-n+1}$ such that $\Gamma\not\subset D_{\kappa+1}^{*}(\alpha_0)$ for all irreducible components of dimension $n-\kappa$ of $\cap_{j=1}^{\kappa}D_j^{*}(\alpha_0)\cap V(\overline k),$ where $$P_{\kappa+1}=\sum_{j=\kappa+1}^{m-n+\kappa+1}c_{1(j)}Q_j.$$ This clearly implies that $$\begin{aligned}
\label{m1}
\dim \Big(\cap_{i=1}^{\kappa+1}D_i^{*}(\alpha)\cap V(\overline k)\Big)\le n-\kappa-1.\end{aligned}$$ Certainly, we have $$\begin{aligned}
\label{m2}
\dim \Big(\cap_{i=1}^{\kappa+1}D_i^{*}(\alpha)\cap V(\overline k)\Big)\ge n-\kappa-1.\end{aligned}$$ From (\[m1\]) and (\[m2\]), we get $$\begin{aligned}
\dim \Big(\cap_{i=1}^{\kappa+1}D_i^{*}(\alpha)\cap V(\overline k)\Big)=n-\kappa-1.\end{aligned}$$
[**Step 2.**]{} We will construct $P_{\kappa+2}$ as follows. For each irreducible component $\Gamma'$ of dimension $n-\kappa-1$ of $\cap_{j=1}^{\kappa+1}D_j^{*}(\alpha_0)\cap V(\overline k),$ we put $$\begin{aligned}
V_{1\Gamma'}=\Big\{c=(c_{\kappa+1},\dots,c_{m-n+\kappa+2})\in k^{m-n+2},\Gamma'\subset D_c^{*}(\alpha_0),\; \text{where}\; Q_c=\sum_{j=\kappa+1}^{m-n+\kappa+2}c_jQ_j\Big\}.\end{aligned}$$ Then $V_{1\Gamma'}$ is a subspace of $k^{m-n+2}.$ Since $$\dim \Big(\cap_{i=1}^{m-n+\kappa+2}D_i^{*}(\alpha_0)\cap V(\overline k)\Big)\le n-\kappa-2,$$ there exists $i\in \{\kappa+1,\dots,m-n+\kappa+2\}$ such that $\Gamma\not\subset D_i^{*}(\alpha_0).$ Since the set of irreducible components of dimension $n-\kappa-1$ of $\cap_{j=1}^{\kappa+1}D_j^{*}(\alpha_0)\cap V(\overline k)$ is at most countable, we have $$k^{m-n+\kappa+1}\setminus \cup_{\Gamma'}V_{1\Gamma'}\ne \emptyset.$$ Hence there exists $(c_{2(\kappa+1)},\dots,c_{2(m-n+\kappa+2)})\in k^{m-n+2}$ such that $\Gamma'\not\subset D_{\kappa+2}^{*}(\alpha_0)$ for all irreducible components of dimension $n-\kappa-1$ of $\cap_{j=1}^{\kappa}D_j^{*}(\alpha_0)\cap V(\overline k),$ where $$P_{\kappa+2}=\sum_{j=\kappa+1}^{m-n+\kappa+2}c_{2(j)}Q_j.$$ This clearly implies that $$\dim \Big(\cap_{i=1}^{\kappa+2}D_i^{*}(\alpha_0)\cap V(\overline k)\Big)\le n-\kappa-2$$ and we also have $$\dim \Big(\cap_{i=1}^{\kappa+2}D_i^{*}(\alpha_0)\cap V(\overline k)\Big)= n-\kappa-2.$$
Repeat again the above steps, after $(n+1-\kappa)$-th step, we get the hypersurface $P_{\kappa+1},\dots, P_{n+1}$ satisfying $$\dim \Big(\cap_{i=1}^{t}D_i^{*}(\alpha_0)\cap V(\overline k)\Big)\le n-t$$ for all $t=\kappa+1,\dots,n+1.$ In particular, $$\begin{aligned}
\label{ct1}
\cap_{i=1}^{n+1}D_i^{*}(\alpha_0)\cap V(\overline k)=\emptyset.\end{aligned}$$ We denote $R$ by the inertia form of $\mathcal P_1,\dots,\mathcal P_s,\widetilde{P}_{1},\dots,\widetilde{P}_{n+1}.$ As in (\[t2\]) and (\[ct1\]), we see that $R(\alpha_0)\ne 0.$ By the property coherent of $A,$ it implies that $R(\alpha)\ne 0$ for all $\alpha\in A$ outside a finite set. By property of inertia form, we have $$\begin{aligned}
\label{ct2}
\cap_{i=1}^{n+1}D_i^{*}(\alpha)\cap V(\overline k)=\emptyset\end{aligned}$$ for all $\alpha\in A$ outside a finite set.
Note that $c_{tj}$ does not depend on $\Lambda$ for all $ t=2,\dots, n+1$ and $ j=2, \dots, m+1,$ then $P_t[x_0, \dots, x_M]\in \mathcal R_{A, {\mathcal}Q }[x_0, \dots, x_M] $ for $t=1, \dots, n+1.$ We denote $\mathcal I_{A, {\mathcal}Q}(V)$ the ideal in $\mathcal R_{A, {\mathcal}Q }[x_0, \dots, x_M]$ generated by the elements in $\mathcal I(V).$ It is clear that $\mathcal I_{A, {\mathcal}Q}(V)$ is also the sub-vector space of $\mathcal R_{A, {\mathcal}Q}[x_0, \dots, x_M]$ generated by $\mathcal I (V ).$
We use the lexicographic order in $\N_0^n$ and for $I=(i_1,\dots,i_n),$ set $\Vert I\Vert :=i_1+\cdots+i_n.$
\[dn1\] For each $I=(i_1,\cdots, i_n)\in \N_0^n$ and $N\in\N_0$ with $N\geq d\Vert I\Vert,$ denote by ${\mathcal}L_N^I$ the set of all $\gamma\in\mathcal R_{A, {\mathcal}Q }[x_0,\dots,x_M]_{N-d\Vert I\Vert}$ such that $$\begin{aligned}
P_1^{i_1}\cdots P_n^{i_n}\gamma-
\sum_{E=(e_1,\dots,e_n)>I}P_1^{e_1}\cdots P_n^{e_n}\gamma_E\in \mathcal I_{A, {\mathcal}Q }(V)_N.\end{aligned}$$ for some $\gamma_E\in \mathcal R_{A, {\mathcal}Q} [x_0,\dots,x_M]_{N-d\Vert E\Vert}$.
Denote by ${\mathcal}L^I$ the homogeneous ideal in $\mathcal R_{A, {\mathcal}Q } [x_0,\dots,x_M]$ generated by $\cup_{N\geq d\Vert I\Vert}{\mathcal}L_N^I.$
\[r1\] i) ${\mathcal}L_N^I$ is a $\mathcal R_{A, {\mathcal}Q }$-vector sub-space of $\mathcal R_{A, {\mathcal}Q }[x_0,\dots,x_M]_{N-d\Vert I\Vert},$ and $$({\mathcal}I(V), P_1,\dots,P_n)_{N-d\Vert I\Vert}\subset {\mathcal}L_N^I,$$ where $({\mathcal}I(V), P_1,\dots,P_n)$ is the ideal in $\mathcal R_{A, {\mathcal}Q }[x_0,\dots,x_M]$ generated by ${\mathcal}I(V)\cup\{P_1,\dots,P_n\}.$
ii\) For any $\gamma\in {\mathcal}L_N^I$ and $P\in \mathcal R_{A, {\mathcal}Q }[x_0,\dots,x_M]_k,$ we have $\gamma\cdot P\in{\mathcal}L_{N+k}^I$
iii\) ${\mathcal}L^I\cap \mathcal R_{A, {\mathcal}Q }[x_0,\dots,x_M]_{N-d\Vert I\Vert}={\mathcal}L_N^I.$
iv\) $\frac{\mathcal R_{A, {\mathcal}Q }[x_0, \dots, x_M]}{{\mathcal}L^I}$ is a graded module over the graded ring $\mathcal R_{A, {\mathcal}Q }[x_0,\dots,x_M].$
v\) If $I_1-I_2=(i_{1,1}-i_{2,1}, \dots, i_{1,n}-i_{2, n})\in N_0^{n},$ then ${\mathcal}{L}_{N}^{I_{2}}\subset {\mathcal}{L}_{N+d||I_{1}||-d||I||_2}^{I_{1}}.$ Hence ${\mathcal}L^{I_2}\subset {\mathcal}L^{I_1}.$
Using Definition \[dn1\], by arguments as [@STT], we get the following result.
\[L4s\][@STT] For all $N>>0$ divisible $d,$ there are homogeneous polynomials $\phi_1,$ $\dots,$ $\phi_{H_V(N)}$ in $ \mathcal R_{A, {\mathcal}Q}[x_0,\dots,x_M]_N$ such that they form a basis of the $\mathcal R_{A, {\mathcal}Q}$-vector space $\frac{\mathcal R_{A, {\mathcal}Q}[x_0,\dots,x_M]_N}{\mathcal I_{A, {\mathcal}Q}(V)_N},$ and $$\begin{aligned}
\prod_{j=1}^{H_V(N)}\phi_j-\big(P_{1}\cdots P_{n}\big)^{\frac{\deg V\cdot N^{n+1}}{d\cdot (n+1)!}-u(N)}\cdot P\in\mathcal I_{A, {\mathcal}Q}(V)_N,\end{aligned}$$ where $u(N)$ is a function satisfying $u(N)\leq O(N^n)$, $P \in \mathcal R_{A, {\mathcal}Q}[x_0,\dots,x_M]$ is a homogeneous polynomials of degree $$N\cdot H_V(N)-\frac{n\cdot\deg V\cdot N^{n+1}}{(n+1)!}+u(N)=\frac{\deg V\cdot N^{n+1}}{(n+1)!}+O(N^n).$$
Proof of Theorem \[Schmidt\]
============================
By [@CRY3 Lemma 2.1 ], there exists an infinite index subset $A\subset \Lambda$ which is coherent with respect to $\mathcal Q.$ By Remark \[remark\], we may assume that the polynomials $Q_j$’s have the same degree $d\ge 1$ and their coefficients belong to the field $\mathcal R_{A, {\mathcal}Q}.$ By the fact that for any infinite subset $B$ of $A$, then $B$ is also coherent with respect to $\mathcal Q$ and ${\mathcal}R_{B,{\mathcal}Q}\subset{\mathcal}R_{A,{\mathcal}Q},$ in our proof, we may freely pass to infinite subsets. For simplicity, we still denote these infinite subsets by $A.$ We set $${\mathcal}J=\{(i_1, \dots, i_{m+1}); 1\le i_j\le q\; \text{for}\; j=1, \dots, q, i_1, \dots, i_{m+1}\; \text{distinct}\}.$$ For each $J=(i_1,\dots, i_{m+1})\in {\mathcal}J,$ we denote by $P_{J, 1}\dots, P_{J,n+1}$ the moving homogeneous polynomials obtained in Lemma \[lm1\] with respective to the family of moving hypersurfaces $\{Q_{i_1}, \dots, Q_{i_{m+1}}\}.$ It is easy to see that, for each $v\in S,$ there exists a positive function $h_v\in \mathcal C_{\bf x}$ such that $$\begin{aligned}
\label{ctm1}
||P_{J, t}(x(\alpha))||_v\le h_v(\alpha)\max_{1\le j\le m-n+t}||Q_{i_j}(x(\alpha))||_v\end{aligned}$$ for all $\alpha\in A$ outside a finite subset, for all $t=\kappa+1,\dots, n+1.$ Here, the function $h_v$ may choose common for all $J\in \mathcal J.$ From the assumption, for each $a\in \mathcal R_{A, {\mathcal}Q},$ and $v\in M(k)$, we have, for all $\alpha \in A$, $$\begin{aligned}
\label{ct21s}
\log ||a(\alpha)||_v\le \sum_{v\in M(k)} \log^{+}||a(\alpha)||_v=h(a(\alpha))\le o(h(x(\alpha))).\end{aligned}$$ For each $v\in S$, and $\alpha \in A$, there exist a subset $J(v, \alpha)=\{i_1(v, \alpha), \dots, i_{q}(v, \alpha)\}$ of $\{1,\dots,q\}$ such that $$\begin{aligned}
||Q_{i_1(v, \alpha)}(\alpha)(x(\alpha))||_v\le ||Q_{i_2(v, \alpha)}(\alpha)(x(\alpha))||_v \dots& \le ||Q_{i_{q}(v, \alpha)}(\alpha)(x(\alpha))||_v.\end{aligned}$$ We have $J(v, \alpha)=(i_1(v, \alpha), \dots, i_{m+1}(v, \alpha))\subset \mathcal J.$ Denote by $P_{J(v,\alpha), 1}, \dots, P_{J(v,alpha),n+1}$ by the moving homogeneous polynomials obtained in Lemma \[lm1\] and by $D_{J(v,\alpha), j}$ the hypersurface defined by $P_{J(v,\alpha), j},$ $j=1,\dots,n+1.$ Note that, we may freely pass to infinite subsets, then we may assume $D_{J(v, \alpha),1}, \dots, D_{J(v, \alpha),n+1}$ are in general position with respective $V.$ Apply to Lemma \[lem21s\] for $\mathcal Q=\{D_{J(v, \alpha),1}, \dots, D_{J(v, \alpha),n+1}\},$ and using (\[ctm1\]), there exist functions $g_{0, v}^{J(v, \alpha)}, g_v^{J(v, \alpha)} \in \mathcal C_{\bf x}$ (depend on $l_{2, v}$) such that $$\begin{aligned}
\label{ctm2}
||x(\alpha)||_{v}^{d}\le g_{0, v}^{J(v, \alpha)}(\alpha)\max_{1\le j\le n+1}||P_{J(v, \alpha), j}(\alpha)(x(\alpha))||_v\le g_v^{J(v, \alpha)}(\alpha) ||Q_{i_{m+1}}(\alpha)(x(\alpha))||_v.\end{aligned}$$ Therefore, from (\[ctm2\]), we get $$\begin{aligned}
\label{ctm3}
&&\prod_{i=1}^{q}\dfrac{||x(\alpha)||_{v}^{d}}{||Q_{i}(\alpha)(x(\alpha))||_v}\\\nonumber
&\le& (g_v^{J(v, \alpha)})^{q-m}(\alpha)\prod_{j=1}^{m}\dfrac{||x(\alpha)||_{v}^{d}}{||Q_{i_j(v, \alpha)}(\alpha)(x(\alpha))||_v}
\notag\\\nonumber
&=&(g_v^{J(v, \alpha)})^{q-m}(\alpha)\dfrac{||x(\alpha)||_{v}^{md}}{\prod_{j=1}^{\kappa}||Q_{i_j(v, \alpha)}(\alpha)(x(\alpha))||_v\prod_{j=\kappa+1}^{m-n+\kappa}||Q_{i_j(v, \alpha)}(\alpha)(x(\alpha))||_v}\\\nonumber
&&\times \dfrac{1}{\prod_{j=m-n+\kappa+1}^{m}||Q_{i_j(v, \alpha)}(\alpha)(x(\alpha))||_v}\notag\\\nonumber
&\le& (g_v^{J(v, \alpha)})^{q-m}(\alpha)h_v^{n-\kappa-1}(\alpha)\dfrac{||x(\alpha)||_{v}^{md}}{
\prod_{j=1}^{n}||P_{J(v, \alpha), j}(\alpha)(x(\alpha))||_v\prod_{j=\kappa+1}^{m-n+\kappa}||Q_{i_j(v, \alpha)}(\alpha)(x(\alpha))||_v}.\end{aligned}$$
From (\[ctm3\]), we get $$\begin{aligned}
\label{a1}
\sum_{i=1}^{q}\lambda_{D_i(\alpha),v}({\bf x}(\alpha))\le \sum_{j=1}^{n}\lambda_{D_{J(v,\alpha)},j,v}({\bf x}(\alpha))+\sum_{j=1}^{m-n}\lambda_{D_{J(v,\alpha)},j,v}({\bf x}(\alpha))+o(h({\bf x}(\alpha)))\end{aligned}$$ if $m-n\le \kappa$ and $$\begin{aligned}
\label{a2}
&&\sum_{i=1}^{q}\lambda_{D_i(\alpha),v}({\bf x}(\alpha))\notag\\&\le& \sum_{j=1}^{n}\lambda_{D_{J(v,\alpha)},j,v}({\bf x}(\alpha))+\sum_{j=\kappa+1}^{m-n+\kappa}\lambda_{D_{i_j(v,\alpha),v}(\alpha)}({\bf x}(\alpha))\notag\\
&\le& \sum_{j=1}^{n}\lambda_{D_{J(v,\alpha)},j,v}({\bf x}(\alpha))+\sum_{j=\kappa+1}^{m-n+\kappa}\lambda_{D_{i_j(v,\alpha),v}(\alpha)}({\bf x}(\alpha))
+o(h({\bf x}(\alpha)))\notag\\
&\le& \sum_{j=1}^{n}\lambda_{D_{J(v,\alpha)},j,v}({\bf x}(\alpha))+\dfrac{m-n}{\kappa}\sum_{j=\kappa+1}^{2\kappa}\lambda_{D_{i_j(v,\alpha),v}(\alpha)}({\bf x}(\alpha))
+o(h({\bf x}(\alpha)))\notag\\
&=&\sum_{j=1}^{n}\lambda_{D_{J(v,\alpha)},j,v}({\bf x}(\alpha))+\dfrac{m-n}{\kappa}\sum_{j=1}^{\kappa}\lambda_{D_{J(v,\alpha)},j,v}({\bf x}(\alpha))
+o(h({\bf x}(\alpha)))\end{aligned}$$ if $m-n\ge\kappa.$ Combine (\[a1\]) and (\[a2\]), we get $$\begin{aligned}
\label{a3}
\sum_{i=1}^{q}\lambda_{D_i(\alpha),v}({\bf x}(\alpha))&\le& \sum_{j=1}^{n}\lambda_{D_{J(v,\alpha)},j,v}({\bf x}(\alpha))+o(h({\bf x}(\alpha)))\notag\\&&+\dfrac{m-n}{\max\{1,\min \{m-n,\kappa\}\}}\sum_{j=1}^{n}\lambda_{D_{J(v,\alpha)},j,v}({\bf x}(\alpha)).\end{aligned}$$ From (\[a3\]), we obtain $$\begin{aligned}
&\log \prod_{j=1}^{q}\dfrac{||x(\alpha)||_v^{d}}{||Q_j(\alpha)(x(\alpha))||_v}\\
&\le \left(\dfrac{m-n}{\max\{1,\min \{m-n,\kappa\}\}}+1\right)\log \prod_{j=1}^{n}\dfrac{||x(\alpha)||_v^{d}}{||P_{J(v, \alpha), j}(\alpha)(x(\alpha))||_v}+o(h({\bf x}(\alpha))).\end{aligned}$$ This implies $$\begin{aligned}
\label{ct22s}
&&\log \prod_{j=1}^{q}||Q_j(\alpha)(x(\alpha))||_v\\&\ge& \left(q-\left(\dfrac{m-n}{\max\{1,\min \{m-n,\kappa\}\}}+1\right)n\right)d\log ||x(\alpha)||_v\notag\\
&&+(\dfrac{m-n}{\max\{1,\min \{m-n,\kappa\}\}}+1)\log \prod_{j=1}^{n}||P_{J(v, \alpha), j}(\alpha)(x(\alpha))||_v+o(h({\bf x}(\alpha)))\notag.\end{aligned}$$
By Lemma \[L4s\], there exist homogeneous polynomials $\phi_1^{J(v, \alpha)}, \dots, \phi_{H_V(N)}^{J(v, \alpha)}$(depend on $J(v, \alpha)$) in $\mathcal R_{A, {\mathcal}Q}[x_0, \dots, x_M]_N$ and functions $u(N), v(N)$ (common for all $J(v,\alpha))$ such that $\{\phi_i^{J(v, \alpha)}\}$ a basis of $\mathcal R_{A, {\mathcal}Q}-$ vector space $\dfrac{\mathcal R_{A, {\mathcal}Q}[x_0, \dots, x_M]_N}{\mathcal I_{A, {\mathcal}Q}(V)_N}$ and $$\prod_{\ell=1}^{H_V(N)}\phi_\ell^{J(v, \alpha)}-(P_{J(v,\alpha), 1}\dots P_{J(v, \alpha), n})^{\dfrac{\deg V \cdot N^{n+1}}{d(n+1)!}-u(N)}P_{J(v,\alpha)} \in \mathcal I_{A, {\mathcal}Q}(V)_N,$$ where $P_{J(v,\alpha)}\in \mathcal R_{A, {\mathcal}Q}[x_0,\dots,x_M]$ is a homogeneous polynomials of degree $\frac{\deg V\cdot N^{n+1}}{(n+1)!}+v(N), v(N)=O(N^n).$ Thus, for all ${\bf x}(\alpha) \in V(k)$, we have $$\begin{aligned}
\prod_{\ell=1}^{H_V(N)}\phi_\ell^{J(v, \alpha)}(\alpha)(x(\alpha))=\Big(\prod_{i=1}^nP_{J(v,\alpha), i}(\alpha)(x(\alpha))\Big)^{\dfrac{\deg V \cdot N^{n+1}}{d(n+1)!}-u(N)}P_{J(v,\alpha)}(\alpha)(x(\alpha)) .\end{aligned}$$
On the other hand, it is easy to see that there exist $h_{J(v, \alpha)}\in \mathcal C_{\bf x}$ such that $$\begin{aligned}
&&||P_{J(v,\alpha)}(\alpha)(x(\alpha))||_v \\&\leq& ||x(\alpha)||_v^{\deg P_{J(v,\alpha)}}h_{J(v, \alpha)}(\alpha)\\
&=&||x(\alpha)||_v^{\frac{\deg V\cdot N^{n+1}}{(n+1)!}+v(N)}h_{J(v, \alpha)}(\alpha).\end{aligned}$$ Therefore, $$\begin{aligned}
&&\log \prod_{\ell=1}^{H_V(N)}||\phi_\ell^{J(v, \alpha)}(\alpha)(x(\alpha))||_v\\
&\leq&\Big( \dfrac{\deg V . N^{n+1}}{d(n+1)!}-u(N)\Big)\cdot\log ||\prod_{i=1}^nP_{J(v,\alpha), i}(\alpha)(x(\alpha))||_v\\
&&+\log^+ h_{J(v, \alpha)}(\alpha)+( \dfrac{\deg V . N^{n+1}}{(n+1)!}+v(N))\log ||x(\alpha)||_v\end{aligned}$$ This implies that there are functions $\omega_1(N),\omega_2(N)\leq O(\frac{1}{N})$ such that $$\begin{aligned}
\label{ct23s}
&&\log ||\prod_{i=1}^nP_{J(v,\alpha), i}(\alpha)(x(\alpha))||_v\notag\\&\geq& \Big(\dfrac{d(n+1)!}{\deg V . N^{n+1}}+\omega_1(N) \Big)\cdot\log \prod_{\ell=1}^{H_V(N)}||\phi_\ell^{J(v, \alpha)}(\alpha)(x(\alpha))||_v \notag\\
&&-\Big(\dfrac{d(n+1)!}{\deg V . N^{n+1}}+\omega_1(N) \Big)\log ^+ h_{J(v, \alpha)}(\alpha)-(d+\omega_2(N))\log ||x(\alpha)||_v.\end{aligned}$$
By (\[ct22s\]) and (\[ct23s\]), we have $$\begin{aligned}
\label{ct26s}
&&\log \prod_{j=1}^{q}||Q_j(\alpha)(x(\alpha))||_v\\&\ge& \left(q-\left(\dfrac{m-n}{\max\{1,\min \{m-n,\kappa\}\}}+1\right)(n+1)\right)d\log ||x(\alpha)||_v\notag\\
&&+\left(\dfrac{m-n}{\max\{1,\min \{m-n,\kappa\}\}}+1\right)\Big(\Big(\dfrac{d(n+1)!}{\deg V . N^{n+1}}+\omega_1(N)\Big)\notag\\&&\times\log \prod_{\ell=1}^{H_V(N)}||\phi_\ell^{J(v, \alpha)}(\alpha)(x(\alpha))||_v \notag\\
&&-\Big(\dfrac{d(n+1)!}{\deg V . N^{n+1}}+\omega_1(N) \Big)\log^+ h_{J(v, \alpha)}(\alpha)-\omega_2(N)\log ||x(\alpha)||_v\Big)+o(h({\bf x}(\alpha)))\notag.\end{aligned}$$
We fix homogeneous polynomials $\Phi_1, \dots, \Phi_{H_V(N)} \in \mathcal R_{A, \{Q_j\}_{j=1}^{q}}[x_0, \dots, x_M]_N$ such that they form a basis of $\mathcal R_{A, {\mathcal}Q}-$ vector space $\dfrac{\mathcal R_{A, {\mathcal}Q}[x_0, \dots, x_M]_N}{{{\mathcal I}_{A, {\mathcal}Q}(V)}_N}.$ Then, there exist homogeneous linear polynomials $$L_1^{J(v, \alpha)}, \dots, L_{H_V(N)}^{J(v, \alpha)}\in \mathcal R_{A, {\mathcal}Q}[y_1, \dots, y_{H_V(N)}]$$ such that they are linear independent over $\mathcal R_{A, \{Q_j\}_{j=1}^{q}}$ and $$\phi_\ell^{J(v, \alpha)}-L_\ell^{J(v,\alpha)}(\Phi_1, \dots, \Phi_{H_V(N)}) \in \mathcal I_{A, {\mathcal}Q}(V)_N,$$ for all $\ell=1, \dots, H_V(N).$ It is clear that $h(L_\ell^{J(v, \alpha)}(\beta))=o(h(x(\beta))), \beta\in A$ and $A$ is coherent with respect to $\{L_\ell\}_{\ell=1}^{H_V(N)}.$
We have, $$\begin{aligned}
\label{ct24s}
\prod_{\ell=1}^{H_V(N)}||\phi_\ell^{J(v, \alpha)}(\alpha)(x(\alpha))||_v=\prod_{\ell=1}^{H_V(N)}||L_\ell^{J(v, \alpha)}(\Phi_1, \dots, \Phi_{H_V(N)})(\alpha)(x(\alpha))||_v.\end{aligned}$$ We write $$L_\ell^{J(v, \alpha)}(y_1, \dots, y_{H_V(N)})=\sum_{s=1}^{H_V(N)}g_{\ell r}y_s, \quad g_{\ell s}\in\mathcal R_{A, {\mathcal}Q}.$$ Since $L_1^{J(v, \alpha)}, \dots, L_{H_N(V)}^{J(v, \alpha)}$ are linear independent over $\mathcal R_{A, {\mathcal}Q},$ we have $\det (g_{\ell s})\ne 0\in \mathcal R_{A,{\mathcal}Q}.$ Thus, due to coherent property of $A,$ $\det(g_{\ell s})(\beta)\ne 0$ for all $\beta\in A$, outside a finite subset of $A.$ By passing to an infinite subset if necessary, we may assume that $L_1^{J(v,\alpha)}(\beta),\dots,L_{H_V(N)}^{J(v,\alpha)}(\beta)$ are lineraly independent over $k$ for all $\beta\in A.$
Now we consider the sequence of points $F(\alpha)=[\Phi_1(x(\alpha)), \dots, \Phi_{H_N(V)}(x(\alpha))]$ from $A$ to $\P^{H_V(N)-1}(k)$ and moving hyperplanes ${\mathcal}L:=\{L_1^{J(v, \alpha)}, \dots, L_{H_N(V)}^{J(v, \alpha)}\}$ in $\P^{H_V(N)-1}(k),$ indexed by $A.$ We claim that $F$ is linearly nondegenerate with respect to ${\mathcal}L.$ Indeed, ortherwise, then there is a linear form $L\in{\mathcal}R_{B, {\mathcal}L}[y_1,\dots, y_{H_N(V)}]$ for some infinite coherent subset $B\subset A,$ such that $L(F)|_B\equiv 0$ in $B,$ which contradicts to the assumption that $x$ is algebraically nondegenerate with respect to ${\mathcal}Q.$
By Theorem A, for any $\epsilon >0,$ there is an infinite subset of $A$ (common for all $J(v,\alpha)),$ denoted again by $A$, such that $$\begin{aligned}
\label{ct25s}
\sum_{v\in S} \log \prod_{\ell=1}^{H_V(N)}\dfrac{||F(\alpha)||_v||L_\ell^{J(v, \alpha)}(\alpha)||_v}{||L_\ell^{J(v, \alpha)}(\alpha)(F(\alpha))||_v}\le (H_V(N)+\epsilon)h(F(\alpha)),\end{aligned}$$ for all $\alpha \in A.$
Combining with (\[ct26s\]) and (\[ct25s\]) we have $$\begin{aligned}
\label{ct27s}
&&\sum_{v\in S}\sum_{j=1}^{q}\log \dfrac{||x(\alpha)||_v^{d}}{||Q_j(\alpha)(x(\alpha))||_v}\notag\\
&\le&\left(\dfrac{m-n}{\max\{1,\min \{m-n,\kappa\}\}}+1\right)(n+1)d \sum_{v\in S}\log ||x(\alpha)||_v\notag+\omega_2(N)\sum_{v\in S}\log ||x(\alpha))||_v\notag\\
&&+\left(\dfrac{m-n}{\max\{1,\min \{m-n,\kappa\}\}}+1\right)(\dfrac{d(n+1)!}{\deg V \cdot N^{n+1}}+\omega_1(N))\notag\\
&&\times\sum_{v\in S}\log \prod_{\ell=1}^{H_V(N)}\dfrac{||F(\alpha)||_v||L_\ell^{J(v,\alpha)}(\alpha)||_v}{||L_\ell^{J(v, \alpha)}(\alpha)(x(\alpha))||_v}\notag\\
&&-H_V(N)\left(\dfrac{m-n}{\max\{1,\min \{m-n,\kappa\}\}}+1\right)\left(\dfrac{d(n+1)!}{\deg V \cdot N^{n+1}}+\omega_1(N)\right)\sum_{v\in S}\log ||F(\alpha)||_v\notag\\
&&+o(h(x(\alpha))).\end{aligned}$$ Since the above inequality is independent of the choice of components of ${\bf x}(\alpha)$, we can choose the components of ${\bf x}(\alpha)$ being $S$-integers so that $$\begin{aligned}
\label{ctm4}
\sum_{v\in S}\log ||x(\alpha)||_v&=&h({\bf x}(\alpha))+O(1), \text{and}\notag\\
\sum_{v\in S}\log\Vert F(\alpha)\Vert_v&\le& h(F(\alpha))+O(1) \le Nh({\bf x}(\alpha))+O(1).\end{aligned}$$
Combining with (\[ct27s\]) and (\[ctm4\]), we obtain $$\begin{aligned}
&&\sum_{v\in S}\sum_{j=1}^{q}\log \dfrac{||x(\alpha)||_v^{d}}{||Q_j(\alpha)(x(\alpha))||_v}\\&\le& \left(\dfrac{m-n}{\max\{1,\min \{m-n,\kappa\}\}}+1\right)(n+1)dh({\bf x}(\alpha))+\omega_2(N) h({\bf x}(\alpha))\\
&&+\left(\dfrac{m-n}{\max\{1,\min \{m-n,\kappa\}\}}+1\right)\Big(\dfrac{d(n+1)!}{\deg V \cdot N^{n+1}}+\omega_1(N)\Big)(H_V(N)+\epsilon)h(F(\alpha))\\
&&-H_V(N)\left(\dfrac{m-n}{\max\{1,\min \{m-n,\kappa\}\}}+1\right)\Big(\dfrac{d(n+1)!}{\deg V \cdot N^{n+1}}+\omega_1(N)\Big)h(F(\alpha))\\
&&+o(h({\bf x}(\alpha)).\end{aligned}$$ Hence, we obtain $$\begin{aligned}
\label{ct28s}
&&\sum_{v\in S}\sum_{j=1}^{q}\log \dfrac{||x(\alpha)||_v^{d}||Q_j(\alpha)||_v}{||Q_j(\alpha)(x(\alpha))||_v}\\&\le& \left(\dfrac{m-n}{\max\{1,\min \{m-n,\kappa\}\}}+1\right)(n+1)dh({\bf x}(\alpha))+\omega_2(N)h({\bf x}(\alpha))\notag\\
&&+\epsilon\left(\dfrac{m-n}{\max\{1,\min \{m-n,\kappa\}\}}+1\right)\Big(\dfrac{d(n+1)!}{\deg V . N^{n+1}}+\omega_1(N)\Big)h(F(\alpha))+o(h({\bf x}(\alpha)))\notag.\end{aligned}$$ Here, we note that $h(D_j(\alpha))=o(h({\bf x}(\alpha)))$ and there is only finite points ${\bf x}$ such that $h({\bf x})$ is bounded, combining (\[ctm4\]) and (\[ct28s\]), for any $\varepsilon>0,$ by our choice with $\omega_1,\omega_2$ for $N$ large enough, we get $$\begin{aligned}
\sum_{v\in S}\sum_{j=1}^{q}\log \dfrac{||x(\alpha)||_v^{d}||Q_j(\alpha)||_v}{||Q_j(\alpha)(x(\alpha))||_v}\le \left(\left(\dfrac{m-n}{\max\{1,\min \{m-n,\kappa\}\}}+1\right)(n+1)+\varepsilon\right)d h({\bf x}(\alpha)),\end{aligned}$$ for all $\alpha\in A$ outside finite set. This completes the proof of Theorem \[Schmidt\].
[99]{} Z. Chen, M. Ru, and Q. Yan, *The degenerated second main theorem and Schmidt’s subspace theorem*, Sci. China Math. **55** (2012), 1367-1380.
Z. Chen, M. Ru, and Q. Yan, *Schmidt’s subspace theorem with moving targets*, Internat. Math. Res. Notices **15**(2015), no. 1, 6305-6329, 2015.
G. Dethloff, and T. V. Tan, *Holomorphic curves into algebraic varieties intersecting moving hypersurface targets*, To appear in Acta Math. Vietnamica (2019), Doi: 10.1007/s40306-019-00336-3
P. Corvaja and U. Zannier, *On a general Thue’s equation*, Amer. J. Math. **126** (2004), 1033-1055.
G. Dethloff and T. V. Tan, *A second main theorem for moving hypersurface targets*, Houston J. Math. **37** (2011), 79-111.
J. H. Evertse and R. G. Ferretti, *Diophantine inequalities on projective varieties*, Internat. Math. Res. Notices **25**(2002), 1295-1330.
J. H. Evertse and R. G. Ferretti, *A generalization of the subspace theorem with polynomials of higher degree*, Developments in Mathematics, **16** (2008), 175-198, Springer-Verlag, New York.
G. Le, *Schmidt’s subspace theorem with moving hypersurfaces*, Int. J. Number Theory **11**(2015), 139-158.
S. D. Quang, *Schmidt’s subspace theorem for moving hypersurface in subgeneral position*, Int. J. Number Theory **14**(2018), 103-121, 2018.
M. Ru, *A defect relation for holomorphic curves intersecting hypersurfaces*, Amer. J. Math. **126**(2004), 215-226.
M. Ru, *Holomorphic curves into algebraic varieties*, Ann of Math. **169**(2009), 255-267.
M. Ru and P. Vojta, *Schmidt’s subspace theorem with moving targets*, Invent. Math. **127**(1997), 51-65.
N. T. Son, T. V. Tan and N. V. Thin, Schmidt’s subspace theorem for moving hypersurface targets, J. Number Theory [**186**]{}(2018), 346-369.
O. Zariski, *Generalized weight properties of the resultant of $n+1$ polynomials in $n$ indeterminates*, Trans. AMS **41**(1937), 249-265.
L. B. Xie and T. B. Cao, *Second Main Theorem for holomorphic curves into algebraic varieties intersecting moving hypersurfaces targets*, Arxiv: 1908.05844v2.
Tingbin Cao\
Department of Mathematics\
Nanchang University\
Jiangxi 330031, P. R. China\
e-mail: [email protected]\
Nguyen Van Thin\
Department of Mathematics\
Thai Nguyen University of Education\
Luong Ngoc Quyen Street, Thai Nguyen city, Vietnam.\
e-mail: [email protected]\
[^1]: The first author is supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (\#11871260).
[^2]: Corresponding author: Nguyen Van Thin.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
author:
- 'N.D. Christensen, P. de Aquino, N. Deutschmann, C. Duhr, B. Fuks, C. Garcia-Cely, O. Mattelaer, K. Mawatari, B. Oexl, Y. Takaesu'
bibliography:
- 'library.bib'
date: 'Received: date / Accepted: date'
title: 'Simulating spin-$\mathbf{{\frac{3}{2}}}$ particles at colliders'
---
\
Introduction {#sec:intro}
============
Spin-$\mathbf{{\frac{3}{2}}}$ implementation {#sec:implement}
============================================
[FeynRules]{} {#sec:fr}
-------------
fr.tex
[ALOHA]{} {#sec:aloha}
---------
aloha.tex
[MadGraph 5]{}
--------------
mg5.tex
[CalcHEP]{}
-----------
calchep.tex
\[sec:pheno\]Physics applications
=================================
Gravitino {#sec:gravitino}
---------
gravitino.tex
Top-quark excitation {#sec:top}
--------------------
top.tex
Angular distributions for a spin-$\mathbf{{\frac{3}{2}}}$ particle\[sec:angular distributions\]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
wigner.tex
Summary {#sec:summary}
=======
summary.tex
[*Acknowledgements*]{} We would like to thank Fabio Maltoni for discussions in the early stage of the project. N.D.C. would like to thank Nicholas Setzer and Daniel Salmon for helpful discussions. N.D.C. was supported in part by the LHC-TI under U.S. National Science Foundation, grant NSF-PHY-0705682, by PITT PACC, and by the U.S. Department of Energy under grant No. DE-FG02-95ER40896. PdA, KM and BO are supported inpart by the Belgian Federal Science Policy Office through the Interuniversity Attraction Pole P7/37, in part by the “FWO-Vlaanderen" through theproject G.0114.10N, and in part by the Strategic Research Program “High Energy Physics" and the Research Council of the Vrije Universiteit Brussel. O.M. is a fellow of the Belgian American Education Foundation. His work is partially supported by the IISN MadGraph convention 4.4511.10. B.F. has been partially supported by the Theory-LHC-France initiative of the CNRS/IN2P3, by the French ANR 12 JS05 002 01 BATS@LHC and by the MCnet FP7 Marie Curie Initial Training Network. C.D. is supported by the ERC grant “IterQCD”. C.G. is supported by the Graduiertenkolleg “Particle Physics at the Energy Frontier of New Phenomena”. Y.T. is supported by the Korea Neutrino Research Center which is established by the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) grant funded by the Korea government (MSIP) (No. 2009-0083526).
\[sec:app:conventions\]Conventions
==================================
conventions.tex
\[sec:app:polarization\]Review of spin
======================================
polarization\_app.tex
\[sec:app:helgrav\]Helicity amplitudes for gravitino pair-produciton
====================================================================
helgrav.tex
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'The role of the electron diffusion on the stability of a Townsend discharge is investigated. It is obtained, that electron diffusion modifies the condition of the steady self-sustenance of the discharge, and make discharge unstable.'
author:
- 'V.V. Mikhailenko'
- 'H.J. Lee'
- 'V.S. Mikhailenko'
title: Diffusive instability of a Townsend discharge
---
Introduction
============
There has been considerable interest in non-thermal atmospheric pressure glow discharges over last time due to the increased variety of their industrial applications[@Fridman; @Lee]. The basic feature of the non-thermal discharges is that majority of the energy of the applied electric field goes into electrons, instead of heating the entire gas in the discharge cell. Numerous experiments show that depending on the parameters of the discharge, atmospheric pressure glow discharge is realized in two forms: a Townsend and glow discharges. A Townsend discharge is the simplest type of glow discharge. It is characterized by the absence of quasi-neutral plasma – the absolute value of the ion density exceeds much that of the electron density. The applied electric field is weakly disturbed by spatial charge and the discharge current is governed mainly by the processes of the electron emission from the cathode. The current of a Townsend discharge is only limited by the external circuit and when the space charge in a Townsend discharge becomes large enough to cause a significant disturbance of the applied field, the transition to glow discharge occurs.
The physics of space charge driven transitions of a Townsend discharge to subnormal, normal and further to abnormal glow has drown considerable attention of the discharge investigating community (Refs.[@Melekin]–[@Amiranashvili] and references therein). Numerous experimental, analytical and numerical investigations provide deep insight into amazing variety of spatio-temporal processes, which are responsible for such transitions. In this paper, the stability of a Townsend discharge is investigated for the unexplored yet regimes far from such transitions, when space charge is too small to produce any significant distortion of the applied electric field. We find, however that even in that case narrow planar Townsend discharge, with the distance between the electrodes considerably smaller than the radius of the discharge cell, appears unstable. The discovered instability obtains analytical confirmation as a resulted from electron diffusion in the axial direction. The derivation of the basic equations and boundary conditions for the dimensionless variables corresponding to the regime of the Townsend discharge is presented in Section 2. In Section 3, we present the results of the calculations of the modified by electron diffusion condition for the steady self-sustenance of the Townsend discharge and investigate its stability under that condition. A summary and discussion is presented in Sec.4.
Basic equations and boundary conditions
=======================================
The simplest set of equations containing the basic physics necessary for the investigation of the glow discharge stability comprises the well-known continuity equations in the drift-diffusion approximation for electrons $N_{e}$ and positive ions $N_{i}$, coupled with Poison equation for the electrostatic potential $\Phi$ (e.g.,[@Kolobov]), $$\begin{aligned}
&\displaystyle\frac{\partial N_{i}}{\partial t}-\frac{\partial }{\partial Z}\mu _{i}N_{i}E =N_{e}\alpha\left(E\right)\mu _{e}E, \label{1} \\
&\displaystyle\frac{\partial N_{e}}{\partial t}+\frac{\partial}{\partial Z} \left[
-D_{e}\frac{\partial N_{e}}{\partial Z} +\mu_{e}N_{e}E \right] =N_{e}\alpha\left(E\right)\mu _{e}E, \label{2} \\
&\displaystyle\varepsilon_{0}\frac{\partial E}{\partial Z} =e\left(
N_{e}-N_{i}\right). \label{3}\end{aligned}$$ Here $D_{e}$, $\mu_{i}$, and $\mu_{e}$ are the electron diffusion coefficient and mobilities of ions and electrons, respectively; $\alpha\left(E\right)$ is Townsend’s ionization coefficient (e.g., [@Raizer]) and $E$ is the electric field; $\varepsilon_{0}$ is the permittivity of free space, $e$ is the elementary charge, the $Z$-axis is directed from the cathode to the anode, and $t$ is time. For considered here Townsend limit, both mobility and electron diffusion coefficient, which otherwise depend on the local electric field, can be assumed as constant. Because in the Townsend mode electric field is practically constant, local field approximation is applicable to ionization rate $\alpha$. Farther, the process of dissociative recombination and ion diffusion (we assume that electron temperature exceeds greatly the ion temperature) are completely neglected. In contrast, the axial diffusion of electrons is taken into account. The boundary conditions are taken in the Townsend form. At the cathode $(Z= 0)$ $$\begin{aligned}
&\displaystyle -D_{e}\frac{\partial N_{e}}{\partial Z}
+N_{e}\mu _{e}E = \gamma N_{i}\mu_{i}E,\label{4}\end{aligned}$$ where $\gamma$ is the secondary electron emission coefficient and electrons flax from cathode includes mobility and diffusive flaxes. At the anode $(Z = L)$: $$\begin{aligned}
&\displaystyle \frac{\partial N_{e}}{\partial Z} = 0,\quad N_{i} = 0, \label{5}\end{aligned}$$ and the electric current density at the anode is given by $$j=-eN_{e}\mu _{e}E+\varepsilon_{0}\frac{\partial E}{\partial t}. \label{6}$$ The boundary conditions at the wall of the discharge vessel are not relevant for the present one-dimensional study.
In what follows we are interested in processes that are assumed to be on time scale which is longer than the ion travel time $$\begin{aligned}
&\displaystyle t_{0}=\frac{L}{\mu_{i}E}, \label{7}\end{aligned}$$ and therefore ion density time derivative will be considered as a small perturbation. On that time scale the electron density time dependence is eliminated adiabatically and electron density time derivative in Eq.(\[2\]) will be setting to zero. It is convenient to introduce the dimensionless times $\tau$, length $z$ and electric field $\hat{E}$, $$\tau=\frac{t}{t_{0}}, \quad z=\frac{Z}{L}, \quad \hat{E}=\frac{E}{E_{t}}\label{8}$$ and parameter $\varepsilon_{e}$, $$\varepsilon_{e}=\frac{D_{e}}{\mu_{e}E_{t}L}=\frac{T_{e}}{eLE_{t}}, \label{9}$$ which determines the relative value of the diffusive and drift terms in Eq.(\[2\]). By assuming that dimensionless anode current is equal to unity, we obtain from boundary condition (\[9\]) the following dimensionless electron density $n_{e}$: $$n_{e}=\frac{N_{e}e\mu_{e}E_{t}}{j}.\label{10}$$ Similar relation, $$n_{i}=\frac{N_{i}e\mu_{i}E_{t}}{j}.\label{11}$$ we use for the dimensionless ion density $n_{i}$. In dimensionless form, system (\[1\])–(\[3\]) is $$\frac{\partial n_{i}}{\partial\tau}-\frac{\partial}{\partial z}\left(n_{i}\hat{E} \right)=\hat{\alpha}n_{e}\left|\hat{E}\right| .\label{12}$$ $$-\varepsilon_{e}\frac{\partial^{2} n_{e}}{\partial z^{2}}+\frac{\partial}{\partial z}\left(n_{e}\hat{E} \right)=\hat{\alpha}n_{e}\left|\hat{E}\right| ,\label{13}$$ $$\frac{\partial \hat{E}}{\partial z}=\delta\left( \frac{\mu_{i}}{\mu_{e}}n_{e}-n_{i}\right)\approx-\delta n_{i} ,\label{14}$$ where $\hat{\alpha}=\alpha L$. Parameter $\delta$, $$\delta=\frac{jL}{\varepsilon_{0}\mu_{i}E^{2}_{t}} ,\label{15}$$ which, as it follows from Eq.(\[14\]), determines the measure of the distortion of the external ambient electric field by space charge[@Benilov], as well as parameter $\varepsilon_{e}$, are assumed to be small for a Townsend discharge.
In dimensionless variables, boundary conditions (\[4\])–(\[6\]) are at the cathode $(z=0)$ $$-\varepsilon_{e}\frac{\partial n_{e}}{\partial z}+n_{e}\hat{E}=\gamma n_{i}\hat{E},\label{16}$$ and at the anode $(z=1)$ $$n_{i}=0, \quad \quad \frac{\partial n_{e}}{\partial z}=0 ,\label{17}$$ $$-1= n_{e}\hat{E}+\frac{1}{\delta}\frac{\partial \hat{E}}{\partial \tau}.\label{18}$$ It is interesting to note, that derivative $\partial \hat{E}/\partial \tau$ enters only into condition (\[18\]) at the anode, therefore the time dependence of electric field will be determined with boundary condition (\[18\]). It follows from Eq.(\[14\]), that $$\hat{E}\left(z,\tau \right) =-\delta\int^{z}_{1}n_{i}\left( \zeta,\tau \right)d\zeta +\hat{E_{0}}+\delta \mathcal{E}\left(\tau \right). \label{19}$$ In Eq.(\[19\]) we have accounted for that the distortion $\mathcal{E}$ of the applied electric field $\hat{E_{0}}$ is resulted from space charge. It follows from Eq.(\[19\]), that $$\hat{E}\left(z=1,\tau \right)=\hat{E_{0}}+\delta \mathcal{E}\left(\tau \right). \label{20}$$ With electric field (\[20\]) boundary condition at the anode becomes $$-1=-n_{e}\left(z=1,\tau \right)\left(1+\delta \mathcal{E}\left(\tau \right)\right)+\frac{d\mathcal{E}}{d\tau}, \label{21}$$ where $\hat{E_{0}}=1 (E_{0}=E_{t})$ was used. The basic set of equations (\[12\])–(\[14\]) as well as boundary conditions does not contain a time in an explicit form. Therefore in our linear stability analysis of the Townsend discharge we consider ion and electron densities in a conventional form $$n_{e,i}\left(z,\tau; \varepsilon_{e},\delta\right)= n_{e0,i0}\left(z; \varepsilon_{e},\delta\right)+n_{e1,i1}\left(z; \varepsilon_{e},\delta\right)e^{\lambda\tau},\label{22}$$ where $n_{e0,i0}$ is the equilibrium electron (ion) charge and $n_{e1,i1}$ are their time-dependent small perturbations. Using the expansions $$n_{e0,i0}\left(z,\tau; \varepsilon_{e},\delta\right)= n^{(0)}_{e0,i0}\left(z; \varepsilon_{e}\right)+\delta n^{(1)}_{e0,i0}\left(z; \varepsilon_{e}\right),\label{23}$$ $$n_{e1,i1}\left(z,\tau; \varepsilon_{e},\delta\right)= n^{(0)}_{e1,i1}\left(z; \varepsilon_{e}\right)+\delta n^{(1)}_{e1,i1}\left(z; \varepsilon_{e}\right),\label{24}$$ in Eq.(\[21\]) we obtain $$\begin{aligned}
&\displaystyle
-1+n^{(0)}_{e0}\left(z=1; \varepsilon_{e} \right)+\delta n^{(1)}_{e0}\left(z=1; \varepsilon_{e} \right)
\nonumber \\
&\displaystyle=
\frac{d\mathcal{E}}{d\tau}-n^{(0)}_{e1}\left(z=1; \varepsilon_{e}\right)e^{\lambda\tau}-\delta n^{(1)}_{e1}\left(z=1; \varepsilon_{e}\right)e^{\lambda\tau} \nonumber \\
&\displaystyle -\delta \mathcal{E}\left(\tau \right)\left(n^{(0)}_{e0}\left(z=1; \varepsilon_{e} \right)+ n^{(0)}_{e1}\left(z=1; \varepsilon_{e}\right)e^{\lambda\tau}\right) \label{25}\end{aligned}$$ For stationary electron density $n^{(0)}_{e0}$ , Eq.(\[25\]) gives known boundary condition $$n^{(0)}_{e0}\left(z=1; \varepsilon_{e}\right)=1,\label{26}$$ as well as the equation for $\mathcal{E}$, $$\frac{d\mathcal{E}}{d\tau}=n^{(0)}_{e1}\left(z=1; \varepsilon_{e}\right)e^{\lambda\tau},\label{27}$$ which, for initial condition $\mathcal{E}\left(\tau\rightarrow -\infty \right)=0 $ has solution $$\mathcal{E}\left( \tau\right)=\lambda^{-1}n^{(0)}_{e1}\left(z=1; \varepsilon_{e}\right)e^{\lambda\tau}.\label{28}$$ It also follows from Eq.(\[25\]) that $$n^{(1)}_{e0}\left(z=1; \varepsilon_{e}\right)=0\label{29}$$ and $$\begin{aligned}
&\displaystyle
n^{(1)}_{e1}\left(z=1, \tau; \varepsilon_{e}\right)=-\mathcal{E}\left(\tau\right)=-n^{(0)}_{e1}\left(1; \varepsilon_{e}\right)\frac{e^{\lambda\tau}}{\lambda}.\label{30}\end{aligned}$$ It stems from Eq.(\[30\]), that expansion (\[24\]) is convergent for not small $|\lambda|$, for which $$\delta<\left | \lambda\right |.\label{31}$$ The system (\[12\])–(\[14\]) with boundary conditions (\[16\]), (\[17\]), (\[26\])–(\[30\]) composes the eigenvalue problem for the parameter $\lambda$ for the investigations of a Townsend discharge stability.
Diffusive instability of a Townsend discharge
=============================================
In this section, we solve system (\[12\])–(\[14\]) with boundary conditions (\[16\]), (\[17\]) in asymptotic limit $\delta=0$ and $\varepsilon_{e}\ll 1$, for which $\hat{E}=\hat{E}_{0}=1$. With nomenclature (\[22\]) system of equation (\[12\])–(\[14\]) for for ion, $n^{(0)}_{i0}\left(z; \varepsilon_{e}\right)$, and electron, $n^{(0)}_{e0}\left(z; \varepsilon_{e}\right)$, densities reduces to the following simple system $$\frac{\partial n^{(0)}_{i0}\left(z; \varepsilon_{e}\right)}{\partial z}= -\hat{\alpha}n^{(0)}_{e0}\left(z; \varepsilon_{e}\right),\label{32}$$ $$\varepsilon_{e}\frac{\partial^{2} n^{(0)}_{e0}\left(z; \varepsilon_{e}\right)}{\partial z^{2}}-\frac{\partial n^{(0)}_{e0}\left(z; \varepsilon_{e}\right)}{\partial z}+\hat{\alpha}n^{(0)}_{e0}\left(z; \varepsilon_{e}\right)=0.\label{33}$$ The solution of Eqs.(\[32\])–(\[33\]) provides us with a Townsend discharge solution [@Amiranashvili], extended on the accounting for the effects of electrons diffusion. With boundary conditions (see Eqs. (\[16\]), (\[17\]) and (\[26\], respectively) $n^{(0)}_{i0}\left(z=1, \varepsilon_{e}\right)=0$, $n^{(0)}_{e0}\left(z=1, \varepsilon_{e}\right)=1$, $\partial n^{(0)}_{e0}\left(z=1, \varepsilon_{e}\right)/\partial z=0$, the expressions for electron, $n^{(0)}_{e0}\left(z, \varepsilon_{e}\right)$, and ion, $n^{(0)}_{i0}\left(z, \varepsilon_{e}\right)$, steady state densities are $$\begin{aligned}
&\displaystyle n^{(0)}_{e0}\left(z, \varepsilon_{e}\right)=\frac{1}{\left(1-\frac{a_{1}}{a_{2}}\right)}
\nonumber \\
&\displaystyle \times \left(e^{-a_{1}\left( 1-z\right)}-\frac{a_{1}}{a_{2}}e^{-a_{2}\left( 1-z\right)}\right)\label{34}\end{aligned}$$ $$\begin{aligned}
&\displaystyle n^{(0)}_{i0}\left(z, \varepsilon_{e}\right)=\frac{1}{\left(1-\frac{a_{1}}{a_{2}}\right)}
\nonumber \\
&\displaystyle \times
\frac{\alpha}{a_{1}}\left[\left(1-e^{-a_{1}\left( 1-z\right)}\right) -\frac{a_{1}^{2}}{a^{2}_{2}}\left(1-e^{-a_{2}\left( 1-z\right)}\right)\right] , \label{35}\end{aligned}$$ where $$\begin{aligned}
&\displaystyle a_{1,2}= \frac{1}{2\varepsilon_{e}}\pm\left(\frac{1}{4\varepsilon^
{2}_{e}}-\frac{\hat{\alpha}}{\varepsilon_{e}}\right)^{1/2} , \label{36}\end{aligned}$$ The condition $n^{(0)}_{e0}\left(z=0, \varepsilon_{e}=0\right) =\gamma n^{(0)}_{i0}\left(z=0, \varepsilon_{e}=0\right)$ at cathode provides us with condition of the steady self-sustenance of Townsend discharge, extended on the accounting for the effect of electrons diffusion, $$\gamma\frac{\alpha}{a_{2}}\left(e^{a_{2}}-1 \right)=1+\gamma\frac{\alpha}{a_{1}}\frac{a_{2}}{a_{1}}e^{a_{2}}, \label{37}$$ which is, in fact, the equation which determines $E_{t}$, used in Eq.(\[8\]) of our transformations to dimensionless variables. Last term in Eq.(\[37\]) is negligibly small and it will be omitted in what follows. For $\varepsilon_{e}=0$ Eq.(\[37\]) reduces to well known relation[@Raizer] $\gamma\left(e^{\hat{\alpha}}-1 \right)=1$.
Using presentation (\[22\]) with $\delta=0$, we obtain the system of equations for ion and electron densities perturbations, $$\begin{aligned}
&\displaystyle \frac{\partial n^{(0)}_{i1}\left(z; \varepsilon_{e}\right)}{\partial z}-\lambda n^{(0)}_{i1}\left(z; \varepsilon_{e}\right)=-\hat{\alpha}n^{(0)}_{e1}\left(z; \varepsilon_{e}\right), \label{38}\end{aligned}$$ $$\begin{aligned}
&\displaystyle -\varepsilon_{e}\frac{\partial^{2} n^{(0)}_{e1}\left(z; \varepsilon\right)}{\partial z^{2}}+\frac{\partial n^{(0)}_{e1}\left(z; \varepsilon_{e}\right)}{\partial z}=\hat{\alpha}n^{(0)}_{e1}\left(z; \varepsilon_{e}\right). \label{39}\end{aligned}$$ The solution of that system with boundary conditions (\[17\]) is $$\begin{aligned}
&\displaystyle n^{(0)}_{e1}\left(z; \varepsilon_{e}\right)= C\left(e^{-a_{1}\left( 1-z\right)}-\frac{a_{1}}{a_{2}}
e^{-a_{2}\left( 1-z\right)} \right), \label{40}\end{aligned}$$ and $$\begin{aligned}
&\displaystyle n^{(0)}_{i1}\left(z; \varepsilon_{e}\right)= C\hat{\alpha}\left[e^{-\lambda\left( 1-z\right)}\left(\frac{1}
{a_{1}-\lambda}-\frac{a_{1}}{a_{2}}\frac{1}{a_{2}-\lambda} \right)\right.
\nonumber \\
&\displaystyle -\left.
\left(\frac{e^{-a_{1}\left( 1-z\right)}}{a_{1}-\lambda}-
\frac{a_{1}}{a_{2}}\frac{e^{-a_{2}\left( 1-z\right)}}{a_{2}-\lambda} \right)\right] , \label{41}\end{aligned}$$ where $a_{1,2}$ are determined by Eq.(\[36\]) and $C$ is arbitrary constant of the integration. By using solutions (\[39\]) and (\[40\]) in boundary condition (\[16\]) we obtains the eigenvalue equation for parameter $\lambda$, $$\begin{aligned}
&\displaystyle -\varepsilon_{e}a_{1}\left( e^{-a_{1}}-e^{-a_{2}}\right)+\left( e^{-a_{1}}-\frac{a_{1}}{a_{2}}e^{-a_{2}}\right)\nonumber \\
&\displaystyle=\alpha\gamma\left[-\frac{1}{a_{1}-\lambda}\left(e^{-a_{1}}-e^{-\lambda} \right)
\right.
\nonumber \\
&\displaystyle +\left.\frac{a_{1}}{a_{2}}\frac{1}{a_{2}-\lambda}\left(e^{-a_{2}}-e^{-\lambda} \right) \right].\label{42}\end{aligned}$$ Accounting for that $a_{1}\sim \varepsilon_{e}^{-1}\gg 1$, and $a_{1}\gg a_{2}\approx\hat{\alpha}\left( 1-\hat{\alpha}\varepsilon_{e}\right) $, Eq.(\[43\]) may be simplified to $$\begin{aligned}
&\displaystyle \left( \lambda-a_{2}\right)\left( 1-a_{2}\varepsilon_{e}\right) =\alpha\gamma\left(1-e^{a_{2}-\lambda} \right), \label{43}\end{aligned}$$ where we assume that $\lambda\neq a_{1}$ or $a_{2}$. For $\varepsilon_{e}=0$ Eq.(\[43\]) has infinite number of complex roots with negative real part, which corresponds to the damping oscillations of the ion and electron space charges perturbations. Also it has two evident real roots, $\lambda=a_{2}$ and $\lambda=0$. Root $\lambda=a_{2}$ is physically senseless, because for $\lambda =a_{2}$ ion density perturbation $n^{(0)}_{i1}\left(z; \varepsilon_{e}\right)$ becomes infinite. $\lambda=0$ corresponds to stationary state, for which presentation (\[22\]) becomes senseless. This root, however, due to the terms with finite $\varepsilon_{e}$ in Eq.(\[43\]), will obtain relatively small non-zero value. Expanding the exponential in Eq.(\[43\]) for small $\lambda$, we obtain simple solution for this root, $$\begin{aligned}
&\displaystyle \lambda=\frac{a^{2}_{2}\varepsilon_{e}}{a_{2}+a_{2}\varepsilon_{e}-1-\hat{\alpha}\gamma}. \label{44}\end{aligned}$$ Because the denominator in Eq.(\[44\]) is positive for the conditions of a Townsend discharge, root (\[43\]) corresponds to the growth rate of the aperiodic instability, conditioned by electron diffusion. The growth rate (\[44\]) is the main result of this paper. We identify the discovered instability as the diffusive instability, because the growth rate (\[44\]) of this instability is proportional to the electron diffusion parameter $\varepsilon_{e}$. Because of the assumption $\delta =0$, the instability discovered is true Townsend discharge instability, which does not lead to the transition to other forms of glow discharge. In dimensional physical units, the growth rate (\[44\]) is equal approximately to $$\begin{aligned}
&\displaystyle \lambda_{phys}\sim\frac{\alpha v_{s}^{2}}{L\nu_{in}}, \label{45}\end{aligned}$$ where $v_{s}^{2}=T_{e}/m_{i}$ is the ion sound velocity, $\nu_{in}$ is ion-neutral collision frequency, and Einstein relation, $D_{e}=T_{e}\mu_{e}/e$, was used. For a discharge in Helium under the pressure of 30 Torr, with $L=1$ mm distance between the electrodes, and electron temperature $T_{e}=1$ eV, the growth rate (\[45\]) is equal approximately to $\lambda_{phys}\backsimeq 2\cdot 10^{4}$ c$^{-1}$.
Conclusion
==========
In this work, by solving the eigenvalue problem for the parameter $\lambda$, we have shown, that a Townsend discharge is unstable due to a joint action of the ionization process and electron diffusion. Discovered instability is responsible for the spatially homogeneous exponential growth with time the perturbations of the electron and ion densities due to the ionization processes and from this point of view it may be considered as a kind of the ionization instability[@Raizer]. However it is principally different from known ionization instability of a Townsend discharge[@Kaganovich; @Kolobov]. The dispersion equation (\[42\]) is derived from the boundary value problem solution for which the electron diffusion have to be included in the boundary conditions (and which can be neglected for the main part of the gap between the electrodes). The growth rate (\[44\]) is proportional to the ionisation parameter $\hat{\alpha}$ $\left(a_{2}\simeq \hat{\alpha} \right)$ and does not depend on the local properties of a Townsend discharge with practically homogeneous electric field, not disturbed by spatial charge, whereas the well known ionization instability of a Townsend discharge is developed due to violation of the ionization balance resulted from the local spontaneous fluctuation of the spatial charge. Accounting for this and that the growth rate (\[44\]) is proportional to the electron diffusion parameter $\varepsilon_{e}$, we identify the discovered instability as the diffusive instability. The presented theory is valid for sufficiently small currents and /or strong applied electric field $E_{t}$, for which condition (\[31\]) is valid. However, because of the gradual growth of the ion and electron densities with time and concomitant to this process growth of the discharge current, that in turn leads to the growth of the parameter $\delta$, the effects of the small space charge, $\delta \ll 1$, have to be addressed on following stages of the discharge development. Therefore, discovered diffusive instability may be considered as a precursor of the ordinary spatially inhomogeneous ionization instability, as well as an unstable background for its development at times $\lambda_{phys}^{-1}$.
The first author would like to thank Prof. M.S. Benilov for valuable discussions and encouragement. The work was partially supported by project PTDC/FIS/68609/2006 of FCT, Centro de Cincias Matemticas of FCT, Portugal, and Pusan National University, Republic of Korea.
Yu. P. Raizer, 1991, Gas Discharge Physics (Berlin: Springer) A. Fridman, A. Chirokov, and A. Gutsol, J.Phys D: Appl. Phys. [**38**]{}, R1 (2005) H.W. Lee, G.Y. Park, Y.S. Seo, Y.H. Im, S.B. Shim, H.J. Lee, J.Phys D: Appl. Phys. [**44**]{}, 053001 (2011) V.N. Melekin, N.Yu.Naumov,Sov.Phys.- Tech.Phys., [**29**]{}, 888, (1984) A.V. Phelps, Z.L.Petrovic, B.M.Jelenkovic, Phys.Rev.E, [**47**]{}, 2825, (1993) V.I. Kolobov, A. Fiala, Phys.Review E [**50**]{}, 3018 (1994) I.D. Kaganovich, M.A. Fedotov, L.D. Tsendin, Tech.Phys., [**39**]{}, 241 (1994) B.P. Koch, N. Goepp, B. Bruhn, Phys. Review E [**56**]{}, 2118 (1997) B. Bruhn, A. Richter, B. May, Phys. Plasmas, [**15**]{}, 053505 (2008) Sh. Amiranashvili, S.V. Gurevich, H.-G. Purvins, Phys.Review E [**71**]{}, 066404 (2005) M.S. Benilov, Phys.Review E [**77**]{}, 036408 (2008)
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'We present a study of the submillimeter (submm) emission of Distant Red Galaxies (DRGs). The DRGs are selected by the criterion $J-K > 2.3$, and are generally massive galaxies at redshifts higher than 2, with red rest-frame optical colors. Using a deep SCUBA submm image of a field centred on the cluster MS$1054{-}03$, we obtain a statistical detection of the DRGs at redshift $z=2-3.5$, with an average 850$\mu$m flux density of $1.11\pm0.28$mJy. The detection implies an average star formation rate (SFR) of $127\pm34$M$_\odot$yr$^{-1}$ (lensing corrected), assuming that the far-infrared (FIR) spectral energy distribution (SED) is well-described by a modified blackbody. The SFR derived from the submm agrees well with SFRs derived from SED fitting of optical-near-infrared data and average X-ray emission. Constant Star Formation models imply ages of 2Gyr, extinction $A_V=2.4$mag, which is consistent with the FIR to rest-frame optical luminosity ratio of $\sim 15$. DRGs are older and have lower SFRs relative to optical luminosity than (ultra-)luminous infrared galaxies, although their FIR luminosities are similar. The DRGs at $2<z<3.5$ and the Extremely Red Objects ($I-K>4$) at $1<z<2$, which were also investigated, contribute 5.7 and 5.9 Jy deg$^{-2}$ respectively to the submm background. Simple estimates suggest that these populations contribute $\sim50\%$ of the flux from sources with $0.5<f_{850}<5$mJy, which is where the peak of energy is produced. We have therefore uncovered one of the most important populations of galaxies contributing to the sub-mm background.'
author:
- 'K. K. Knudsen, P. van der Werf, M. Franx, N. M. Förster Schreiber, P. G. van Dokkum, G.D. Illingworth, I. Labbé, A. Moorwood, H.-W. Rix, G. Rudnick'
title: 'Submillimeter observations of Distant Red Galaxies: uncovering the 1mJy 850$\mu$m-population'
---
INTRODUCTION
============
Members of the recently defined galaxy population [*Distant Red Galaxies*]{} (DRGs) are identified by their red observed near-infrared colors, $J-K>2.3$ (@franx03 [@vDokkum03; @forster04] (henceforth FS04)). Galaxies selected by this color cut are generally at $z\sim 2-3.5$, and are hence selected on their red colors in the rest-frame optical. Their stellar populations are relatively old, or are highly dust obscured. DRGs account for over half of the cosmic stellar mass at the high mass end at redshifts $2\leq z \leq 3.5$, somewhat more than the contribution from Lyman Break Galaxies (LBGs) (@rudnick03; FS04). One of the most pressing questions concerning these galaxies is how high their star formation rates (SFRs) are. Based on near-infrared (near-IR) spectroscopy, high star formation rates of $200-400\,M_\odot$yr$^{-1}$ and high stellar masses of (1$-$5)$\times$10$^{11}$M$_\odot$ were determined [@vDokkum04]. Unfortunately, near-IR spectroscopy is available for only a few galaxies at this moment. Star formation rates can also be estimated using other techniques, especially using radio, X-ray or submillimeter (submm) observations. Most of the DRGs are too faint to be detected individually at these wavelengths, but it is possible to estimate their average star formation rate by “stacking” the fluxes for a large number of sources. Using this technique, @rubin04 have detected the X-ray emission of DRGs in the field of the cluster MS$1054{-}03$ and derived an average star formation rate of $214\pm99$M$_\odot$yr$^{-1}$ if all the X-ray flux is attributed to the SFR. However, the flux contribution from faint AGNs remains unclear.
Here we present a different SFR measurement for the DRGs, based on the average 850$\,\mu$m flux density, which we attribute to emission from dust that has been heated by young stars. We have taken very deep SCUBA $850\,\mu$m observations of the field of the cluster MS$1054{-}03$ (@knudsenphd; Knudsen et al. [*in prep*]{}). These deep data provide a unique opportunity for studying the submm properties of DRGs. Throughout this Letter we will assume an $\Omega=0.3$, $\Lambda=0.7$ cosmology with $H_0=70$kms$^{-1}$Mpc$^{-1}$. Unless otherwise stated, we use Vega magnitudes.
SUBMILLIMETER DATA
==================
Submillimeter data for MS$1054{-}03$ were obtained using the Submillimetre Common-User Bolometer Array (SCUBA; @holland) at 850$\mu$m on the 15m James Clerk Maxwell Telescope at Mauna Kea, Hawaii. Total integration time was 49hours, distributed almost evenly over 3 pointing centers to cover the entire field of interest. The data were reduced using SURF [@surf], and sources were extracted using the Mexican Hat Wavelet algorithm [@barnard04; @knudsen05]. Noise properties of the data were determined using Monte Carlo simulations of artificial datasets. Details of these reduction and analysis methods are described in @knudsenphd and @knudsen05. The total area of the map is 14.4arcmin$^2$, though for the analysis the outer 23$''$ edge has been trimmed off due to high noise leaving a useful area is 12.8arcmin$^2$. The image has an area-weighted $1\sigma$ r.m.s. noise of $\sim
1.2$mJybeam$^{-1}$, with variations between 0.9 and 1.6mJybeam$^{-1}$. The flux calibration uncertainty at 850$\mu$m is about 10%. The Full Width Half Maximum (FWHM) of a point source in the map is 15$''$. The astrometric accuracy is approximately $3''$, due to the pointing uncertainty of the JCMT.
Nine submm sources are detected with flux densities of $3.5-5.0\,$mJy with signal-to-noise ratio $>3$. Two of the nine submm sources have been securely identified, both with DRGs, namely the galaxies MS-1383 which has a spectroscopic redshift of 2.423 [@vDokkum04] and MS-723 which has a photometric redshift of 1.88$^{+0.12}_{-0.02}$ [@forster05]. Five of the other submm sources have likely identifications, with at least one DRG or Extremely Red Object (ERO, defined by an observed color $I-K>4$) nearby. The two remaining sources have no obvious counterpart. A mass model for the foreground cluster [@hoekstra00] shows that the gravitational lensing magnification is small for the sources, on average around 20%.
SUBMM EMISSION FROM DISTANT RED GALAXIES {#sect:statan}
========================================
Statistical analysis
--------------------
We measured the characteristic submm fluxes for DRGs as a class of galaxies by measuring the flux in the 850$\mu$m map at the position of all the galaxies in the sample. We found an average 850$\mu$m flux of $1.19\pm0.22$mJy for 30 DRGs with $K < 22.5$, and with an uncertainty on their $K$-band magnitude smaller than 0.1, and minimum weight in the photometry $> 0.2$ (this measure is related to the total integration time – see FS04), present within the area covered by the SCUBA map. As the sensitivity is not uniform across the field, we determine the weighted mean and standard deviation, weighted by the squared reciprocal of the 1$\sigma$ r.m.s. noise at the position. The weighted mean compared to the unweighted mean only changes the result by a few percent, indicating that the weighted result is not dominated by a few data points with high weights. @webb_ero discussed a possible bias in this procedure due to confusion. If two or more DRGs are separated by less than the 850$\mu$m beam, emission might be counted twice. This is corrected for by estimating the flux contribution from each of the close-by DRGs to the flux measured at the given position (for details see: @webb_ero). We find that this effect influences our measurements by $\sim$2$-$10%.
As mentioned above, two DRGs are identified as the counterparts of two individual SCUBA detections. Additionally, three other DRGs are found within the identification search radius of three other SCUBA detections, though these are not secure identifications. We calculate the mean 850$\mu$m flux density, both including and excluding these five objects. Results are summarized in Table \[tab:stack\]. If we omit the DRGs associated with discrete SCUBA sources, we obtain an average flux of $0.74\pm0.24$mJy, demonstrating that the detection is not caused solely by these galaxies. We show the average images of both samples in Fig. \[fig:stack\_res\]. The emission is well-centered.
[lccccccccccc]{}\[ht\] all-$z$ & 22.5 & 30 & $1.19\pm0.22$ & 21.8(30.9) & 169 & 7.3 & 23.2 && 25 & $0.74\pm0.24$ & 15.1\
2$<$z$<$3.5 & 22.5 & 18 & $1.11\pm0.28$ & 13.0(18.4) & 159 & 7.9 & 20.2 && 15 & $0.69\pm0.30$ & 13.8\
\[1.3ex\] \[0pt\][no-DRGs]{} & 22.5 & 71 & $0.14\pm0.15$ & 6.5(9.3) & 20 & 4.7 & 4.3 && 67 & $0.04\pm0.15$ & 1.2\
\[0pt\][2$<$z$<$3.5]{}& & & & & & && & &\
\[0.2ex\] CSF & 21.7 & 9 & $1.67\pm0.38$ & 10.3(14.6) & 238 &10.4& 22.9 && 7 & $1.15\pm0.43$ & 17.7\
SSP & 21.7 & 5 & $0.67\pm0.54$ & 1.6(2.3) & 96 & 6.1 & 15.7 && & &
For DRGs restricted to the redshift interval 2$<$$z$$<$3.5, we obtain an average flux of $1.11\pm0.28$mJy for the DRGs. For comparison, the average flux for galaxies at 2$<$$z$$<$3.5 which are not DRGs, i.e. $J-K <2.3$ (henceforth refered to as [*non-DRGs*]{}), is substantially lower at only $0.14\pm0.15$.
Following FS04, we fitted the full optical/near-IR spectral energy distribution (SED) with stellar population models for DRGs with $K$$<$21.7 and 2$<$$z$$<$3.5. The sample was separated into those best fit by constant star formation models (CSF) or single age stellar populations (SSP). The CSF-subsample has an average flux of $1.67\pm0.38$mJy, while the SSP-subsample has an average flux of $0.67\pm0.54$. Excluding the DRGs associated with discrete SCUBA sources affects only the CSF subsample and its mean flux decreased to $1.15\pm0.43$mJy. We note that the lensing correction is less than or comparable to the uncertainty of the average fluxes.
Monte Carlo simulations
-----------------------
To test the reliability of the detection of the mean 850$\mu$m flux from the DRGs, Monte Carlo (MC) simulations were performed by making the statistical measurements at random positions in the field. The MC simulations were repeated 10000 times. As with the real data, the MC measurements were corrected for the confusion of two or more sources separated by less than the distance of a beam. For 45-50 random positions on the map, the weighted mean is 0.13$\pm$0.17mJy. As the noise distribution deviates from Gaussian, the probability for getting a $>$3$\sigma$ detection at random positions is 2.4%. The probabilities for a $>$4$\sigma$ detection and a $>$5$\sigma$ detection are 0.2% and 0.02% respectively. A similar result is seen for 20-30 and for 10-20 random positions. Thus we conclude that the detected mean 850$\mu$m flux is real.
Possible systematic uncertainties
---------------------------------
We performed simulations to verify how reliable the average detections were. We assumed that the star formation rate is proportional to restframe $L_V$ luminosity, with different ratios for different classes of objects. We found that systematic errors occur at the level of 0.1-0.2 mJy for the average fluxes. For the DRGs and EROs this is not a concern, but for the fainter objects (e.g., the non-DRGs with average flux 0.14 mJy) this implies that the systematic errors are at least as large as the detections. The systematic problems are due to a combination of effects, including the negative “sidelobes” in the beam pattern, which cause the total flux of the map to be zero, and can reduce the flux for the faint, but abundant non-DRGs, and superpositions of objects. Obviously, similar observations of other fields would help to constrain the errors for the DRGs; but it is unclear whether such measurements will ever constrain the flux from the faint non-DRGs.
DISCUSSION
==========
Implied star formation rates of the DRGs
----------------------------------------
The average SFR of the DRGs can be estimated from the average submm flux assuming an SED and an initial mass function (IMF). As the submm and far-infrared (FIR) SED of the DRGs is unknown, we use the SED description for dusty starburst galaxies from @YunCar02 for calculating the FIR luminosity. Because of the large negative $k$-correction in the submm, the observed 850$\mu$m flux density is essentially constant between redshift 1 and 8 for a given luminosity. For the DRG 2$<$$z$$<$3.5 sample, the average FIR luminosity is $1.2\times10^{12}$L$_\odot$, which is comparable to the luminosity of the local ultraluminous infrared galaxy (ULIRG) Arp220. Furthermore, we base the conversion between FIR luminosity and SFR on @kennicutt98, where a Salpeter IMF in the mass range 0.1-100M$_\odot$ is assumed. However, we assumed a mean age of the stellar population of 1Gyr and a constant star formation during that time, which lowers the conversion by a factor of 1.5: . We assumed this longer mean age since modeling of the optical-Near IR SEDs suggest ages of 1-2 Gyr (FS04). We obtain an average SFR of $159\pm42$M$_\odot$yr$^{-1}$ for $2<z<3.5$, where the error reflects the accuracy of the submm detection. When correcting for gravitational lensing, this is an $\langle$SFR$\rangle$ of $127\pm34$M$_\odot$yr$^{-1}$. We note that the FIR luminosity and SFR have considerable uncertainties as they depend on the assumed shape of the SED and IMF.
The average SFR derived from the thermal dust emission in the far-IR ($\lambda_{rest}$$\sim$250$\mu$m) can be compared to the SFRs inferred from the SED fits to the optical and near-IR data (FS04). The SFRs from SED fits are rather model-dependent. One of the main uncertainties is the parametrization of the star formation history (constant, declining etc). The maximum is generally given by constant formation rates, and is on average $\sim$170M$_\odot$yr$^{-1}$ for the sample studied here (FS04). This compares well with the SFR derived from the submm flux.
The good agreement suggests that the majority of DRGs are well approximated by simple models with constant star formation rate, ages of 2 Gyr, and high extinction $A_V=2.4$ (FS04). Despite the abundant dust the overall ratio of $L_{FIR}/L_{opt}\sim 15$, which is in good agreement with $A_V$, is lower than that of ULIRGs in the nearby universe. This implies that DRGs are forming stars more steadily over longer periodes than nearby starbursts. We expect to find very large reservoirs of cold gas to sustain these high star formation rates.
When interpreting the average rates it should be noted that not all DRGs are likely to be forming stars. In a deep Spitzer study of DRGs in HDF-South, @labbe05 found that 30% are best fit by old stellar populations at redshifts higher than 2, and the remaining are best fit by constant star formation models. The results suggest that at redshifts higher than 2, the majority of massive galaxies were still forming stars at rather high rates, enough to build up their stellar mass in 1-2 Gyr.
Contribution to the comoving star formation density
---------------------------------------------------
We derive a comoving star formation density of about 0.045M$_\odot$yr$^{-1}$Mpc$^{-3}$ for the DRGs with $2<z<3.5$. This can be compared with the comoving star formation density derived from UV selected galaxies at $z=2-3.5$ of approximately 0.022 to 0.11 M$_\odot$yr$^{-1}$Mpc$^{-3}$ (Steidel et al 1999), excluding, and including a correction for dust absorption. As the dust correction is uncertain for UV selected galaxies, especially at the faint end which contributes a large fraction of the flux, we have to conclude that the contributions of the two populations are similar, but still uncertain. The main uncertainty for the DRGs is the luminosity function at the faint end, and the main uncertainty for the LBGs is the dust correction.
We note that several authors have tried to detect the average submm flux of the LBGs (e.g., Chapman et al. 2000, Webb et al 2003), without statistically significant results. Since our simulations suggest that systematic effects can be large at the very faint end, the average 850$\mu$m flux of these sources remains an open question.
Dissecting the contribution to the sub-mm background
----------------------------------------------------
Each population of high redshift galaxies contributes to the submm Extragalactic Background Light (EBL). Previous studies have addressed this for the LBG and the ERO populations. There has been no significant statistical detection of the submm emission from LBGs. Through SCUBA observations, @chapman_lbg placed upper limits on the LBG contribution to the submm EBL of 0.2%, while @webb_lbg placed an upper limit of 20% when extrapolating to a redshift interval 1$<$$z$$<$5. Contrary to the LBG case, statistical detection of the ERO population has been successful. @wehner and @webb_ero find an average submm flux of $1.58\pm0.13$mJy and $0.40\pm0.07$mJy respectively, and determine the contributions to the submm EBL to be about half and 10%. The discrepancy between the results can be primarily assigned to the difference in depth of the ERO selection and the strong clustering of EROs, as the fields studied by @wehner appear to have a large overdensity of EROs.
Using the present study we constrain the contribution of the DRGs to the submm EBL. For the whole sample of DRGs in the MS1054$-$03 field, the total flux density is approximately 9.6Jy/deg$^2$, which is 21.8% of the EBL value measured by @fixsen98 of 44Jy/deg$^2$ and 30.9% of the value from @puget96 of 31Jy/deg$^2$. For the DRG sample limited to the redshift range $2<z<3.5$ the contribution is 5.7Jy/deg$^2$, i.e. 12.9% \[18.4%\] of the result from @fixsen98 \[@puget96\]. We can perform the same measurement for the EROs in the interval $1 < z < 2$. We apply similar magnitude and uncertainty cuts as for the DRGs (see section \[sect:statan\]). We obtain an average flux of $0.69\pm0.21$mJy, by averaging 35 sources, which implies a comoving star formation rate density of 0.085M$_\odot$yr$^{-1}$Mpc$^{-3}$. The total contribution from the EROs is 5.9Jy/deg$^2$. Hence the total contribution to the submm EBL of the EROs at $1<z<2$ and the DRGs at $2<z<3.5$ is 11.6Jy/deg$^2$.
The surface density of the two populations combined is $\sim5$arcmin$^{-2}$ down to $K=22.5$mag, similar to the surface density derived from the submm number counts, where $N(>\!0.5{\rm mJy})\sim 6.5$arcmin$^{-2}$.
We can use our measured ratios of SFR/$L_V$ to predict the fluxes of the EROs and DRGs at $1 < z < 4$: we assume they all have the same ratio, i.e., SFR scales linearly with $L_V$. We assume that the ratio is that of non-DRGs for the other galaxies at the same redshift interval. Using this very simple assumption, we find that the EROs+DRGs contribute 12.3 Jy deg$^{-2}$. This is about 50% the background between $0.5 < f < 5$mJy determined by @knudsenphd, which is 26Jydeg$^{-2}$. For the non-EROs/DRGs at $ 1 < z < 4$ and $K < 22.5$ we estimate 1.4 Jy deg$^{-2}$.
It is interesting to speculate whether there exists an evolutionary link between the massive high redshift galaxy populations, namely the DRGs and EROs and the submm galaxies (SMGs) with $f_{850} > 5$mJy, which are found to have comparable masses [@greve05]. Possibly the SMGs represent a short-lived phase with a duration of $\leq100$Myr [@chapman05], which is $>10$ times shorter than what we find for the DRGs. The surface density of bright SMGs is about 0.2arcmin$^{-2}$. This relative to the surface density of DRGs and EROs, is comparable to the ratio of the duration of the phases.
In summary, the submm detection of the DRGs strongly supports that these high-$z$, massive galaxies are undergoing star formation at high rates. Furthermore, the results presented here, based on simple assumptions, imply that DRGs and EROs dominate the counts around 1mJy.
We thank Tracy Webb for helpful discussions. The James Clerk Maxwell Telescope is operated by The Joint Astronomy Centre on behalf of the Particle Physics and Astronomy Research Council of the United Kingdom, the Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research, and the National Research Council of Canada. We thank the staff at the JCMT for their assistence during the observations. Support from NSF CAREER grant AST-0449678 is acknowledged.
Barnard, V.E., Vielva, P., Pierce-Price, D.P.I., Blain, A., Barreiro, R.B., Richer, J.S., Qualtrough, C., 2004, MNRAS, 352, 961 Chapman, S.C., et al., 2000, MNRAS, 319, 318 Chapman, S.C., Blain, A.W., Smail, I., Ivison, R.J., 2005, ApJ, 622, 772 Fixsen, D.J., Dwek, E., Mather, J.C., Bennett, C.L., Shafer, R.A., 1998, ApJ, 508, 123 Franx, M., et al., 2003, ApJ, 587, L79 Förster Schreiber, N.M., et al., 2004, ApJ, 616, 40 (FS04) Förster Schreiber, N.M., et al., 2005, AJ, in press Greve, T.R., et al., 2005, MNRAS, 359, 1165 Hoekstra, H., Franx, M., & Kuijken, K. 2000, ApJ, 532, 88 Holland, W.S., et al., 1999, MNRAS, 303, 659 Hughes, D.H., et al., 1998, Nature, 394, 241 Jenness, T., Lightfoot, J.F., 1998, [*Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems VII*]{}, A.S.P. Conference Series, Vol. 145, eds. R. Albrecht, R.N. Hook and H.A. Bushouse, p.216 Kennicutt, R.C., 1998, ARA&A, 36, 189 Knudsen, K.K., 2004, Ph.D. Thesis (Leiden University) Knudsen, K.K., et al., 2005, MNRAS, submitted Labbé, I., et al., 2005, ApJ, 624, L81 Madau, P., Ferguson, H.C., Dickinson, M.E., Giavalisco, M., Steidel, C.C., Fruchter, A., 1996, MNRAS, 283, 1388 Puget, J.-L., Abergel, A., Bernard, J.-P., Boulanger, F., Burton, W.B., Desert, F.-X., Hartmann, D., 1996, A&A, 308, L5 Rubin, K.H.R., van Dokkum, P.G., Coppi, P., Johnson, O., Förster Schreiber, N.M., Franx, M., van der Werf, P., 2004, ApJ, 613, L5 Rudnick, G., et al., 2003, ApJ, 599, 847 Steidel, C.C., Adelberger, K.L., Giavalisco, M., Dickinson, M., Pettini, M., 1999, ApJ, 519, 1 van Dokkum, P.G., et al., 2003, ApJ, 587, L83 van Dokkum, P.G., et al., 2004, ApJ, 611, 703 Webb, T.M., et al., 2003, ApJ, 582, 6 Webb, T.M.A., Brodwin, M., Eales, S., Lilly, S.J., ApJ, 605, 645 Wehner, E.H., Barger, A.J., Kneib, J.-P., 2002, ApJ, 577, L83 Yun, M.S., Carilli, C.L., 2002, ApJ, 568, 88
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
author:
- 'N. Vranešević, D. B. Melrose'
- 'R. N. Manchester'
date: 'Received 2006 month day; accepted 2006 month day'
title: What is Special about HBRPs
---
Introduction {#sect:intro}
============
About 1500 neutron stars have so far been detected in the Galaxy as radio pulsars, of which 125 are millisecond pulsars (from ATNF Pulsar Catalogue at http://www.atnf.csiro.au/research/pulsar/psrcat, see Manchester et al. [@manc05]). The Parkes Multibeam Survey (hereafter PMS) doubled the number of known pulsars (Manchester et al. [@manc01]; Morris et al. [@morr02]; Kramer et al. [@kram03]; Hobbs et al. [@hobb04]; Faulkner et al. [@faul04]). Prior to the PMS the highest measured neutron star surface magnetic field was $2.1\times 10^{13}\rm\,G$ for the pulsar B0154+61. The PMS led to the identification of a number of ‘HBRPs’, radio pulsars with long periods and with surface magnetic fields near $10^{14}\rm\,G$ (McLaughlin et al. [@mcla04]). Even more exotic neutron stars, with the surface fields clustered around $10^{14-15}\rm\,G$, are the Anomalous X-ray Pulsars (AXPs) (Kaspi & Gavriil [@kasp04]) and Soft Gamma-rays Repeater (SGRs) (Kouveliotou [@kouv03]), now believed to be magnetars (Duncan & Thompson [@dunc92]). The fields of these sources, deduced from their dipole spin down rates ($B_{\rm
surf}=3.2\times 10^{19} (P {\dot P})^{1/2}$), are well above the quantum critical magnetic field of $B_{\rm c}\sim
4.4\times10^{13}\rm\,G$. Existence of these long period radio pulsars with surface dipole magnetic field strengths higher than critical, demonstrates that radio emission can be produced in neutron stars with $B_{\rm surf} > B_{\rm c}$, despite the prediction of the radio-quiet boundary below which radio emission should cease (Baring & Harding [@bari98]).
The HBRPs may be young objects that form a transition between normal radio pulsars and AXPs (McLaughlin et al. [@mcla03]). This suggests that there should be many more HBRPs than those currently known. It may be that the SGRs, AXPs and HBRPs form a continuum of magnetic activity, or they might be different phases/states of a more uniform class of object. In order to investigate these ideas we initiated a project with the main goal of understanding the emission properties of HBRPs. We chose a sample of 17 HBRPs, together with 17 low magnetic-field radio pulsars selected to have similar spin period distributions. We observed these 34 pulsars at three different frequencies in order to obtain their polarimetric characteristics as well as to find their flux densities and spectral indexes. High time resolution data on their individual pulses together with multi-frequency polarimetric data will provide us with a wealth of information about their emission process. We will compare observed characteristics of these two samples of pulsars using the Parkes radio telescope.
We organize this paper as follows. In section 2 we discuss super strong magnetic fields briefly, and then summarize the classes of pulsars. In Section 3 we present some preliminary results from our multi-frequency observations. In Section 4 we discuss the importance of understanding the emission properties from HBRPs and how they differ from normal pulsars. Our conclusion are given in the Section 5.
Neutron star populations
========================
Neutron stars are strongly magnetized objects, with surface magnetic fields ranging from $10^{6}\rm\,G$ to $10^{15}\rm\,G$. The slowing down of pulsar rotation implies magnetic fields of order of $10^{11}\rm\,G$ to $10^{15}\rm\,G$. The rapid rotation of such fields is important in generating relativistic particles and radio emission. Plasma accreting onto neutron stars in X-ray binary systems is channeled to the magnetic poles by fields ranging from $10^{8}\rm\,G$ to $10^{13}\rm\,G$.
Radio emission in super strong magnetic fields
----------------------------------------------
The condition that the cyclotron energy equal the rest energy of the electron corresponds to $B$ equal to the quantum critical field strength of $B_{\rm c} ={m_{e}^{2} c^{3}}/{\hbar e}=4.4\times
10^{13}\rm\,G$, and fields of this order or larger are said to be super strong. Most pulsars have $B_{\rm surf}\la 0.1\,B_{\rm c}$, and HBRPs have $B_{\rm surf}\ga B_{\rm c}$. Some other negligible or forbidden physical processes become important in pulsar magnetic fields, including birefringence of the vacuum, splitting of one photon into two, the decay of a single photon into an electron-positron pair, and the rapid radiative loss of perpendicular energy by all electrons, so that their motion is one-dimensional along the magnetic field lines.
The radio emission from pulsars is attributed to an electron-positron pair plasma created by one-photon decay into pairs. This is actually a four-stage process: a) a parallel electric field accelerates primary particles to extremely high energies, (b) these primaries emit gamma rays, initially directed nearly along the field lines, (c) as the photons propagate outward, the curvature of the magnetic field causes the angle between the photon and field line to increase, (d) when this angle is large enough, the photon decays into a pair. Any process that stops any of the steps (a)–(d) operating effectively can prevent copious pair production, so that the pulsar is ‘dead’ as a radio emitter. The death-line is usually attributed to the parallel electric field becoming too weak to provide effective primary particles. For $B_{\rm surf}>B_{\rm c}$ photon splitting can prevent (c) and (d) from operating effectively: a photon splits into two lower energy photons before it reaches the threshold for pair creation. Photon splitting is known to be possible only for photons of one polarization mode of the birefringent vacuum: photons with the other polarization mode are forbidden to split by selection rules attributed to Adler ([@adle71]). Baring and Harding ([@bari01]) speculated that this selection rule might not apply for $B_{\rm surf}> B_{\rm c}$, and that photons of both polarization might split, so that there is no pair creation for sufficiently high $B$, implying that neutron stars with $B_{\rm surf}\ga 3\times 10^{13}\rm\,G$ should not be radio emitters. This prediction appears to be violated by the radio detection from two AXPs (Malofeev et al. [@malo05]). It also suggest that HBRPs should not exist.
More recently, Weise and Melrose ([@weis06]) showed that Adler’s selection rules continue to apply for $B_{\rm surf}> B_{\rm c}$. Hence photons in one mode do not experience photon splitting, but can decay into pairs. We conclude that the existence of HBRPs is consistent with theory.
Neutron stars classes
---------------------
Based on observations, neutron stars may be classified as:\
[**Radio active pulsars**]{} are traditional rotational-powered objects, divided into two main populations: [*Millisecond pulsars*]{}, with spin periods centered around $\sim 3\rm\,ms$ and magnetic fields around $10^{8}\rm\,G$, with different evolutionary history from normal pulsars; and [*Normal pulsars*]{} with spin periods centered around $0.5\rm\,s$ and magnetic fields around $\sim10^{12}\rm\,G$, thought to be born with short spin periods, to spin down on a time-scale of $10^{5-6}\rm\,yrs$, and to cease radio emission after around $10^{7}\rm\,yrs$); with distinguishable third class of [*HBRPs*]{}, which have similar spin parameters (long periods and high slowdown rates) as AXPs, but without detectable high-energy emission.\
[**Radio-quiet isolated neutron stars:**]{} emit thermal-like X-rays, usually subdivided in four classes: [*Anomalous X-ray pulsars*]{}, a small class of solitary pulsars with spin periods in the $6-12\rm\,s$ range, very soft X-ray spectra, and strong magnetic fields of $10^{14-15}\rm\,G$; [*Soft Gamma-ray Repeaters*]{}. emitting sporadic, intense flares of low-energy (soft) gamma rays, with periods and magnetic field in the similar range as AXPs; [*Dim Thermal neutron stars*]{}, which are not associated with supernovae remnants; and [*Compact Central sources*]{}, not identified with active radio pulsars or AXPs/SGRs, and with un-pulsed soft (thermal) emission. AXPs together with SGRs are believed to be [*magnetars*]{}, a class of neutron stars distinct from radio pulsars, in which magnetic energy, rather than the rotational energy, plays the dominant role in powering the X-ray and gamma-ray emissions.\
[**Accretion-powered neutron stars**]{} are detected in X-ray binary systems (more than 200 known) as X-ray pulsars or X-ray bursts powered by thermonuclear flashes.
![A $P$ –$\dot P$ diagram showing location of pulsars populations, as well as the location of pulsars from our samples. Dots correspond to all radio pulsars taken from the ATNF pulsar catalogue. Squares and triangles represent pulsars from our high-B and low-B samples, respectively. AXPs are marked with open stars. Lines of constant characteristic age and surface magnetic dipole field strength are shown.[]{data-label="Fig1:ppdot"}](nv_fig1.ps){width="105mm" height="120mm"}
Some Preliminary Results
========================
Observed samples
----------------
The location of our sample pulsars on the $P - \dot P$ diagram is shown in Figure 1. Seventeen HBRPs ($B_{\rm surf}> 10^{13}$ G) are marked with squares. The low-B pulsars sample ($B_{\rm surf}\leq
10^{12}$ G), which has a similar period distribution to the high-B sample, appear as 17 triangles. Observations were carried out using the Parkes 64-m radio telescope, in two sessions, 2005 May 23 – 25, and 2005 December 02 – 05. The 20-cm observations were made using the central beam of the Parkes multibeam receiver with central frequencies of 1433 MHz and 1369 MHz. The 10-cm and 50-cm observations were made using the the dual frequency $10/50\rm\,cm$ receiver with a central frequencies at 3100 MHz and 685 MHz. The most exotic pulsars discovered by PMS are J1718-3718, J1734-3333, J1814-1444, and J1847-0130, with $B_{\rm surf}\ga B_{\rm c}$, specifically, $7.4\times
10^{13}\rm\,G$, $5.2\times 10^{13}\rm\,G$, $5.5\times 10^{13}\rm\,G$ and $9.4\times 10^{13}\rm\,G$, respectively.
PSR J1734-3333
--------------
We show preliminary results for pulsar J1734-3333 at two different frequencies. This pulsar is young, $\sim 8000\rm\,yrs$ old, with $P=1.17\rm\,s$ and $B_{\rm surf}>B_{\rm c}$. Figure 2 shows the polarization profiles at $20\rm\,cm$ and $10\rm\,cm$. The 10cm profile shows two main components; the dominant trailing component has strong circular polarization. Linear polarization is significant for both components with a position-angle swing of opposite sign through the two components. The 20cm profile clearly shows the effects of ray scattering by irregularities in the ISM, broadening an intrinsically sharp pulse. More distant pulsars with higher DMs are more likely to be strongly scattered; PSR J1734-3333 has $\rm
DM=578\rm\,cm^{-3}\,pc$ and distance of $d=7.40\rm\,kpc$.
The only publicly available data for this pulsar are filterbank data at 1374 MHz from the discovery paper (Morris et al. [@morr02]). More than 80% of all our observed 34 pulsars have published data only from their discovery at 20 cm. Detailed results on multi-frequency observations of HBRPs will be published in the near future.
![Polarization profiles for PSR J1734-3333 at $20\rm\,cm$ and $10\rm\,cm$, showing $360^{\circ}$ of rotational phase, with total intensity as a solid line, linearly polarized intensity as a dashed line and circularly polarized intensity as a dotted line. The upper panel shows the position angle of the linear polarization.[]{data-label="Fig2:polarprof"}](nv_fig2a.ps){width="70mm" height="100mm"}
![Polarization profiles for PSR J1734-3333 at $20\rm\,cm$ and $10\rm\,cm$, showing $360^{\circ}$ of rotational phase, with total intensity as a solid line, linearly polarized intensity as a dashed line and circularly polarized intensity as a dotted line. The upper panel shows the position angle of the linear polarization.[]{data-label="Fig2:polarprof"}](nv_fig2b.ps){width="70mm" height="100mm"}
Discussion {#sect:discussion}
==========
The motivation for this project arose from the desire to understand recent results of pulsar population analysis (Vranesevic et al. [@vran04]) which show that pulsars with high magnetic fields contribute almost half to the total pulsar birthrate, despite the fact that such high field pulsars are restricted to only few per cent of the total pulsar population. Furthermore, in the same paper, it was shown that up to $40\,\%$ of all pulsars are born with periods in the range $100-500\rm\,ms$, which is in contradiction to the canonical view that all pulsars are born as fast rotators ($P_{0}\leq
100\rm\,ms$). Kaspi and McLaughlin ([@kasp05]) pointed out the overlap area (below $10^{14}\rm\,G$), where a couple of magnetars have fields and periods that are comparable to those of HBRPs. This overlap suggests that there could exist lower field magnetars (with $B_{\rm
surf}<10^{14}\rm\,G$) that will evolve into X-ray silent HBRPs (Ferrario and Wickramasinghe [@ferr06]). The same authors have indicated possibility of discovery of ‘hybrid’ young objects having these high magnetic fields, exhibiting both magnetar and radio pulsar characteristics.
Conclusions {#sect:conclusion}
===========
Although HBRPs and magnetars have similar spin parameters, their emission properties are different. It has been suggested that pulsars-like objects could evolve from normal radio pulsars to magnetars (Lyne [@lyne04], Lin & Zhang [@linz04]). Ferrario and Wickramasinghe ([@ferr03], [@ferr06]) argued that the initial neutron stars spin periods may depend critically on their magnetic fields, in particular, there is a tendency for high field systems to be born as slow rotators. These suggestions may reveal a missing link between radio pulsars and magnetars.
We hope to provide solid constraints on HBRP’s radio emission characteristics by comparing HBRPs properties with the properties of normal pulsar population using their multi-frequency and high time resolution data.
This work was supported by the Astronomical Society of Australia (ASA) through Student Travel Funds.
[99]{}
Adler S. L., 1971, Ann. Phys. (N.Y.), 67, 599
Baring M. G., Harding A. K., 1998, , 507, 55
Baring M. G., Harding A. K., 2001, , 547, 929
Duncan R. C., Thompson C., 1992, , 392, 9
Faulkner A. J., et al., 2004, , 355, 147
Ferrario L., Wickramasinghe D. T., 2006, accepted by
Ferrario L., Wickramasinghe D. T., 2003, In: Pulsars, AXPs and SGRs observed with BeppoSAX and Other Observatories, Proceedings of the International Workshop held in Marsala,. eds., Cusumano G., Massaro E., Mineo T., p189
Hobbs G., et al., 2004, , 352, 1439
Kaspi,V. M., Gavriil F. P., 2004, Nuclear Physics B Proceedings Supplements, 132, 456
Kaspi V. M., McLaughlin M. A., 2005, , 618, 41
Kouveliotou C., 2003, in: P. Kaaret, F. K. Lamb, and J. H. Swank, eds., AIP Conference Proceedings, Vol. 714, X-ray Timing 2003: Rossi and Beyond, Cambridge, AIP, p.273
Kramer M., et al., 2003, , 342, 1299
Lin J. R., Zhang S. N., 2004, , 615, 133
Lyne A.G., 2004, In: IAU Symposium no. 218, eds., Camilo & Gaensler, PASP, 257
Malofeev V. M., et al., 2005, Astronomy Reports, Vol. 49, p.242
Manchester R. N., et al., 2001, , 328, 17
Manchester R. N., Hobbs G. B., Teoh A., Hobbs M., 2005, , 129, 1993
McLaughlin et al., 2003, , 591, 135
McLaughlin et al., 2004, IAUS, 218, 255
Morris D. J., et al., 2002, , 335, 275
Vranesevic N., et al, 2004, , 617, 139
Weise J. I., Melrose D. B., 2006, accepted by Phys. Rev. D
\[lastpage\]
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'We report on a precision measurement of the $D$ line tune-out wavelength of $^{87}$Rubidium in the hyperfine ground state $\Ket{F=1, m_F=0,\pm1}$ manifold at $\SI{790}{\nm}$, where the scalar ac Stark shifts of the $D_1$ and the $D_2$ lines cancel. This wavelength is sensitive to usually neglected contributions from vector and tensor ac Stark shifts, transitions to higher principle quantum numbers, and core electrons. The ac Stark shift is probed by Kapitza-Dirac scattering of a Rubidium Bose-Einstein condensate in a one-dimensional optical lattice in free space and controlled magnetic environment. The tune-out wavelength of the magnetically insensitive $m_F=0$ state was determined to $\SI{790.01858 (23)}{\nano \meter}$ with sub ${\si{\pm}}$ accuracy. An *in situ* absolute polarization, and magnetic background field measurement is performed by employing the ac vector Stark shift for the $m_F=\pm 1$ states. Comparing our findings to theory, we get quantitative insight into atomic physics beyond commonly used two-level atom approximations or the neglect of inner shell contributions.'
bibliography:
- 'manuscript.bib'
title: |
Precision Measurement of the $^{87}$Rb Tune-Out Wavelength\
in the Hyperfine Ground State F=1 at 790 nm
---
Introduction
============
Energy shifts of atomic levels due to light-matter interaction have enabled optical traps for neutral atoms with numerous applications in state-of-the-art quantum technology as well as atomic and molecular physics. Of particular interest are so-called magic wavelengths, where contributions originating from the coupling to different atomic transitions cancel in some quantity. Important examples are the cancellation of differential light shifts in atomic traps for spectroscopic applications and metrology [@Barber2008; @Akatsuka2008; @Katori2011; @Ushijima2015], the minimization of differential light shifts for different hyperfine states [@Ludlow2008; @Lemke2009], or engineering of state-dependent traps [@Karski2009; @Soltan-Panahi2011; @Jimenez-Garcia2012; @Belmechri2013].
In mixed-species experiments, the usage of magic wavelength dipole traps facilitates engineering of species-selective optical traps, where in a mixture of two ultracold atomic species only one is optically trapped, while the other experiences a zero-crossing of the total energy shift for this so-called tune-out wavelength [@Leblanc2007; @Arora2011]. Beyond the application of these tune-out wavelengths for quantum engineering, they yield information about the exact atomic level structure. This can be used to compare with *ab-initio* calculations to refine the models of the atom and fundamental atomic data [@Arora2011]. While there are versatile theoretical studies on tune-out wavelengths in alkali metals [@Leblanc2007; @Rosenbusch2009; @Arora2011; @Safronova2012; @Arora2012; @Jiang2013; @Jiang2013_2], only few measurements have been performed in Potassium [@Holmgren2012; @Trubko2015], and Rubidium [@Herold2012; @Leonard2015], using interferometry and, respectively, light shift cancellation techniques.
In our case, the system is designed to provide a species-selective optical lattice for single $^{133}$Cesium (Cs) atoms in a mixture with a $^{87}$Rubidium (Rb) Bose-Einstein condensate (BEC) [@Hohmann2015]. The tune-out wavelength for Rb at $\SI{790}{\nano\meter}$ results from blue detuning to the $D_1$ transition at $\SI{795}{\nano\meter}$ and red detuning to the $D_2$ transition at $\SI{780}{\nano\meter}$, so the ac Stark shifts cancel.
Here, we report on the measurement of this tune-out wavelength in the ground state manifold $\Ket{F=1, m_F = 0,\pm1}$ in the absence of additional light fields and a controlled magnetic environment. Since the dominant scalar ac Stark shifts of both $D$ lines add to zero, our observation reveals usually neglected contributions, such as vector and tensor polarizabilities, transitions to higher quantum numbers, and the influence of core electrons to the scalar polarizability.
We measure the tune-out wavelength of the $m_F=0$ state, where no vector ac Stark shift is present, with an accuracy improvement by a factor of $10$ compared to an earlier measurement [@Lamporesi2010]. We compare our value with a theoretical model, obtained from a recent measurement in a related system [@Leonard2015]. By employing the vector ac Stark shift in the case of $m_F=\pm1$, *in situ* information about the absolute lattice polarization at a sub-percent level and the magnetic background field is gained.
Ac Stark shift and polarizability
=================================
To reveal the influence of additional contributions to the ac Stark shift, the scalar components from the $D$ lines have to be calculated accurately. Therefore, instead of using common approximations, *i.e.* averaging the transitions’ line widths [@Grimm2000] and neglecting the hyperfine structure (HFS) [@Leblanc2007], we sum over all dipole allowed hyperfine transitions, coupled by the light field, following the formalism given in [@Rosenbusch2009; @LeKien2013]. Here, the atom is interacting with an electromagnetic wave $$\vec{E} = \frac{1}{2} E_0 \vec{\text{e}} e^{-i\left( \omega t - kz \right)} + \text{c.c.}
\label{eq:runningWave}$$ of amplitude $E_0$, frequency $\omega$, and wave number $k=\nicefrac{2\pi}{\lambda}$, propagating along the $z$ direction, where $\lambda$ is the laser wavelength. The vector $\vec{\text{e}}$ denotes an arbitrary complex polarization, that is described by a parametric angle $\theta_0$ as $$\vec{\text{e}} = \hat{\text{e}}_x \cos{\theta_0} + i \hat{\text{e}}_y \sin{\theta_0},
\label{eq:polarizationVector}$$ with the degree of circular polarization $A = \sin{2 \theta_0}$. The total energy shift is then calculated for an atom in the hyperfine Zeeman state $\Ket{ n \left( I J \right) F m_F }$, with main quantum number $n$, nuclear spin $I$, electronic angular momentum $J$, total angular momentum $F$ with $\vec{F} = \vec{J} + \vec{I}$, and its projection to the quantization axis $m_F$. This yields an ac Stark shift of $$%
\begin{split}
V^{\left(2\right)}_{n F m_F}(\lambda) = &- \left( \frac{1}{2} E_0 \right)^2
\Bigl[ \alpha^{\text{s}}_{nF}(\lambda) + C \frac{m_F}{2F} \alpha^{\text{v}}_{nF}(\lambda)\\
&- D \frac{3 m_F^2 - F \left( F + 1 \right)}{2F \left( 2F - 1 \right)} \alpha^{\text{T}}_{nF}(\lambda) \Bigr],
\end{split}
\label{eq:acStarkShift}$$ with the state and wavelength dependent scalar, vector, and tensor polarizabilities $\alpha^{\text{s}}_{nF}(\lambda)$, $\alpha^{\text{v}}_{nF}(\lambda)$, and $\alpha^{\text{T}}_{nF}(\lambda)$ respectively, summing over all contributions from dipole allowed transitions to excited states $\Ket{ n^\prime \left( I J^\prime \right) F^\prime m_F^\prime }$. The parameters $C=A \cos{\theta_k}$, and $D={\left( 3 \cos^2{\theta_p}-1 \right)}/{2}$ depend on the light field’s polarization. Here, the orientation of the light field with respect to the system’s quantization axis along the magnetic field vector $\hat{B}$ is given by the angle $\theta_k$ between the quantization axis and the wave vector, and $\theta_p$ between the quantization axis and the polarization vector, respectively. By factorizing the dependencies on $I$, $F$, $m_F$, $F^\prime$, and $m_F^\prime$, all polarizabilities are reduced to the dipole transition matrix elements $\Bra{n^\prime J^\prime} e \hat{r} \Ket{n J}$, which can be taken from literature.
Note that only states with $m_F \neq 0$ show a vector ac Stark shift, which depends on the polarization of the light field. Nevertheless, the tensor polarizability, which vanishes for $J=\nicefrac{1}{2}$ if only fine structure splitting is taken into account [@Rosenbusch2009], shows an ac Stark shift contribution even in the $m_F=0$ case.
Figure \[fig:DipolePotentialsPlot\] illustrates the wavelength and light polarization dependence of the ac Stark shift. The vector ac Stark shift disappears for $m_F=0$, but can shift the tune-out wavelengths of the $m_F=\pm1$ states by up to $\SI{2}{\nano \meter}$ in the case of circularly polarized light ($A=\pm1$).
![The ac Stark shift $V_0$ for Rb atoms in the $m_F=0$ (solid), $m_F=+1$ (dashed), and $m_F=-1$ (dashed-dotted) ground states $\Ket{F=1}$, for right handed ($\sigma^+$) polarized light ($\theta_0 = \nicefrac{\pi}{4}$). $V_0$ is given in multiples of the photon recoil $E_r$ at $\SI{790}{\nano \meter}$, and a typical light intensity in our experiment of $I=\SI{136}{\milli\W \per \centi\meter^2}$. The inset shows a magnified view of the tune-out wavelength for the three $m_F$ states (vertical lines). The tune-out wavelengths of the $m_F=\pm 1$ states are shifted by more than $\SI{2}{\nano \metre}$ with respect to the $m_F=0$ states due to the vector ac Stark shift. []{data-label="fig:DipolePotentialsPlot"}](./img/Magic_Wavelength_Energies){width="47.50000%"}
Experimental Method
===================
We measure the ac Stark shift around the tune-out wavelength by employing Kapitza-Dirac (KD) scattering, the diffraction of a matter wave at a light grating. KD scattering has been originally introduced [@Kapitza1933] and measured [@Bucksbaum1988; @Freimund2001] for electrons. The diffraction of neutral atoms was demonstrated for atomic beams [@Arimondo1979; @Gould1986], ultracold clouds [@Cahn1997], and BECs [@Ovchinnikov1999], and since then became a standard tool for atom interferometry applications [@Sapiro2009; @Li2014] and optical lattice characterization [@Jo2012; @Windpassinger2013; @Cheiney2013].\
We perform the KD experiment by flashing a Rb BEC for a duration $\tau=\SI{12}{\micro \second}$ with a one-dimensional static optical lattice, derived from two counterpropagating beams along $z$, with wavelength $\lambda$ and linear polarization parallel to $x$. The earlier discussed ac Stark shift results in a lattice potential of $V_0$. The Rb matter wave scatters at the light grating of periodicity $\nicefrac{\lambda}{2}$, imposing a momentum transfer of multiples of $2 \hbar k = 2\pi \hbar \frac{2}{\lambda}$, with $\hbar=\nicefrac{h}{2\pi}$ and Planck’s constant $h$. In the theoretical description, the particle motion during the interaction is neglected (Raman-Nath regime) [@Kazantsev1980; @Gould1986], yielding an occupation of the momentum states $p = 2 N \hbar k$ ($N=0,\pm1, \pm 2, ...)$ with a respective probability of $$P_N( V_0, \tau ) = J^2_N\left( \frac{V_0 \tau}{2} \right),
\label{eq:scatteringAmplitude}$$ where $J_N(\theta)$ are the Bessel functions of the first kind. In our system, the Raman-Nath condition is fulfilled for absolute lattice depths $|V_0|\ll \SI{125}{E_r}$, given in multiples of the photon recoil $E_r = \nicefrac{\left(\hbar k\right)^2}{2m_{\text{Rb}}}$, with Rb mass $m_{\text{Rb}}$.
![Experimental Setup. (a) Simplified artist’s view on the experiment. The coil setup used for magnetic field control consists of the homogeneous field coils (1), the Stern-Gerlach coil (2), and 3D compensation coils (3). The dipole trap beam (4) and the two counterpropagating lattice beams (5) are overlapped by dichroic mirrors on the main axis through the glass cell. (b) Schematic scattering process. When applying the lattice pulse on the free falling BEC, atoms are scattered into higher momentum orders $\pm 2 N \hbar k$ depending on the potential depth. (c) Schematic time line for the experimental sequence. After preparing the BEC in the dipole trap and setting the magnetic field to the desired value, the dipole trap is switched off and after a delay of $\SI{3}{\micro\second}$, the lattice pulse of $\tau=\SI{12}{\micro\second}$ duration is applied. Subsenquently, the Stern-Gerlach field gradient is switched on and after $\SI{20}{\milli\second}$ the atoms are imaged via absorption imaging along the y-axis.[]{data-label="fig:Setup"}](img/setup.eps){width="48.00000%"}
Experimentally, both lattice beams are derived from a single-frequency Titanium Sapphire (Ti:Sa) laser and intensity-modulated with acousto-optic modulators (AOM) in each lattice arm, yielding a power of up to $\SI{450}{\milli \watt}$ per beam at a waist of $\SI{29}{\micro\meter}$. The AOMs shift the laser frequency by $-\SI{160}{\mega\Hz}\pm \SI{1}{\Hz}$ and therefore the wavelength by $\Delta\lambda=+\SI{0.42}{\pm}$ (at $\lambda=\SI{790}{\nano\meter}$). The radio frequency source, driving both AOMs is switched by means of a voltage controlled attenuator (VCA), limiting the pulse edges to a $\nicefrac{1}{e}$-time of $\SI{1.7}{\micro \second}$. In a crossed dipole trap at $\lambda=\SI{1064}{\nano \meter}$ a BEC of typically $2.5 \times 10^4$ atoms is prepared. The BEC is optically pumped to the absolute ground state $\Ket{F=1, m_F=+1}$ and driven into a desired $m_F$ state by means of a radio frequency transition. Details on our BEC preparation scheme are given in [@Hohmann2015].
Although KD scattering experiments have also been performed in thermal gases [@Cahn1997], the BEC system features a lower thermal momentum spread. In particular, the thermal spread is smaller than the momentum transfer of multiples of $2 \hbar k$, which allows for separating and counting populations of higher momentum orders with standard time of flight (TOF) absorption imaging.
Figure \[fig:Setup\] shows our setup and a typical experimental sequence. The KD pulse is applied $\SI{3}{\micro \second}$ after releasing the BEC from the optical dipole trap, so we exclude any influence of the trap [@Neuzner2015] on the measured tune-out wavelength. During the KD pulse, three orthogonal pairs of offset field coils create a magnetic field of up to $\SI{3}{G}$ in each direction. Additional homogeneous field coils allow to apply a strong offset field along $z$ of up to several $\SI{100}{G}$. Due to the VCA’s switching response and fluctuations of the optical setup, the lattice pulse shape deviates from an ideal square wave. Analyzing the time dependent intensity of both lattice beams, we obtain a reduction of the effective pulse duration from ideally $\SI{12}{\micro \second}$ to $\SI{8.75}{\micro \second}$ with respect to the maximum lattice intensity, and an intensity fluctuation of $\SI{2.3}{\percent}$ rms, respectively. The latter results in a reduction of the lattice potential $V_0$ on the same order of magnitude. Note that the fluctuation of $V_0$ does not affect the zero-crossing point of the lattice potential.
Figure \[fig:AnalysisMethod\] shows a KD measurement of a Rb spin mixture after $\SI{20}{\milli \second}$ TOF. The magnetic states $m_F=0, \pm 1$ are spatially separated by applying an inhomogeneous magnetic Stern-Gerlach field after the KD flash.
![KD image for a Rb spin mixture. (a) KD scattering image for $\SI{12}{\micro \second}$ pulse at a lattice wavelength of $\SI{790.018}{\nano \meter}$ after $\SI{20}{\milli \second}$ TOF. The $m_F$ states are distinguished by applying a magnetic Stern-Gerlach field along the gravitation axis $x$. The wavelength corresponds to the tune-out wavelength of the $m_F=0$ state. $m_F=+1$ and $m_F=-1$ show scattering into higher momentum orders due to the vector ac Stark shift. (b) The use of an improved absorption image calculation suppresses interference fringes of the imaging laser and background noise, increasing the SNR from $34$ to $95$. (c) The signal is vertically binned in the highlighted areas for each $m_F$ state. The improved image calculation (solid line) is compared to the standard technique (shaded). (d) A multi-Gaussian (solid line) is fitted to the line data (shaded line) from (b). The transfers are determined from the areas of the BEC peaks (shaded area). The population of the $\pm 4 \hbar k$ peaks correspond to less than $1750$ Rb atoms each. []{data-label="fig:AnalysisMethod"}](./img/sampleAnalysis.eps){width="50.00000%"}
The population of each $ 2 N \hbar k$ momentum state is fitted with a double Gaussian, representing a superposition of a thermal background and a BEC peak. Since the thermal contributions cannot be well distinguished from each other, only the BEC contributions are included into the analysis according to equation (\[eq:scatteringAmplitude\]). Note that the scattering amplitudes $P_N(V_0, \tau)$ are equal for positive and negative lattice potentials, and therefore give a measure of the absolute ac Stark shift. Therefore, the sign has to be determined from the theoretical model.
When measuring KD at weak lattice potentials $V_0$, the atomic density signal in higher momentum states approaches the detection threshold of our imaging system, which is mainly determined by the occurrence of fringes in the absorption images. Since the atomic density is calculated as $\propto -\log{(S_i / R_i)}$ from the actual absorption image $S_i$ containing the shadow of the BEC, and a reference image $R_i$ with only the probe laser light, any fluctuation of interference patterns between the two images results in fringes in the atomic density (see figure \[fig:AnalysisMethod\](a)).
This effect is strongly suppressed by using an optimum reference image $R_{\text{best}}$, that reproduces the background properties of the signal shot $S_i$ [@Ockeloen2010], and thereby the specific interference pattern. We compute $R_{\text{best}}$ as a linear combination $\sum_k^M c_k R_k$ of up to $500$ reference images from a base $\left[ R_k \right]$, so it optimally matches a signal-free area in the absorption signal $S_i$ with a size of roughly $200 \times 300$ pixel. The least square fitting algorithm, given in [@Ockeloen2010] was optimized by diagonalizing the base of reference images $\left[ R_k \right]$, allowing for a computation time of less than $\SI{100}{\milli \second}$ per absorption image on a standard personal computer. The approach avoids fringes, created by time varying interference patterns of the probe laser beam at the best and even yields a reduction of photon shot noise [@Ockeloen2010], increasing the signal to noise ratio (SNR) by a factor of at least $3$ in our measurements.
Results
=======
$m_F=0$ State Measurement
-------------------------
![Tune-out wavelength measurement of Rb in the $\Ket{F=1, m_F=0}$ state. (a) From the KD scattering images, the populations in the zero momentum state (triangle), $\pm 2 \hbar k$ (square), and $\pm 4 \hbar k$ (circle) state were extracted. Insets show samples of KD images for vanishing (center) and maximal potential (right). (b) The resulting lattice potential $V_0$ (dots) was fitted with the model of eq. (\[eq:linearApprox\]) with the tune-out wavelength $\lambda_M$ (solid line). (c) For various magnetic offset fields $B_z$ the tune-out wavelength has been measured. The values scatter around the average of $\bar{\lambda}_M = \SI{790.01858}{\nano \metre}$ (solid line). The error bars are calculated from the fitting uncertainties of (b) and the wavelength measurement calibration.[]{data-label="fig:mFMagicWavelength"}](./img/potentials_mF0_paper.eps){width="50.00000%"}
We measure the tune-out wavelength of the $m_F = 0$ state, where the scalar and the tensor, but no vector ac Stark shift is present. The laser wavelength is measured with a wavelength meter, offering a resolution of $\SI{50}{\mega\hertz}$, and an automatic calibration to a built-in wavelength standard. We have validated the calibration by measuring the wavelength of a laser, stabilized to the Rb $\Ket{5S_{\nicefrac{1}{2}}F=1}\rightarrow\Ket{5P_{\nicefrac{3}{2}}F=2}$ transition [@Steck2010], with an absolute accuracy of $\SI{20}{\mega\hertz}$. For the measurements we use a magnetic offset field of $(B_{x_0}, B_{y_0}, B_{z_0}) = (0.4, 0.3, -0.7) \si{G}$ and apply a homogeneous quantization field $B_z$ along $z$. Since for $m_F=0$ the nonlinear Zeeman energy is negligible for weak magnetic fields, we do not expect a magnetic field dependence of the tune-out wavelength. However, the measurement is limited to $B_z\approx \SI{100}{G}$. For higher fields, an asymmetric background in the absorption images occurs, which perturbs the momentum transfer fits. We attribute the asymmetric background to a superposition of the homogeneous quantization field and the Stern-Gerlach field.
[17.8cm]{}[>XXXXXXX]{} & $\lambda_{M, \text{5s-5p, theo}}$$+$& $\Delta\lambda_{\text{tensor}}$$+$ & $\Delta\lambda_{\text{5s-6p+}}$ $+$& $\Delta\lambda_{\text{c, cv}}$ $=$& $\lambda_{M, \text{total, theo}}$ & [$\lambda_{M, \text{experiment}}$]{}\
& $\left( \si{\nano \meter} \right)$ & $\left( \si{\pico \meter} \right)$ & $\left( \si{\pico \meter} \right)$ & $\left( \si{\pico \meter} \right)$ & $\left( \si{\nano \meter} \right)$ & $\left( \si{\nano \meter} \right)$\
$d_{\nicefrac{1}{2}}$, $d_{\nicefrac{3}{2}}$$^{\text{(a)}}$ & $790.0181(56)$ & & & & $790.0228(57)$ &\
$R$, $d_{\nicefrac{3}{2}}$$^{\text{(b)}}$ & $790.01374(1)$ & & & & 790.01850(9)\
\[tab:TheoryMagicWavelength\]
Figure \[fig:mFMagicWavelength\] shows the measurement of the lattice potential depth around the tune-out wavelength for various offset fields $B_z$ in a range of $\SI{5}{G}$ to $\SI{100}{G}$. The dependence of the potential $V_0(\lambda)$, taken from equation (\[eq:acStarkShift\]) is approximately linear with a maximum deviation of $\SI{0.25}{\percent}$ in the measured wavelength range, and writes $$V_0(\lambda)= \frac{\partial V_0}{\partial \lambda} (\lambda-\lambda_M),
\label{eq:linearApprox}$$ with the slope $\frac{\partial V_0}{\partial \lambda}$, and the tune-out wavelength $\lambda_M$. Since the KD scattering analysis yields absolute values, $\left|V_0(\lambda)\right|$ is fitted to the potentials. We average the $\lambda_M$ data and obtain a tune-out wavelength of $\bar{\lambda}_M = \SI{790.01858 (23)}{\nano \meter}$ for the $\Ket{F=1, m_F=0}$ state, providing a 10-fold accuracy improvement compared to the previous measurement of $\SI{790.018(2)}{\nano \meter}$ in the same internal state [@Lamporesi2010]. We compare our result to the model from equation (\[eq:acStarkShift\]), assuming a scalar polarizability of $$\alpha^{\text{s}}_{nJF}(\lambda) = \alpha^{\text{5s-5p}}_{F}(\lambda) + \alpha^{\text{5s-6p+}}_{J} + \alpha^{\text{c, cv}}.$$ Here, $\alpha^{\text{5s-5p}}_{F}(\lambda)$ contains all wavelength dependent scalar polarizabilities from the Rb $D$ lines, that we calculate from the dipole allowed hyperfine transitions with respective energy splitting [@LeKien2013]. Transitions to higher $P$ states are represented by $\alpha^{\text{5s-6p+}}_{J}$, where only the fine structure is taken into account. The contribution of core electrons and core electron - valence electron interaction is represented by $\alpha^{\text{c, cv}}$ [@Arora2011]. For $\alpha^{\text{5s-6p+}}_{J}$ as well as $\alpha^{\text{c, cv}}$ most recent values from [@Leonard2015] are used. Since $\alpha^{\text{5s-6p+}}_{J}$ and $\alpha^{\text{c, cv}}$ are 4 orders of magnitude smaller than $\alpha^{\text{5s-5p}}_{F}$, their contribution is negligible in applications using far-off resonance dipole traps. In contrast, at the tune-out wavelength studied here, the polarizabilities of both Rb $D$ lines cancel, revealing these usually negligible components.
Table \[tab:TheoryMagicWavelength\] compares the theoretical prediction of the tune-out wavelength with our measurement. We first calculate a theoretical value for the tune-out wavelength $\lambda_{M, \text{5s-5p}}$, if only the $D$ line contributions $\alpha^{\text{5s-5p}}_{F}$ were present. Each further contribution, *i.e.* the tensor polarizability, the higher transitions, and the core electrons leads to a correction of the tune-out wavelength toward higher wavelengths of in total $\Delta\lambda_M=\SI{4.749(87)}{\pico \meter}$.
Using direct measurements of the reduced dipole matrix elements $d_{\nicefrac{1}{2}} = \Bra{5S_{\nicefrac{1}{2}}} d \Ket{5P_{\nicefrac{1}{2}}} $, and $d_{\nicefrac{3}{2}} = \Bra{5S_{\nicefrac{1}{2}}}d\Ket{5P_{\nicefrac{3}{2}}}$ in the calculation of the $D$ line contributions from [@Steck2010] yields an expected tune-out wavelength of $\SI{790.0228(57)}{\nano \meter}$. Here, the uncertainty of $\SI{5.7}{\pico \meter}$ in the prediction does not allow for verifying the expected tune-out wavelength shift of $\Delta\lambda_M=\SI{4.749(87)}{\pico \meter}$. For comparison, we take the more accurately measured ratio of both dipole matrix elements $R = \nicefrac{|d_{\nicefrac{3}{2}}|^2}{|d_{\nicefrac{1}{2}}|^2}$ from [@Leonard2015], that has been gained from determining the tune-out wavelength of the $\Ket{F=2, m_F=2}$ state, and get $\SI{790.01850 (9)}{\nano \meter}$. Our measurement is in agreement with the model within the $1\sigma$ uncertainties, confirming the non-negligible influence of higher transitions and the core-electron polarizability.
We emphasize that in the absence of the vector ac Stark shift for $m_F=0$, the apparent discrepancy with the tune-out wavelength value, obtained for Rb in $\Ket{F=2}$ of $\SI{790.0324}{\nano \meter}$ [@Leonard2015] results from different couplings to excited states rather than light polarization or magnetic field effects.
$m_F=\pm 1$ State Measurement
-----------------------------
Complementary information about the influence of the vector ac Stark shift is gained by investigating the lattice potential of $m_F=\pm 1$. The vector polarizability $\alpha^{\text{v}}_{F}(\lambda)$ is constant to the sub-percent level in the measured wavelength range, so the tune-out wavelengths for the $m_F=\pm 1$ states strongly depend on the polarization properties $A$ and $\theta_k$ of the light field.
![Lattice potential for the $m_F=\pm 1$ states. Due to the vector Stark shift, the tune-out wavelength for the $m_F=-1$ state (circles, left) is shifted to a lower, and $m_F=+1$ (triangles, right) is shifted to a higher wavelength. As a reference, the $m_F = 0$ (dashed, center) potential is given. The solid line shows one single fit to both the $m_F=+1$ and the $m_F=-1$ state with our model, including a circular degree of polarization $A$ of the lattice (see eq. (\[eq:effectiveCircPolA\])). []{data-label="fig:latticePolarizationState"}](./img/latticePolarizationFit.eps){width="50.00000%"}
The resulting vector light shift $V_0\propto A \cos{\theta_k} m_F \alpha^{\text{v}}_{F}$ yields a symmetric shift of the tune-out wavelengths with respect to $m_F=0$ according to the sign of the respective $m_F$ state. We perform the measurement analogously to $m_F=0$ for a quantization field of $B_z = \SI{50}{G}$, parallel to the $\hat{k}$ vector with an angle of $\theta_k = \SI{0.0(1)}{\degree}$. Therefore, the system is maximally sensitive to the degree of circular lattice polarization $A$. Figure \[fig:latticePolarizationState\] shows the fitted lattice potentials for both states. The wavelength of minimal remaining lattice potential of $m_F=-1(+1)$ is shifted to a lower (higher) wavelength, indicating a small contribution of left hand circularly polarized ($\sigma^-$) lattice polarization. In addition, the lattice potential does not drop to zero as expected. We model this by a fluctuating degree of circular polarization during the KD pulse, effectively shaking the $v$-shape potential curve along the $\lambda$ axis and therefore smoothing out the minimum of the lattice potential. We assume a normally distributed probability of $A$ with a standard deviation of $\sigma_A$ around the expectation value $A_0$. This model yields an effective potential for Rb atoms of $$\begin{aligned}
|V_0| &= \frac{E_0^2}{4} \left[ \sqrt{\frac{8 {\sigma_A}^2}{\pi}} \text{e}^{- \frac{{\gamma}^2}{8 {\sigma_A}^2}} + \gamma \text{erf}{\left(\frac{\gamma}{\sqrt{8 {\sigma_A}^2}}\right)} \right]. \\
\end{aligned}
\label{eq:effectiveCircPolA}$$ Here, $\gamma = \alpha^{\text{s,t}} + A_0 \frac{m_F}{F}\alpha^{\text{v}}$ is the lattice potential in the absence of fluctuations in $A$ ($\sigma_A = 0$). We fit the model to the measured $m_F=\pm 1$ data, including the knowledge about the value of the magic wavelength $\lambda_M$ from the $m_F=0$ measurement, and using $\nicefrac{\partial V_0}{\partial \lambda}$, $A_0$ and $\sigma_A$ as only free parameters. We obtain $A_0 = \SI{-7.80(4)e-3}{}$, which corresponds to an angle of circular polarization of $\theta_0 = \SI{-0.223(1)}{\degree}$, and a fluctuation of $\sigma_A = \SI{4.78(9)e-3}{}$ and $\sigma_{\theta_0}= \SI{0.137(8)}{\degree}$, respectively. In our setup both lattice arms are linearized before entering the vacuum chamber by a combination of a polarizing beam splitting cube (PBC), a polarization maintaining optical fiber, a half-wave plate, and another PBC. Therefore, we attribute the admixture of circular polarization components to the birefringence of the vacuum chamber windows [@Solmeyer2011; @Steffen2013; @Zhu2013], which however does not explain the comparably large and high-frequency fluctuations.
The results from the $m_F=\pm 1$ measurements are of major importance for a possible application of the lattice for species-selective experiments, since even for $A_0=0$ and the magnetic field orientation chosen here, the fluctuations lead to a non-vanishing lattice potential for $m_F = \pm 1$ of more than $\SI{5}{E_r}$. For comparison, in the $m_F=0$ state the residual lattice potential dropped to $\SI{1.1}{E_r}$, when averaging in a wavelength range of $\pm\SI{1}{\pm}$ around the tune-out wavelength.
Magnetic Field Dependence
-------------------------
![Measurement of the vector Stark shift. (a) An offset field $B_z$ along the $z$ axis, parallel to the lattice $\vec{k}$ vector is applied. For $B_z=-B_{0,z}$, the quantization axis along the total magnetic field $\vec{B}_t$ is perpendicular to $\vec{k}$, minimizing the vector light shift. The minimum at $B_{0,z}$ is fitted (solid line) according to our model (eq. \[eq:thetaKMagnetic\]). (b) For an offset field $B_x$ along the $x$ axis, the projection of $\vec{B}_t$ is maximized for $B_x=-B_{0, x}$. Using $B_{0,z}$ from (a), we get $B_{0,x}$ and $B_{0,y}$ from the fit (solid line). (c) Applying an offset $B_y$ along the $y$ axis, the vector Stark shift is maximized for $B_y = -B_{0,y}$ as well. The solid line shows the model with fit results from (a) and (b). The lattice wavelength was held constant at the tune-out wavelength $\SI{790.0182(2)}{\nano \meter}$ for all measurements. For each magnetic field, roughly 20 data points were taken.[]{data-label="fig:MagneticFieldMeasurement"}](./img/magnetic_fields.eps){width="50.00000%"}
After studying the dependence of the vector ac Stark shift on the light polarization, we investigate the influence of the magnetic field orientation on the lattice potential. The vector Stark shift is proportional to the projection $\cos{\theta_k}={\vec{k} \cdot \vec{B}_t} / (|\vec{k}| |\vec{B}_t|)$ of the lattice $\vec{k}$ vector to the total magnetic field $\vec{B}_t$. We superpose the magnetic background $\vec{B}_0$ with a known offset field $\vec{B} = (B_x, B_y, B_z)$, and thereby vary $\vec{B}_t$. With $\vec{k}$ aligned parallel to the $z$ axis, the projection writes $$\cos{\theta_k} = \frac{B_{z, t}}{\sqrt{B_{x, t}^2 + B_{y, t}^2 + B_{z, t}^2}}
\label{eq:thetaKMagnetic}$$ with the spatial components of the total magnetic field $B_{i, t}=B_{0, i} + B_i$ in each direction $i$. Important cases are $B_z=-B_{0,z}$, where the projection is vanishing as well as $B_x=-B_{0,x}$ and $B_y=-B_{0,y}$, where $\cos{\theta_k}$ is maximized. We measure the vector ac Stark shift for varying offset along one direction, while keeping the fields in both remaining directions at zero. The lattice wavelength is set to the tune-out wavelength of $m_F=0$, allowing for maximum sensitivity to the vector ac Stark shift.
Figure \[fig:MagneticFieldMeasurement\] shows the measured lattice potential for Rb in the $m_F=+1$ state. From the $B_z$, and the $B_x$ variation measurement, we obtain a background field of $\vec{B}_0 = (0.28, 0.11, -0.39)\SI{}{G}$. For comparison, using a Hall probe, we measure a magnetic background field of $\vec{B}_{0,H}=(0.25(1), 0.11(1), -0.20(3))\SI{}{G}$ in the lab. While $B_{0,x}$, and $B_{0,y}$ agree fairly well with the independent measurement, a discrepancy in $B_{0,z}$ occurs, which we attribute to an additional magnetic background from our setup due to a residual field from the homogeneous field coils. Using the fitted background field, the lattice potential maximum in the $B_y$ variation is reproduced. We suspect the asymmetric wavelength to result from an unwanted magnetic field component of the $B_y$ coils along the $z$ direction. To increase the accuracy of the background field measurement, optical magnetometry [@Budker2007] or magnetic field imaging [@Koschorreck2011] techniques could be applied.
Combining our results of the lattice polarization measurement and the magnetic background field $\vec{B}_0$, we gained a valuable understanding of the factors $A$ and $\cos{\theta_k}$, that determine the influence of the vector Stark shift on the lattice potential *in situ*. In particular, by applying a strong offset field along the $x$ axis, we can reduce the influence of the polarization fluctuations, reaching equally vanishing trapping potentials for all $m_F = 0, \pm 1$ states at the tune-out wavelength, as indicated in the measurement, shown in figure \[fig:MagneticFieldMeasurement\] (b).
Conclusions
===========
We have presented an experiment to measure the ac Stark shift around the tune-out wavelength of Rb in the hyperfine ground state manifold $\Ket{F=1, m_F=0,\pm1}$ at $\SI{790}{\nano \meter}$. At the tune-out wavelength, ac Stark shifts from higher transitions and core electrons, as well as vector and tensor polarizabilities are resolved, that are orders of magnitude smaller than the dominant scalar polarizabilities from the $D_1$ and $D_2$ line. In addition, by separating the magnetic $m_F=0, \pm1$ Zeeman states, we exclude the influence of the vector ac Stark shift on demand. Our measurements feature a Kapitza-Dirac scattering technique, combined with an improved absorption image processing, the absence of additional trapping light fields, and a magnetically controlled environment.
When measuring the $m_F=0$ state, we exclude the influence of the vector ac Stark shift on the tune-out wavelength. Our value of $\SI{790.01858 (23)}{\nano \meter}$ provides a 10-fold accuracy improvement compared to the previous measurement [@Lamporesi2010] in the same atomic state, and therefore allows for resolving the influence of transitions to higher principle quantum numbers, core electron and core-valence electron contributions to the scalar polarizability $\alpha^{\text{s}}$ of Rb. This confirms a recent measurement of these contributions [@Leonard2015] in a complementary system.
The vector ac Stark shift is included into the system when measuring the lattice potential of the $m_F=-1$ and $m_F=+1$ states. From the shift of the tune-out wavelength with respect to $m_F=0$, we evaluate the degree of circular polarization $A_0 = \SI{-7.80(4)e-3}{}$ of the optical lattice, and its fluctuation $\sigma_A = \SI{4.78(9)e-3}{}$ *in situ*. In addition, by exploiting the dependence of the vector light shift on the quantization field orientation, we have determined the magnetic background field.\
Besides probing the atomic level structure beyond common approximations, we apply the tune-out wavelength in our Cs-Rb mixed-species experiment. For our species-selective trapping application, we reach a trap potential selectivity $\nicefrac{V_\text{Cs}}{V_\text{Rb}}$ exceeding $\SI{1.8e3}{}$ for the $m_F=\pm1$ states and more than $\SI{3.3e3}{}$ in the case of $m_F=0$. In a lattice physics scenario with lattice depth for Cs in the order of $\SI{25}{E_{r,\text{Cs}}}$ [@Bloch2005], for Rb this would cause a remaining trap potential of $\SI{9.1e-3}{E_{r}}$, and a photon scattering rate of $\SI{5.7}{\Hz}$, where $E_{r,\text{Cs}}=\nicefrac{\left(\hbar k\right)^2}{2m_{\text{Cs}}}$ is the recoil energy for Cs. The species-selective lattice will allow for the study of non-equilibrium interaction effects, such as polaron transport [@Bruderer2008], coherence properties of Cs in the Rb bath [@Klein2005], and Bloch oscillations [@Grusdt2014]. Moreover, a full understanding of all relevant ac Stark shift contributions to the Rb potential enables us to engineer $m_F$ state-dependent trapping schemes with variable selectivity and tunable species overlap.
Acknowledgments
===============
The project was financially supported partially by the European Union via the ERC Starting Grant 278208 and partially by the DFG via SFB/TR49. D.M. is a recipient of a DFG-fellowship through the Excellence Initiative by the Graduate School Materials Science in Mainz (GSC 266), F.S. acknowledges funding by Studienstiftung des deutschen Volkes, and T.L. acknowledges funding from Carl-Zeiss Stiftung.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'We undertake a local analysis of combinatorial independence as it connects to topological entropy within the framework of actions of sofic groups.'
address:
- '-David Kerr, Department of Mathematics, Texas A[&]{}M University, College Station, TX 77843-3368, U.S.A.'
- '-Hanfeng Li, Department of Mathematics, Chongqing University, Chongqing 401331, China. Department of Mathematics, SUNY at Buffalo, Buffalo, NY 14260-2900, U.S.A.'
author:
- David Kerr
- Hanfeng Li
date: 'November 30, 2012'
title: Combinatorial independence and sofic entropy
---
Introduction
============
Among the various phenomena in dynamics associated with randomness, weak mixing and entropy stand out for the depth of their theory and the breadth of their applications (see for example [@EinWar11; @Gla03]). In the setting of discrete acting groups, weak mixing makes sense in general while entropy, as classically formulated, requires the group to be amenable. One can view these two concepts in a unified way across both measurable and topological dynamics by means of the combinatorial notion of independence. In close parallel with the $\ell_1$ theorems of Rosenthal and Elton-Pajor in Banach space theory, weak mixing and positive entropy reflect two of the basic regimes in which combinatorial independence can occur across the orbit of a tuple of sets in a dynamical system. The first of these asks for independence over a subset of the group having infinite cardinality, while the other requires this subset to satisfy a positive density condition. Inspired by work in the local theory of entropy [@GlaYe09], the authors studied this connection between independence, weak mixing, and entropy in [@KerLi07; @KerLi09] as part of a program to develop a general theory of combinatorial independence in dynamics.
Combinatorial independence is the basic set-theoretic expression of randomness in which we are concerned not with the size of intersections, as in the probabilistic context, but merely with their nonemptiness. A collection $\{ (A_{i,1} , \dots , A_{i,k} ) \}_{i\in J}$ of $k$-tuples of subsets of a set $X$ is [*independent*]{} if for every nonempty finite set $F\subseteq J$ and function $\omega : F\to \{ 1,\dots,k\}$ the intersection $\bigcap_{i\in F} A_{i,\omega(i)}$ is nonempty. If a group $G$ is acting on $X$ then given a tuple $(A_1 ,\dots,A_k )$ of subsets of $X$ we say that a set $J\subseteq G$ is an [*independence set for $(A_1 ,\dots,A_k )$*]{} if the collection $\{ (s^{-1} A_1 ,\dots ,s^{-1} A_k) \}_{s\in J}$ is independent. In the case of an action of a countable amenable group $G$ on a compact Hausdorff space $X$, the [*independence density*]{} $I({{\boldsymbol{A}}})$ of a tuple ${{\boldsymbol{A}}}= (A_1 ,\dots, A_k )$ of subsets of $X$ is defined as the limit of $\varphi_{{{\boldsymbol{A}}}}(F) /|F|$ as the nonempty finite set $F\subseteq G$ becomes more and more left invariant, where $\varphi_{{{\boldsymbol{A}}}}(F)$ denotes the maximum of the cardinalities of the independence sets for ${{\boldsymbol{A}}}$ which are contained in $F$ [@KerLi07 Prop. 3.23]. We then say that a tuple $(x_1 , \dots , x_k ) \in X^k$ is an [*IE-tuple*]{} if for every product neighbourhood $U_1 \times\cdots\times U_k$ of $(x_1 , \dots , x_k )$ the tuple ${{\boldsymbol{U}}}= (U_1 ,\dots, U_k )$ satisfies $I({{\boldsymbol{U}}}) > 0$. This condition on ${{\boldsymbol{U}}}$ is equivalent to the existence of an independence set $J\subseteq G$ for ${{\boldsymbol{U}}}$ which has positive density with respect to a given tempered F[ø]{}lner sequence $\{ F_i \}_{i\in {{\mathbb N}}}$ in the sense that $\lim_{i\to\infty} |F_i \cap J|/|F_i| > 0$. It turns out that a nondiagonal tuple is an IE-tuple if and only if it is an entropy tuple [@KerLi07 Sect. 3]. For general acting $G$ we define IT-tuples in the same way as IE-tuples except that we ask instead for the independence set to have infinite cardinality. Versions of IE-tuples and IT-tuples can also be defined for probability-measure-preserving actions by requiring the condition on the independence set to hold whenever we remove small parts of the sets $s^{-1}U_1, \dots, s^{-1}U_k$ for each $s\in G$. The following are some of the results relating independence, weak mixing, and entropy that were established in [@KerLi07; @KerLi09].
1. A continuous action $G\curvearrowright X$ of an Abelian group on a compact Hausdorff space is (topologically) weakly mixing if and only if every tuple of points in $X$ is an IT-tuple (in which case the action is said to be [*uniformly untame of all orders*]{}).
2. A probability-measure-preserving action $G\curvearrowright (X,\mu )$ of an arbitrary group is weakly mixing if and only if its universal topological model is uniformly untame of all orders.
3. A continuous action $G\curvearrowright X$ of a discrete amenable group on a compact Hausdorff space has positive topological entropy if and only if it has a nondiagonal IE-pair (for $G={{\mathbb Z}}$ this was first proved by Huang and Ye in [@HuaYe06] using measure-theoretic techniques). Moreover, the action has uniformly positive entropy if and only if every pair of points in $X$ is an IE-pair, and uniformly positive entropy of all orders if and only if every tuple of points in $X$ is an IE-tuple.
4. A probability-measure-preserving action $G\curvearrowright (X,\mu )$ of a discrete amenable group has positive measure entropy if and only if there is a nondiagonal measure IE-pair in some topological model. Moreover, the action has complete positive entropy if and only if every tuple of points is an IE-tuple in the universal topological model (for $G={{\mathbb Z}}$ this was proved by Glasner and Weiss in [@GlaWei95]).
Chung and the second author applied IE-tuples in [@ChuLi11] as part of a new approach for studying the relation between homoclinicity and entropy in expansive algebraic actions that enabled them to break the commutativity barrier and establish some duality-type equivalences for polycyclic-by-finite acting groups. In this case, and more generally for actions of a countable amenable group on a compact group $X$ by automorphisms, the analysis of IE-tuples is governed by a single closed invariant normal subgroup of $X$ called the [*IE group*]{} [@ChuLi11 Sect. 7].
Recent seminal work of Bowen in [@Bow10] has expanded the scope of the classical theory of entropy for actions of discrete amenable groups to the much broader realm of sofic acting groups. For a countable group $G$, soficity can be expressed as the existence of a sequence $\Sigma = \{ \sigma_i : G\to{{\rm Sym}}(d_i ) \}$ of maps from $G$ into finite permutation groups which is asymptotically multiplicative and free in the sense that
1. $\displaystyle\lim_{i\to\infty} \frac{1}{d_i}
\big| \{ k\in \{ 1,\dots ,d_i \} : \sigma_{i,st} (k) = \sigma_{i,s} \sigma_{i,t} (k) \} \big| = 1$ for all $s,t\in G$, and
2. $\displaystyle\lim_{i\to\infty} \frac{1}{d_i} \big| \{ k\in \{ 1,\dots ,d_i \} : \sigma_{i,s} (k) \neq \sigma_{i,t} (k) \} \big| = 1$ for all distinct $s,t\in G$.
Such a sequence for which $\lim_{i\to\infty} d_i = \infty$ we call a [*sofic approximation sequence*]{}. By measuring the asymptotic exponential growth of dynamical models which are compatible with a fixed sofic approximation sequence, Bowen defined in [@Bow10] a collection of invariants for probability-measure-preserving actions of a countable sofic group admitting a generating partition with finite Shannon entropy. A remarkable application of this sofic measure entropy was a far-reaching extension of the Ornstein-Weiss classification of Bernoulli actions of amenable groups.
The authors developed in [@KerLi11] a more general operator-algebraic approach to sofic entropy that enables one to remove the generator hypothesis (see also [@Ker12] for a formulation in terms of finite partitions). This led to a sofic version of topological entropy as well as a variational principle relating it to sofic measure entropy. We used this variational principle to compute the sofic topological entropy of a principal algebraic action $G\curvearrowright \widehat{{{\mathbb Z}}G/{{\mathbb Z}}G f}$ of a countable residually finite group in the case that the sofic approximation sequence arises from finite quotients of $G$ and $f$ is invertible in the full group C$^*$-algebra $C^* (G)$. In line with previous work on algebraic actions [@LinSchWar90; @Den06; @Li12; @Bow11] (see also the more recent [@LiTho12]), this value turns out to be equal to the logarithm of the Fuglede-Kadison determinant of $f$ in the group von Neumann algebra ${{\mathcal L}}G$. We also showed how topological entropy can be used to give a proof that Gottschalk’s surjunctivity conjecture holds for countable sofic groups, a result originally established by Gromov in [@Gro99], where the idea of soficity itself first appeared.
In the present work we initiate a local analysis of independence as it connects to topological entropy within this broadened framework of actions of sofic groups. Given a continuous action $G\curvearrowright X$ of a countable sofic group and a sofic approximation sequence $\Sigma = \{ \sigma_i : G\to{{\rm Sym}}(d_i ) \}$ for $G$, we define the notion of a $\Sigma$-IE-tuple by externalizing the positive independence density condition in the amenable case to the finite sets $\{ 1,\dots , d_i \}$ appearing in the sequence $\Sigma$ (Definition \[D-Sigma-IE\]). We show in Section \[S-Sigma\] that $\Sigma$-IE-tuples share many of the same properties as IE-tuples for actions of discrete amenable groups. In particular, the action $G\curvearrowright X$ has positive entropy with respect to $\Sigma$ if and only if there is a nondiagonal $\Sigma$-IE-pair in $X\times X$. On the other hand, we do not know whether the product formula holds in general for $\Sigma$-IE-tuples. However, granted that we use a free ultrafilter ${{\mathfrak F}}$ over ${{\mathbb N}}$ to express the independence density condition in the definition of $\Sigma$-IE-tuples, we demonstrate in Theorem \[T-ergodic to product\] that the product formula holds under the assumption of ergodicity on the action of the commutant of $G$ inside the group of measure-preserving automorphisms of the Loeb space $\prod_{{\mathfrak F}}\{ 1,\dots ,d_i \}$ which arise from permutations of the sets $\{ 1,\dots ,d_i \}$. We then prove that this commutant acts ergodically when $G$ is residually finite and $\Sigma$ is built from finite quotients of $G$ (Theorem \[T-rf ergodic\]), and also when $G$ is amenable and $\Sigma$ is arbitrary (Theorem \[T-amenable ergodic\]). In the case that $G$ is nonamenable, a combination of results of Elek and Szabo [@EleSza11 Thm. 2] and Paunescu [@Pau11] shows that there exist $\Sigma$ for which the ergodicity condition fails.
The definition of IE-tuples for amenable $G$, as given in [@KerLi07], involves an asymptotic density condition over finite subsets of $G$ which become more and more invariant. Although density in this sense loses its meaning in the nonamenable case, we might nevertheless ask what the external independence density in the definition of $\Sigma$-IE-tuples implies about the degree of independent behaviour across orbits in $X$. We observe in Proposition \[P-sofic IE to orbit IE\] that every $\Sigma$-IE-tuple (and more generally every sofic IE-tuple as defined in Definition \[D-Sigma-IE\]) is an [*orbit IE-tuple*]{}, by which we mean that for every product neighbourhood $U_1 \times\cdots\times U_k$ of the given tuple $(x_1,\dots,x_k)$ in $X^k$, the tuple $(U_1 , \dots , U_k )$ has positive independence density over $G$ in the sense that there is a $q>0$ such that every finite set $F\subseteq G$ has a subset of cardinality at least $q|F|$ which is an independence set for $(U_1 , \dots , U_k )$ (note that this definition makes sense for any acting group $G$). We show moreover in Theorem \[T-amenable case: orbit IE=IE\] that, for amenable $G$, $\Sigma$-IE-tuples, IE-tuples, and orbit IE-tuples are all the same thing. This puts us in the pleasant and somewhat surprising situation that IE-tuples can be identified by a density condition that does not structurally depend on amenability for its formulation, and raises the question about the relation between entropy and orbit IE-tuples for nonamenable sofic $G$. In another direction, Theorem \[T-orbit IE to nontame\] asserts that if a tuple of subsets of $X$ has positive independence density over $G$ then it has an infinite independence set in $G$, which implies that every orbit IE-tuple is an IT-tuple.
By a theorem of Chung and the second author in [@ChuLi11], an algebraic action of a countable group $G$ is expansive if and only if it is either the dual action $G\curvearrowright X_A := \widehat{({{\mathbb Z}}G)^n /({{\mathbb Z}}G)^n A}$ for some $n\in{{\mathbb N}}$ and matrix $A\in M_n ({{\mathbb Z}}G)$ which is invertible in $M_n (\ell^1 (G))$, or the restriction of such an action to a closed $G$-invariant subgroup of $X_A$. In the same paper it is shown that an expansive algebraic action $G\curvearrowright X$ of a polycyclic-by-finite group has completely positive entropy with respect to the Haar measure prescisely when the IE group is equal to $X$, which is equivalent to every tuple of points in $X$ being an IE-tuple. It is also shown that, when $G$ is amenable, every action of the form $G\curvearrowright X_A$ with $A$ invertible in $M_n (\ell^1 (G))$ has the property that every tuple of points in $X$ is an IE-tuple (see Lemma 5.4 and Theorems 7.3 and 7.8 in [@ChuLi11]). We prove in Theorem \[T-invertible to UPE\] that if $G$ is a countable sofic group, $n\in{{\mathbb N}}$, and $A$ is a matrix in $M_n ({{\mathbb Z}}G)$ which is invertible in $M_n (\ell^1 (G))$, then the algebraic action $G\curvearrowright X_A$ has the property that every tuple of points in $X_A$ is a $\Sigma$-IE-tuple for every sofic approximation sequence $\Sigma$. We use this to answer a question of Deninger in the case that $G$ is residually finite by combining it with an argument from [@ChuLi11] and the entropy computation for principal algebraic actions from [@KerLi11] mentioned above to deduce that if $f$ is an element of ${{\mathbb Z}}G$ which is invertible in $\ell^1 (G)$ and has no left inverse in ${{\mathbb Z}}G$ then the Fuglede-Kadison determinant of $f$ satisfies $\det_{{{\mathcal L}}G} f > 1$ (Corollary \[C-answer to Deninger\]). Deninger asked whether this holds for all countable groups [@Den09 Question 26], and affirmative answers were given in [@DenSch07] for residually finite amenable $G$ and more generally in [@ChuLi11] for amenable $G$.
For a continuous action $G\curvearrowright X$ of a countably infinite group on a compact metrizable space with compatible metric $\rho$, we say that a pair $(x, y)\in X\times X$ is a [*Li-Yorke pair*]{} if $$\limsup_{G \ni s\to \infty}\rho(sx, sy)>0 \hspace*{5mm}\text{and} \hspace*{5mm}
\liminf_{G \ni s\to \infty}\rho(sx, sy)=0 ,$$ where the limit supremum and limit infimum mean the limits of $\sup_{s\in G\setminus F} \rho(sx, sy)$ and$\inf_{s\in G\setminus F} \rho(sx, sy)$, respectively, over the net of finite subsets $F$ of $G$. Note that the definition of Li-Yorke pair does not depend on the choice of the metric $\rho$. The action $G\curvearrowright X$ is said to be [*Li-Yorke chaotic*]{} if there is an uncountable subset $Z$ of $X$ such that every nondiagonal pair $(x, y)$ in $Z\times Z$ is a Li-Yorke pair. The notion of Li-Yorke chaos stems from [@LiYor75]. In the case of a continuous map $T:X\to X$, a theorem Blanchard, Glasner, Kolyada, and Maass in [@BlaGlaKolMaa02] states that positive entropy implies Li-Yorke chaos. In [@KerLi07] the authors strengthened this by showing that for every $k\geq 2$ and product neighbourhood $U_1\times\cdots\times U_k$ of a nondiagonal IE-tuple $(x_1,\dots,x_k)\in X^k$ there are Cantor sets $Z_i \subseteq U_i$ for $i=1,\dots,k$ such that
1. every nonempty tuple of points in $\bigcup_i Z_i$ is an IE-tuple, and
2. for all $m\in{{\mathbb N}}$, distinct $y_1, \dots ,y_m\in \bigcup_i Z_i$, and $y_1' ,\dots , y_m'\in \bigcup_i Z_i$ one has $$\liminf_{n\to\infty} \max_{1\leq i\leq m} \rho (T^n y_i,y_i' ) = 0 .$$
In Theorem \[T-positive entropy to chaos\] we show that a similar result holds when $G$ is sofic and IE-tuples are replaced by $\Sigma$-IE-tuples as defined with respect to a free ultrafilter ${{\mathfrak F}}$ on ${{\mathbb N}}$, where $\Sigma$ is any sofic approximation sequence for $G$. Using ${{\mathfrak F}}$ in the definition of entropy, we deduce that if the action has positive entropy for some $\Sigma$ then it is Li-Yorke chaotic. As a corollary, if the action $G\curvearrowright X$ is distal then $h_\Sigma (X,G)=0$ or $-\infty$. In particular, when $G$ is amenable every distal action $G\curvearrowright X$ has zero entropy, which is well known in the case $G={{\mathbb Z}}$ [@Parry].
The following diagram illustrates how some of the main results of the paper relate various properties of actions of a countable discrete group $G$ on a compact metrizable space $X$, which we assume to have more than one point. In the left column we assume that $G$ is sofic and that $\Sigma$ is a fixed but arbitrary sofic approximation sequence. The unlabeled implications are trivial. By pair we mean an element of $X\times X$. See [@KerLi07] for terminology related to tameness and nullness.
$$\footnotesize
\xymatrix{
\txt{uniformly positive\\ entropy w.r.t.\ $\Sigma$} \ar@{<=>}[d]^-*+{\text{\tiny\ref{R-entropy tuple}}} &&& \\
\txt{every pair\\ is a $\Sigma$-IE pair} \ar@=[d]^-*+{\text{\tiny\ref{P-basic}(3)}}\ar@=[r]^-*+{\text{\tiny\ref{P-sofic IE to orbit IE}}} &
\txt{every pair\\ is an\\ orbit IE-pair}\ar@=[r]^-*+{\text{\tiny\ref{C-orbit IE to IT}}} &
\txt{uniformly untame\\ (every pair\\ is an IT-pair)} \ar@=[d]^-*+{\text{\tiny 6.4(2) in \cite{KerLi07}}} \ar@=[r] &
\txt{uniformly nonnull\\ (every pair\\ is an IN-pair)} \ar@=[d]^-*+{\text{\tiny 5.4(2) in \cite{KerLi07}}} \\
\txt{positive entropy\\ w.r.t.\ $\Sigma$} \ar@{<=>}[d]^-*+{\text{\tiny\ref{P-basic}(3)}}&&
\txt{untame} \ar@{<=>}[d]^-*+{\text{\tiny 6.4(2) in \cite{KerLi07}}} &
\txt{nonnull} \ar@{<=>}[d]^-*+{\text{\tiny 5.4(2) in \cite{KerLi07}}} &\\
\txt{$\exists$ nondiag.\\ $\Sigma$-IE-pair} \ar@=[d]^-*+{\text{\tiny\ref{T-positive entropy to chaos}}} \ar@=[r]^-*+{\text{\tiny\ref{P-sofic IE to orbit IE}}}&
\txt{$\exists$ nondiag.\\ orbit IE-pair}\ar@=[r]^-*+{\text{\tiny\ref{C-orbit IE to IT}}} &
\txt{$\exists$ nondiag.\\ IT-pair} \ar@=[r] &
\txt{$\exists$ nondiag.\\ IN-pair} \\
\txt{Li-Yorke\\ chaotic} &&&
}$$
The organization of the paper is as follows. In Section \[S-entropy\] we set up some basic notation and review sofic topological entropy. In Section \[S-orbit\] we introduce orbit IE-tuples and prove a product formula for them. Section \[S-Sigma\] introduces $\Sigma$-IE-tuples and includes our results relating them to orbit IE-tuples. In Section \[S-product\] we focus on the product formula for $\Sigma$-IE-tuples and the question of ergodicity for the action of $G'$ on the Loeb space. Section \[S-algebraic\] contains the material on algebraic actions. In Section \[S-untame\] we prove that positive independence density for a tuple of subsets implies the existence of an infinite independence set, showing that orbit IE-tuples are IT-tuples. Finally in Section \[S-chaos\] we establish the theorem connecting independence and entropy to Li-Yorke chaos in the sofic framework.
[*Acknowledgements.*]{} The first author was partially supported by NSF grants DMS-0900938 and DMS-1162309. The second author was partially supported by NSF grant DMS-1001625. We are grateful to Wen Huang, Liviu Paunescu and Xiangdong Ye for helpful comments.
Sofic topological entropy {#S-entropy}
=========================
We review here the definition of sofic topological entropy [@KerLi11; @KerLi10] and in the process introduce some of the basic notation and terminology appearing throughout the paper. Our approach will bypass the operator algebra technology that appears in [@KerLi11; @KerLi10].
Let $Y$ be a set equipped with a pseudometric $\rho$ and let ${\varepsilon}\geq 0$. A set $A\subseteq Y$ is said to be [*$(\rho ,{\varepsilon})$-separated*]{} if $\rho (x,y) \geq {\varepsilon}$ for all distinct $x,y\in A$. Write $N_{\varepsilon}(Y, \rho )$ for the maximum cardinality of a $(\rho ,{\varepsilon})$-separated subset of $Y$.
Let $G\curvearrowright X$ be a continuous action of a countable sofic group on a compact metrizable space. Let $\Sigma = \{ \sigma_i : G\to{{\rm Sym}}(d_i) \}$ be a sofic approximation sequence for $G$, meaning that
1. $\displaystyle\lim_{i\to\infty} \frac{1}{d_i}
\big| \{ k\in \{ 1,\dots ,d_i \} : \sigma_{i,st} (k) = \sigma_{i,s} \sigma_{i,t} (k) \} \big| = 1$ for all $s,t\in G$,
2. $\displaystyle\lim_{i\to\infty} \frac{1}{d_i} \big| \{ k\in \{ 1,\dots ,d_i \} : \sigma_{i,s} (k) \neq \sigma_{i,t} (k) \} \big| = 1$ for all distinct $s,t\in G$,
and $d_i \to\infty$ as $i\to\infty$. Depending on the situation, for $a\in\{1,\dots ,d_i \}$ we may write $\sigma_{i,s} (a)$, $\sigma_i (s)a$, or $sa$ to denote the image of $a$ under the evaluation of $\sigma_i$ at $s$.
Let $\rho$ be a continuous pseudometric on $X$. For a given $d\in{{\mathbb N}}$, we define on the set of all maps from $\{ 1,\dots ,d\}$ to $X$ the pseudometrics $$\begin{aligned}
\rho_2 (\varphi , \psi ) &= \bigg( \frac{1}{d} \sum_{a=1}^d (\rho (\varphi (a),\psi (a)))^2 \bigg)^{1/2} , \\
\rho_\infty (\varphi ,\psi ) &= \max_{a=1,\dots ,d} \rho (\varphi (a),\psi (a)) .\end{aligned}$$
\[D-map top\] Let $F$ be a nonempty finite subset of $G$ and $\delta > 0$. Let $\sigma$ be a map from $G$ to ${{\rm Sym}}(d)$ for some $d\in{{\mathbb N}}$. Define ${{\rm Map}}(\rho ,F,\delta ,\sigma )$ to be the set of all maps $\varphi : \{ 1,\dots ,d\} \to X$ such that $\rho_2 (\varphi\sigma_s , \alpha_s \varphi ) < \delta$ for all $s\in F$, where $\alpha_s$ is the transformation $x\mapsto sx$ of $X$.
Let $F$ be a nonempty finite subset of $G$ and $\delta > 0$. For ${\varepsilon}> 0$ define $$\begin{aligned}
h_{\Sigma ,2}^{\varepsilon}(\rho ,F, \delta ) &=
\limsup_{i\to\infty} \frac{1}{d_i} \log N_{\varepsilon}({{\rm Map}}(\rho ,F,\delta ,\sigma_i ),\rho_2 ) ,\\
h_{\Sigma ,2}^{\varepsilon}(\rho ,F) &= \inf_{\delta > 0} h_{\Sigma ,2}^{\varepsilon}(\rho ,F,\delta ) ,\\
h_{\Sigma ,2}^{\varepsilon}(\rho ) &= \inf_{F} h_{\Sigma ,2}^{\varepsilon}(\rho ,F) ,\\
h_{\Sigma ,2} (\rho ) &= \sup_{{\varepsilon}> 0} h_{\Sigma ,2}^{\varepsilon}(\rho ) ,\end{aligned}$$ where $F$ in the third line ranges over the nonempty finite subsets of $G$. In the case that ${{\rm Map}}(\rho ,F,\delta ,\sigma_i )$ is empty for all sufficiently large $i$, we set $h_{\Sigma ,2}^{\varepsilon}(\rho ,F, \delta ) = -\infty$. We similarly define $h_{\Sigma ,\infty}^{\varepsilon}(\rho ,F, \delta )$, $h_{\Sigma ,\infty}^{\varepsilon}(\rho ,F)$, $h_{\Sigma ,\infty}^{\varepsilon}(\rho )$ and $h_{\Sigma ,\infty} (\rho )$ using $N_{\varepsilon}(\cdot, \rho_\infty)$ in place of $N_{\varepsilon}(\cdot, \rho_2)$.
Instead of the limit supremum above we could have taken a limit over a fixed free ultrafilter on ${{\mathbb N}}$, whose utility is apparent for example if we wish to have a product formula (see Section \[S-product\]). We will also use this variant in Section \[S-chaos\].
The pseudometric $\rho$ is said to be [*dynamically generating*]{} if for every pair of distinct points $x,y\in X$ there is an $s\in G$ such that $\rho(sx, sy)>0$.
\[L-change pseudometric\] Suppose that $\rho$ and $\rho'$ are continuous pseudometrics on $X$ and that $\rho'$ is dynamically generating. Let $F$ be a nonempty finite subset of $G$ and $\delta>0$. Then there exist a nonempty finite subset $F'$ of $G$ and $\delta'>0$ such that for any $d\in {{\mathbb N}}$ and sufficiently good sofic approximation $\sigma: G\to {{\rm Sym}}(d)$ one has ${{\rm Map}}(\rho', F', \delta', \sigma)\subseteq {{\rm Map}}(\rho, F, \delta, \sigma)$.
List the elements of $G$ as $s_1, s_2, \dots$. Since $\rho'$ is dynamically generating, we have the compatible metric $\rho''$ on $X$ defined by $$\rho''(x, y)=\sum_{k=1}^{\infty}\frac{1}{2^k}\rho'(s_kx, s_ky).$$ It follows that there are a nonempty finite subset $F''$ of $G$ and a $\delta''>0$ such that, for all $x,y\in X$, if $\max_{s\in F''}\rho'(sx, sy)<\delta''$ then $\rho(x, y)<\delta/2$. Set $F'=F''\cup (F''F)$. Let $\delta'>0$ and let $\sigma$ be a map from $G$ to ${{\rm Sym}}(d)$ for some $d\in {{\mathbb N}}$. Let $\varphi\in {{\rm Map}}(\rho', F', \delta', \sigma)$. Then $$\begin{aligned}
|\{a\in \{1, \dots, d\}: \rho'(s_1s_2\varphi(a), &\varphi((s_1s_2)a))<\sqrt{\delta'} \text{ and}\\
\rho'(s_1 \varphi &(s_2a), \varphi(s_1(s_2a)))<\sqrt{\delta'}
\text{ for all } s_1\in F'', s_2\in F\}|\\
&\ge (1-2|F''| |F|\delta')d.\end{aligned}$$ Suppose that $2\sqrt{\delta'}<\delta''$ and $\sigma$ is a good enough sofic approximation for $G$ so that $$|\{a\in \{1, \dots, d\}: (s_1s_2)a=s_1(s_2a) \text{ for all } s_1\in F'', s_2\in F\}|\ge (1-\delta')d.$$ Then $$\begin{aligned}
\lefteqn{|\{a\in \{1, \dots, d\}: \rho(s\varphi(a), \varphi(sa))<\delta/2 \text{ for all } s\in F\}|}\hspace*{15mm} \\
\hspace*{10mm} &\ge |\{a\in \{1, \dots, d\}: \rho'(s_1s_2\varphi(a), s_1\varphi(s_2a))<2\sqrt{\delta'} \text{ for all } s_1\in F'', s_2\in F\}|\\
&\ge (1-(1+2|F''| |F|)\delta')d.\end{aligned}$$ It follows that when $\delta'$ is small enough independently of $d$ and $\sigma$, one has $\varphi\in {{\rm Map}}(\rho, F, \delta, \sigma)$.
The following proposition is contained in Proposition 2.4 of [@KerLi10], whose statement and proof use the operator-algebraic formulation of sofic topological entropy from [@KerLi11].
\[P-pseudometric\] Let $\rho$ and $\rho'$ be continuous pseudometrics on $X$ which are dynamically generating. Then $$h_{\Sigma ,2} (\rho ) = h_{\Sigma ,2} (\rho') = h_{\Sigma ,\infty} (\rho ) = h_{\Sigma ,\infty} (\rho') .$$
Since the pseudometric $\rho_\infty$ dominates the pseudometric $\rho_2$, we have $h_{\Sigma ,2} (\rho ) \leq h_{\Sigma ,\infty} (\rho )$.
Next we argue that $h_{\Sigma ,\infty} (\rho ) \leq h_{\Sigma ,2} (\rho )$. Let $F$ be a finite subset of $G$, $\delta > 0$, and $\sigma$ a map from $G$ to ${{\rm Sym}}(d)$ for some $d\in{{\mathbb N}}$. Let $1/2>{\varepsilon}> 0$. Let $\eta > 0$ be the minimum of ${\varepsilon}^2$ and the reciprocal of the minimum cardinality of an $({\varepsilon}/2)$-spanning subset of $X$ with respect to $\rho$. Given a $\varphi\in{{\rm Map}}(\rho,F,\delta,\sigma)$, every element in the open $(\rho_2 ,\eta )$-ball in ${{\rm Map}}(\rho,F,\delta,\sigma)$ around $\varphi$ agrees with $\varphi$ to within $\sqrt{\eta}$, and hence to within ${\varepsilon}$, on a subset of $\{1,\dots,d\}$ of cardinality at least $(1-\eta )d$. Thus the maximum cardinality of a $(\rho_\infty ,{\varepsilon})$-separated subset of the open $(\rho_2 ,\eta)$-ball around $\varphi$ is at most $\sum_{j=0}^{\lfloor\eta d\rfloor} \binom{d}{j} \eta^{-j}$, which by Stirling’s approximation is bounded above, for all $d$ sufficiently large, by $e^{\beta d} \eta^{-\eta d}$ for some $\beta > 0$ not depending on $d$ with $\beta\to 0$ as ${\varepsilon}\to 0$. Hence $$N_{\varepsilon}({{\rm Map}}(\rho,F,\delta,\sigma),\rho_\infty )
\leq e^{\beta d} \eta^{-\eta d} N_\eta ({{\rm Map}}(\rho,F,\delta,\sigma),\rho_2 ) .$$ It follows that $$h_{\Sigma,\infty}^{\varepsilon}(\rho) \leq h_{\Sigma,2}^\eta (\rho) + \beta - \eta \log \eta ,$$ and since $\beta - \eta \log \eta \to 0$ as ${\varepsilon}\to 0$ we conclude that $h_{\Sigma ,\infty} (\rho ) \leq h_{\Sigma ,2} (\rho )$.
Finally we show that $h_{\Sigma ,2} (\rho ) \leq h_{\Sigma ,2} (\rho' )$, which will establish the proposition as we can interchange the roles of $\rho$ and $\rho'$.
Let ${\varepsilon}> 0$. Since $\rho$ is dynamically generating, we can find a finite set $K\subseteq G$ and an ${\varepsilon}' > 0$ such that, for all $x,y\in X$, if $\rho (sx,sy) < \sqrt{3{\varepsilon}'}$ for all $s\in K$ then $\rho' (x,y) < {\varepsilon}/\sqrt{2}$. By shrinking ${\varepsilon}'$ if necessary we may assume that $3{\varepsilon}' |K| < {\varepsilon}^2 /2$. Take a finite set $F\subseteq G$ containing $K$ and a $\delta > 0$ with $\delta\leq{\varepsilon}'$ such that $h_{\Sigma,2}^{{\varepsilon}'} (\rho ,F,\delta ) \leq h_{\Sigma,2}^{{\varepsilon}'} (\rho ) + {\varepsilon}$. Since $\rho'$ is dynamically generating, by Lemma \[L-change pseudometric\] there are a nonempty finite set $F' \subseteq G$ and a $\delta'>0$ such that for any $d\in {{\mathbb N}}$ and sufficiently good sofic approximation $\sigma: G\to {{\rm Sym}}(d)$ we have ${{\rm Map}}(\rho', F', \delta', \sigma)\subseteq {{\rm Map}}(\rho, F, \delta, \sigma)$.
Given $\varphi ,\psi\in{{\rm Map}}(\rho' ,F',\delta' ,\sigma )$ such that $\rho_2 (\varphi , \psi ) < {\varepsilon}'$, for each $s\in K$ we have, writing $\alpha_s$ for the transformation $x\mapsto sx$ of $X$, $$\begin{aligned}
\rho_2 (\alpha_s \varphi , \alpha_s \psi ) \leq \rho_2 (\alpha_s \varphi , \varphi\sigma_s )
+ \rho_2 (\varphi\sigma_s , \psi\sigma_s ) + \rho_2 (\psi\sigma_s , \alpha_s \psi )
< \delta + {\varepsilon}' + \delta \leq 3{\varepsilon}' .\end{aligned}$$ This implies that there is a set $W\subseteq \{1,\dots,d \}$ of cardinality at least $(1-3{\varepsilon}' |K|)d$ such that for all $a\in W$ we have $\rho (s\varphi (a),s\psi (a)) < \sqrt{3{\varepsilon}'}$ for every $s\in K$ and hence $\rho' (\varphi (a),\psi (a)) < {\varepsilon}/\sqrt{2}$. As a consequence, assuming (as we may by normalizing) that $X$ has $\rho'$-diameter at most one, $$\rho'_2 (\varphi , \psi ) \leq \sqrt{({\varepsilon}/\sqrt{2})^2 + 3{\varepsilon}' |K|} < {\varepsilon}.$$ It follows that $$N_{\varepsilon}({{\rm Map}}(\rho' ,F',\delta' ,\sigma ),\rho'_2 ) \leq N_{{\varepsilon}'} ({{\rm Map}}(\rho ,F,\delta ,\sigma ),\rho_2 )$$ and hence $h_{\Sigma,2}^{\varepsilon}(\rho' ,F',\delta' ) \leq h_{\Sigma,2}^{{\varepsilon}'} (\rho ,F,\delta )$, so that $$\begin{aligned}
h_{\Sigma ,2}^{\varepsilon}(\rho')
\leq h_{\Sigma,2}^{\varepsilon}(\rho' ,F',\delta' )
\leq h_{\Sigma,2}^{{\varepsilon}'} (\rho ,F,\delta )
\leq h_{\Sigma,2}^{{\varepsilon}'} (\rho) + {\varepsilon}\leq h_{\Sigma,2} (\rho) + {\varepsilon}.\end{aligned}$$ Since ${\varepsilon}$ was an arbitrary positive number we conclude that $h_{\Sigma ,2} (\rho' ) \leq h_{\Sigma,2} (\rho)$.
\[D-topological entropy\] The [*topological entropy*]{} $h_\Sigma (X,G)$ of the action $G\curvearrowright X$ with respect to $\Sigma$ is defined to be the common value in Proposition \[P-pseudometric\] over all dynamically generating continuous pseudometrics on $X$.
Note that the approximate multiplicativity of a sofic approximation was only needed in the proof of Lemma \[L-change pseudometric\] to handle the situation in which one of $\rho$ and $\rho'$ is not an actual metric. Indeed we could have defined topological entropy more easily by using the obvious fact that $h_{\Sigma ,\infty} (\rho )$ takes a common value over all compatible metrics on $X$, with Proposition \[P-pseudometric\] then being regarded as a Kolmogorov-Sinai theorem. As with the $(n,{\varepsilon})$-separated set definition of topological entropy for single transformations, it is by considering pseudometrics that we can compute the entropy for a nontrivial example like the shift action $G\curvearrowright \{ 1, \dots ,k \}^G$. In this case one can see that the value is $\log k$ independently of $\Sigma$ by considering the pseudometric $\rho$ on $\{ 1, \dots ,k \}^G$ given by $\rho (x,y) = 0$ or $1$ depending on whether or not the coordinates of $x$ and $y$ at $e$ agree. Indeed $\log k$ is easily seen to be an upper bound, and given a nonempty finite set $F\subseteq G$, a $\delta > 0$, and a good enough sofic approximation $\sigma : G\to{{\rm Sym}}(d)$ we can construct a $(\rho_\infty ,1/2)$-separated subset of ${{\rm Map}}(\rho ,F,\delta , \sigma )$ of cardinality $k^d$ by associating to every $\omega\in \{ 1,\dots ,k \}^d$ some $\varphi_\omega \in{{\rm Map}}(\rho ,F,\delta , \sigma )$ defined by $\varphi_\omega (a)(s^{-1}) = \omega (\sigma_s (a))$ for all $a\in \{ 1,\dots , d \}$ and $s\in G$.
For actions of amenable $G$, the entropy $h_\Sigma (X,G)$ coincides with the classical topological entropy for every $\Sigma$ [@KerLi11]. Such an action always has a largest zero-entropy factor (i.e., a zero-entropy factor such that every zero-entropy factor factors through it), called the [*topological Pinsker factor*]{} [@BlaLac93]. More generally for sofic $G$, with respect to a fixed $\Sigma$ there exists a largest factor of the action $G\curvearrowright X$ which has entropy either $0$ or $-\infty$ (note that the value $-\infty$ does not occur for actions of amenable $G$). This follows from the fact that the property of having entropy $0$ or $-\infty$ is preserved under taking countable products and restricting to closed invariant sets. (The property of having entropy $-\infty$ is also preserved under taking countable products, though we do not know what happens to the property of having entropy $0$.) We say that the action has [*completely positive entropy with respect to $\Sigma$*]{} if each of its nontrivial factors has positive entropy with respect to $\Sigma$.
Unlike in the amenable case, the largest factor with entropy $0$ or $-\infty$ might have factors with positive entropy. In fact for every nonamenable $G$ there exist zero-entropy actions of $G$ which have factors with positive entropy: Take an action $G\curvearrowright X$ with $h_\Sigma (X,G) > 0$ and an action $G\curvearrowright Y$ which has no $G$-invariant Borel probability measure, and consider the action of $G$ on $K:=(X\times Y) \coprod \{ z \}$ where $z$ is a point on which $G$ acts trivially. Then $h_\Sigma (K,G) = 0$ but the quotient action on $X\coprod \{ z \}$ satisfies $h_\Sigma (X\coprod \{ z \} ,G) > 0$.
Orbit IE-tuples {#S-orbit}
===============
Let $G\curvearrowright X$ be a continuous action of a discrete group on a compact Hausdorff space. Recall from the introduction that if ${{\boldsymbol{A}}}= (A_1 , \dots ,A_k )$ is a tuple of subsets of $X$ then we say that a subset $F$ of $G$ is an [*independence set for ${{\boldsymbol{A}}}$*]{} if for every finite subset $J$ of $F$ and every function $\omega : J\to \{ 1,\dots ,k \}$ we have $\bigcap_{s\in J} s^{-1} A_{\omega (s)} \neq\emptyset$.
\[D-independence density\] Let ${{\boldsymbol{A}}}= (A_1 , \dots ,A_k )$ be a tuple of subsets of $X$. We define the [*independence density of ${{\boldsymbol{A}}}$ (over $G$)*]{} to be the largest $q\ge 0$ such that every finite set $F\subseteq G$ has a subset of cardinality at least $q|F|$ which is an independence set for ${{\boldsymbol{A}}}$.
\[D-orbit IE\] We say that a tuple ${{\boldsymbol{x}}}= (x_1 ,\dots ,x_k )\in X^k$ is an [*orbit IE-tuple*]{} (or [*orbit IE-pair*]{} in the case $k=2$) if for every product neighbourhood $U_1 \times\dots\times U_k$ of ${{\boldsymbol{x}}}$ the tuple $(U_1 , \dots , U_k )$ has positive independence density. Write ${{\rm IE}}_k (X,G)$ for the set of all orbit IE-tuples of length $k$.
As Theorem \[T-amenable case: orbit IE=IE\] below demonstrates, the notation ${{\rm IE}}_k (X,G)$ is consistent with its use in [@KerLi07] when $G$ is amenable.
The equality in the next theorem statement is understood with respect to the identification of $((x_1,\dots,x_k),(y_1,\dots,y_k))\in X^k \times Y^k$ and $((x_1,y_1),\dots,(x_k,y_k))\in (X\times Y)^k$.
\[T-product for orbit IE\] Let $G\curvearrowright X$ and $G\curvearrowright Y$ be continuous actions on compact Hausdorff spaces. Let $k\in {{\mathbb N}}$. Then $${{\rm IE}}_k (X\times Y,G)= {{\rm IE}}_k (X,G) \times {{\rm IE}}_k (Y,G).$$
The inclusion ${{\rm IE}}_k (X\times Y,G)\subseteq {{\rm IE}}_k (X,G) \times {{\rm IE}}_k (Y,G)$ is trivial. To prove the other direction, it suffices to show that if ${{\boldsymbol{A}}}= (A_1 , \dots ,A_k )$ is a tuple of subsets of $X$ with independence density $q$ and ${{\boldsymbol{B}}}=(B_1, \dots, B_k)$ is a tuple of subsets of $Y$ with independence density $r$, then ${{\boldsymbol{A}}}\times {{\boldsymbol{B}}}:=(A_1\times B_1, \dots, A_k\times B_k)$ has independence density at least $qr$. Let $F$ be a nonempty finite subset of $G$. Then we can find a $J\subseteq F$ with $|J|\ge q|F|$ which is an independence set for ${{\boldsymbol{A}}}$. We can then find a $J_1\subseteq J$ with $|J_1|\ge r|J|$ which as an independence set for ${{\boldsymbol{B}}}$. Then $J_1$ is an independence set for ${{\boldsymbol{A}}}\times {{\boldsymbol{B}}}$ and $|J_1|\ge qr|F|$.
In [@KerLi07] we defined a tuple ${{\boldsymbol{x}}}= (x_1 , \dots , x_k )\in X^k$ to be an [*IN-tuple*]{} if for every product neighbourhood $U_1 \times\dots\times U_k$ of ${{\boldsymbol{x}}}$ the tuple $(U_1 ,\dots, U_k )$ has arbitrarily large finite independence sets. The following fact is obvious.
\[P-orbit IE to IN\] Suppose that $G$ is infinite. Then every orbit IE-tuple is an IN-tuple.
We will strengthen this assertion in Theorem \[T-orbit IE to nontame\].
$\Sigma$-IE-tuples {#S-Sigma}
==================
Unless otherwise stated, throughout this section $G$ is a countable sofic discrete group, subject to further hypotheses as appropriate. We suppose $G$ to be acting continuously on a compact metrizable space $X$, and $\rho$ denotes a dynamically generating continuous pseudometric on $X$ unless otherwise stated.
In order to be able to define the notion of a sofic IE-tuple as appears in Proposition \[P-sofic IE to orbit IE\], we will set up our definitions for a general sofic approximation net $\Sigma = \{ \sigma_i : G\to{{\rm Sym}}(d_i ) \}$, which is formally defined in the same way as the sequential version.
Let ${{\boldsymbol{A}}}= (A_1 , \dots ,A_k )$ be a tuple of subsets of $X$. Let $F$ be a nonempty finite subset of $G$ and $\delta > 0$. Let $\sigma$ be a map from $G$ to ${{\rm Sym}}(d)$ for some $d\in{{\mathbb N}}$. We say that a set ${{\mathcal J}}\subseteq \{ 1,\dots ,d\}$ is a [*$(\rho ,F,\delta ,\sigma )$-independence set for ${{\boldsymbol{A}}}$*]{} if for every function $\omega : {{\mathcal J}}\to \{ 1,\dots ,k \}$ there exists a $\varphi \in{{\rm Map}}(\rho ,F,\delta ,\sigma )$ such that $\varphi (a) \in A_{\omega (a)}$ for every $a\in {{\mathcal J}}$.
\[D-positive independence density\] Let ${{\boldsymbol{A}}}= (A_1 , \dots ,A_k )$ be a tuple of subsets of $X$. Let $\Sigma = \{ \sigma_i : G\to{{\rm Sym}}(d_i ) \}$ be a sofic approximation net for $G$. We say that ${{\boldsymbol{A}}}$ has [*positive upper independence density over $\Sigma$*]{} if there exists a $q > 0$ such that for every nonempty finite set $F\subseteq G$ and $\delta > 0$ there is a cofinal set of $i$ for which ${{\boldsymbol{A}}}$ has a $(\rho ,F,\delta ,\sigma_i )$-independence set of cardinality at least $qd_i$. By Lemma \[L-change pseudometric\] this definition does not depend on the choice of $\rho$.
For the purposes of Sections \[S-product\] and \[S-chaos\], we will consider a variation of the above definition in which cofinality is replaced by the stronger requirement of membership in a fixed free ultrafilter ${{\mathfrak F}}$ on ${{\mathbb N}}$. The resulting notion of positive upper independence density over $\Sigma$ with respect to ${{\mathfrak F}}$ will then be used when interpreting the following definition of $\Sigma$-IE-tuples.
By the [*universal sofic approximation net*]{} for $G$ we mean the net $(\sigma,F)\mapsto \sigma$ indexed by the directed set of pairs $(\sigma,F)$ where $\sigma$ is a map from $G$ to ${{\rm Sym}}(d)$ for some $d\in{{\mathbb N}}$ and $F$ is a finite subset of $G$, and $(\sigma' :G\to{{\rm Sym}}(d'),F' )\succ (\sigma:G\to{{\rm Sym}}(d),F)$ means that $d' \geq d$ and $|V(\sigma' ,F)|/d' \geq |V(\sigma ,F)|/d$, where $V(\omega,F)$ for a map $\omega : G\to{{\rm Sym}}(c)$ denotes the set of all $a\in \{1,\dots ,c\}$ such that $\sigma (s)\sigma(t)a = \sigma (st)a$ for all $s,t\in F$ and $\sigma (s)a \neq \sigma (t)a$ for all distinct $s,t\in F$.
\[D-Sigma-IE\] Let $\Sigma = \{ \sigma_i : G\to{{\rm Sym}}(d_i ) \}$ be a sofic approximation net for $G$. We say that a tuple ${{\boldsymbol{x}}}= (x_1 ,\dots ,x_k )\in X^k$ is a [*$\Sigma$-IE-tuple*]{} (or [*$\Sigma$-IE-pair*]{} in the case $k=2$) if for every product neighbourhood $U_1 \times\dots\times U_k$ of ${{\boldsymbol{x}}}$ the tuple $(U_1 , \dots , U_k )$ has positive upper independence density over $\Sigma$. We say that ${{\boldsymbol{x}}}$ is a [*sofic IE-tuple*]{} (or [*sofic IE-pair*]{} in the case $k=2$) if it is a $\Sigma$-IE-tuple for the universal sofic approximation net $\Sigma$. We denote the $\Sigma$-IE-tuples of length $k$ by ${{\rm IE}}^\Sigma_k (X,G)$ and the sofic IE-tuples of length $k$ by ${{\rm IE}}_k^{\rm sof} (X,G)$.
Note that ${{\rm IE}}^\Sigma_k (X,G) \subseteq {{\rm IE}}_k^{\rm sof} (X,G)$ for every sofic approximation net $\Sigma$.
We define $\Sigma$-IE-tuples and sofic IE-tuples of sets in the same way as for points above.
\[R-entropy tuple\] It follows from Lemma 3.3 of [@KerLi07] that a nondiagonal tuple of points in $X$ is a $\Sigma$-IE-tuple if and only if it is a $\Sigma$-entropy tuple in the sense of Section 5 in [@Zha12]. In particular, if in analogy with the amenable case we define the action to have [*uniformly positive entropy with respect to $\Sigma$*]{} when every nondiagonal pair in $X\times X$ is a $\Sigma$-entropy pair, then the action has this property precisely when every pair in $X\times X$ is a $\Sigma$-IE-pair.
We will need the following consequence of Karpovsky and Milman’s generalization of the Sauer-Shelah lemma [@Sau72; @She72; @KarMil78].
\[L-KM\] Given $k\geq 2$ and $\lambda > 1$ there is a constant $c>0$ such that, for all $n\in {{\mathbb N}}$, if $S\subseteq \{1, 2, \dots , k \}^{\{1,
2, \dots , n\}}$ satisfies $|S|\geq ((k-1)\lambda )^n$ then there is an $I\subseteq \{1, 2, \dots , n\}$ with $|I|\geq cn$ and $S|_I =
\{1, 2,\dots , k \}^I$.
\[P-sofic IE to orbit IE\] A sofic IE-tuple is an orbit IE-tuple.
Fix a compatible metric $\rho$ on $X$. Let ${{\boldsymbol{x}}}= (x_1 ,\dots ,x_k )$ be a $\Sigma$-IE-tuple and $U_1\times \dots \times U_k$ a product neighborhood of ${{\boldsymbol{x}}}$. We will show that the tuple $(U_1, \dots, U_k)$ has positive independence density over $G$.
Suppose first that $k>1$. Take $1<\lambda<\frac{k}{k-1}$. Then we have the constant $c>0$ in Lemma \[L-KM\].
Let $V_1\times \dots \times V_k$ be a product neighborhood of ${{\boldsymbol{x}}}$ such that for some $\kappa>0$ the $\kappa$-neighborhood of $V_j$ is contained in $U_j$ for all $1\le j\le k$. Then there exists a $q>0$ such that for every nonempty finite subset $F$ of $G$ and $\delta>0$ there is a cofinal set of $i$ for which the tuple $(V_1, \dots, V_k)$ has a $(\rho, F, \delta, \sigma_i)$-independence set ${{\mathcal J}}_i$ of cardinality at least $qd_i$.
Let $F$ be a nonempty finite subset of $G$. We will show $F$ has a subset of cardinality at least $(cq/2)|F|$ which is an independence set for the tuple $(U_1, \dots, U_k)$. Let $\delta$ be a small positive number to be determined in a moment.
Take an $i$ in the above cofinal set with $|{{\mathcal W}}_i|\ge (1-\delta)d$ for ${{\mathcal W}}_i:=\{a\in \{1, \dots, d_i\}: F\overset{\sigma_i(\cdot)a}{\rightarrow} \sigma_i(F)a \text{ is injective}\}$. For each $\omega: {{\mathcal J}}_i\rightarrow \{1, \dots, k\}$, take a $\varphi_\omega\in {{\rm Map}}(\rho ,F,\delta ,\sigma )$ such that $\varphi_\omega(a)\in V_{\omega(a)}$ for all $a\in {{\mathcal J}}_i$. Then $|\{a\in \{1, \dots, d_i\}: \rho(s\varphi_\omega(a), \varphi_\omega(sa))\le \delta^{1/2}\}|
\ge (1-\delta)d_i$ for each $s\in F$ and hence $|\Lambda_\omega|\ge (1-|F|\delta)d_i$ for $$\Lambda_\omega:=\{a\in \{1, \dots, d_i\}: \rho(s\varphi_\omega(a), \varphi_\omega(sa))\le \delta^{1/2} \text{ for all } s\in F\}.$$
Set $n = |F|$. When $n\delta <1/2$, the number of subsets of $\{1, \dots, d\}$ of cardinality no greater than $n\delta d$ is equal to $\sum_{j=0}^{\lfloor n\delta d \rfloor} \binom{d}{j}$, which is at most $n\delta d \binom{d}{n\delta d}$, which by Stirling’s approximation is less than $\exp(\beta d)$ for some $\beta > 0$ depending on $\delta$ and $n$ but not on $d$ when $d$ is sufficiently large with $\beta\to 0$ as $\delta\to 0$ for a fixed $n$. Thus when $\delta$ is small enough and $i$ is large enough, there is a subset $\Omega_i$ of $\{1, \dots, k\}^{{{\mathcal J}}_i}$ with $\big(\frac{k}{(k-1)\lambda}\big)^{q d_i}|\Omega_i|\ge k^{|{{\mathcal J}}_i|}$ such that the set $\Lambda_\omega$ is the same, say $\Theta_i$, for every $\omega \in \Omega_i$, and $|\Theta_i|/d_i>1-|F|\delta$. Then $$|\Omega_i|\ge k^{|{{\mathcal J}}_i|}\bigg(\frac{(k-1)\lambda}{k}\bigg)^{q d_i}
\ge k^{|{{\mathcal J}}_i|}\bigg(\frac{(k-1)\lambda}{k}\bigg)^{|{{\mathcal J}}_i|}=((k-1)\lambda)^{|{{\mathcal J}}_i|}.$$ By our choice of $c$, we can find a subset ${{\mathcal J}}'_i$ of ${{\mathcal J}}_i$ with $|{{\mathcal J}}'_i|\ge c|{{\mathcal J}}_i|\ge cq d_i$ such that every $\xi: {{\mathcal J}}'_i\rightarrow \{1, \dots, k\}$ extends to some $\omega\in \Omega_i$.
Writing $\zeta$ for the uniform probability measure on $\{1,\dots,d\}$, we have $$\begin{aligned}
\int_{{{\mathcal W}}_i\cap \Theta_i} \sum_{s\in F}1_{{{\mathcal J}}'_i}(sa)\, d\zeta (a)
&=\sum_{s\in F}\int_{{{\mathcal W}}_i \cap \Theta_i} 1_{{{\mathcal J}}'_i}(sa)\, d\zeta (a)\\
&\ge \sum_{s\in F}\bigg(\frac{|{{\mathcal J}}'_i|}{d_i}-(|F|+1)\delta\bigg)\ge (cq-(|F|+1)\delta) |F|,\end{aligned}$$ and hence $\sum_{s\in F}1_{{{\mathcal J}}'_i}(sa_i)\ge (cq-(|F|+1)\delta)|F|$ for some $a_i\in {{\mathcal W}}_i\cap \Theta_i$. Then $|J_i|\ge (cq-(|F|+1)\delta)|F|$ for $J_i:=\{s\in F: sa_i\in {{\mathcal J}}'_i\}$.
We claim that $J_i$ is an independence set for the tuple $(U_1, \dots, U_k)$ when $\delta<\kappa^2$. Let $f\in \{1, \dots, k\}^{J_i}$. Since $a_i\in {{\mathcal W}}_i$, the map $J_i\overset{\sigma_i(\cdot)a_i}{\rightarrow} \sigma_i(J_i)a_i$ is bijective. Thus we can define $\xi'\in \{1, \dots, k\}^{\sigma(J_i)a_i}$ by $\xi'(sa_i)=f(s)$ for $s\in J_i$. Extend $\xi'$ to some $\xi\in \{1, \dots, k\}^{{{\mathcal J}}'_i}$. Then we can extend $\xi$ to some $\omega \in \Omega_i$. For every $s\in J_i$, since $sa_i\in {{\mathcal J}}_i$ and $a_i\in \Theta_i=\Lambda_\omega$, we have $\varphi_\omega(s a_i)\in V_{\omega (s a_i)}=V_{f(s)}$ and $\rho(s\varphi_\omega(a_i), \varphi_\omega(s a_i))\le \delta^{1/2}<\kappa$. By the choice of $\kappa$ we have $s \varphi_\omega(a_i)\in U_{f(s)}$. This proves our claim.
Taking $\delta$ to be small enough, we have $|J_i|\ge (cq-(|F|+1)\delta)|F|\ge (cq/2)|F|$ as desired.
The case $k=1$ can be established by a simpler version of the above argument that considers only a single map of the form $\varphi_\omega$ and does not require the invocation of the constant $c$ from Lemma \[L-KM\] and the associated use of Stirling’s approximation.
For the remainder of this subsection, $\Sigma = \{ \sigma_i :G\to{{\rm Sym}}(d_i) \}$ is a fixed but arbitrary sofic approximation sequence.
In the case that $G$ is amenable, the independence density $I({{\boldsymbol{A}}})$ of a tuple ${{\boldsymbol{A}}}$ of subsets of $X$ was defined on page 887 of [@KerLi07] as the limit of $\varphi_{{{\boldsymbol{A}}}}(F) /|F|$ as the nonempty finite set $F\subseteq G$ becomes more and more left invariant, where $\varphi_{{{\boldsymbol{A}}}}(F)$ denotes the maximum of the cardinalities of the independence sets for ${{\boldsymbol{A}}}$ which are contained in $F$. A tuple $(x_1 , \dots , x_k ) \in X^k$ is an [*IE-tuple*]{} if for every product neighbourhood $U_1 \times\cdots\times U_k$ of $(x_1 , \dots , x_k )$ the independence density $I({{\boldsymbol{U}}})$ of the tuple ${{\boldsymbol{U}}}= (U_1 ,\dots, U_k )$ is positive.
To establish Theorem \[T-amenable case: orbit IE=IE\] we need the following version of the Rokhlin lemma for sofic approximations, which appears as Lemma 4.6 in [@KerLi10]. For $\lambda\geq 0$, a collection of subsets of $\{ 1,\dots ,d\}$ is said to [*$\lambda$-cover*]{} $\{1, \dots, d\}$ if its union has cardinality at least $\lambda d$.
\[L-Rokhlin2\] Let $G$ be a countable amenable discrete group. Let $0\le \tau<1$ and $0<\eta<1$. Let $K$ be a nonempty finite subset of $G$ and $\delta>0$. Then there are an $\ell\in {{\mathbb N}}$, nonempty finite subsets $F_1, \dots, F_\ell$ of $G$ with $|KF_k \setminus F_k|<\delta |F_k|$ and $|F_kK\setminus F_k|<\delta|F_k|$ for all $k=1, \dots, \ell$, a finite set $F\subseteq G$ containing $e$, and an $\eta'>0$ such that, for every $d\in {{\mathbb N}}$, every map $\sigma: G\rightarrow {{\rm Sym}}(d)$ for which there is a set $B\subseteq \{1, \dots, d\}$ satisfying $|B|\ge (1-\eta')d$ and $$\sigma_{st}(a)=\sigma_s\sigma_t(a), \sigma_s(a)\neq \sigma_{s'}(a), \sigma_e(a)=a$$ for all $a\in B$ and $s, t, s'\in F$ with $s\neq s'$, and every set $V\subseteq \{1, \dots, d\}$ with $|V|\ge (1-\tau)d$, there exist $C_1, \dots, C_\ell\subseteq V$ such that
1. for every $k=1, \dots, \ell$, the map $(s, c)\mapsto \sigma_s(c)$ from $F_k\times C_k$ to $\sigma(F_k)C_k$ is bijective,
2. the family $\{ \sigma(F_1)C_1, \dots, \sigma(F_\ell)C_\ell \}$ is disjoint and $(1-\tau-\eta)$-covers $\{1, \dots, d\}$.
\[T-amenable case: orbit IE=IE\] Suppose that $G$ is amenable. Then IE-tuples, orbit IE-tuples, $\Sigma$-IE-tuples, and sofic IE-tuples are all the same thing.
By Proposition \[P-sofic IE to orbit IE\], sofic IE-tuples and $\Sigma$-IE-tuples are orbit IE-tuples. That orbit IE-tuples are IE-tuples is clear in view of the definition of the independence density $I({{\boldsymbol{A}}})$ of a tuple ${{\boldsymbol{A}}}$ of subsets of $X$. It thus remains to show that IE-tuples are both sofic IE-tuples and $\Sigma$-IE-tuples.
To prove that IE-tuples are $\Sigma$-IE-tuples, it suffices to demonstrate that, given a tuple ${{\boldsymbol{U}}}= (U_1,\dots,U_k)$ of subsets of $X$ with $I({{\boldsymbol{U}}}) > 0$, the tuple ${{\boldsymbol{U}}}$ has positive upper independence density over $\Sigma$. Set $\lambda = I({{\boldsymbol{U}}}) > 0$. Let $F$ be a nonempty finite subset of $G$ and $\delta > 0$.
Let $\eta>0$, to be determined. By Lemma \[L-Rokhlin2\] we can find an $\ell\in{{\mathbb N}}$ and nonempty finite sets $F_1 ,\dots ,F_\ell \subseteq G$ such that (i) the sets $F_1,\dots,F_\ell$ are sufficiently left invariant so that for each $i=1,\dots ,\ell$ there is a set $J_i \subseteq F_i$ which is an independence set for ${{\boldsymbol{U}}}$ and has cardinality at least $\lambda |F_i|/2$, and (ii) for every good enough sofic approximation $\sigma : G\to{{\rm Sym}}(d)$ there exist $C_1,\dots,C_\ell \subseteq \{ 1,\dots ,d \}$ satisfying the following:
1. for every $i=1, \dots, \ell$ and $c\in C_i$, the map $s\mapsto \sigma_s(c)$ from $F_i$ to $\sigma(F_i)c$ is bijective,
2. the family of sets $\sigma(F_i)c$ for $i=1,\dots,\ell$ and $c\in C_i$ is disjoint and $(1-\eta)$-covers $\{1, \dots, d\}$.
Let $\sigma:G\rightarrow {{\rm Sym}}(d)$ be a sufficiently good sofic approximation for $G$ for some $d\in{{\mathbb N}}$. For every $h = (h_1,\dots,h_\ell )\in\prod_{i=1}^\ell X^{C_i}$ take a map $\varphi_h : \{ 1,\dots ,d\} \to X$ such that $$\varphi_h (sc) = s(h_i (c))$$ for all $i\in \{1,\dots,\ell\}$, $c\in C_i$, and $s\in F_i$. We may assume in our invocation of Lemma \[L-Rokhlin2\] above that the sets $F_1,\dots,F_\ell$ are sufficiently left invariant so that, assuming that $\eta$ is sufficiently small and $\sigma$ is a sufficiently good sofic approximation, we have $\varphi_h \in{{\rm Map}}(\rho,F,\delta,\sigma)$ for every $h\in\prod_{i=1}^\ell X^{C_i}$. Write ${{\mathcal J}}$ for the subset $\bigcup_{i=1}^\ell \bigcup_{s\in J_i} \bigcup_{c\in C_i} \sigma_s (c)$ of $\{1,\dots,d\}$. From (1) and (2) we obtain $$|{{\mathcal J}}|= \sum_{i=1}^\ell |J_i| |C_i|\geq\sum_{i=1}^\ell \frac{\lambda}{2} |F_i| |C_i|
\geq \frac{\lambda}{2} (1-\eta)d \geq \frac{\lambda}{4} d$$ assuming that $\eta\leq 1/2$. Now whenever we are given $\omega_i \in \{ 1,\dots ,k\}^{J_i}$ for $i=1,\dots,\ell$ we can find, since each $J_i$ is an independence set for ${{\boldsymbol{U}}}$, an $h = (h_1,\dots,h_\ell)\in\prod_{i=1}^\ell X^{C_i}$ such that $sh_i (c) \in U_{\omega_i (s)}$ for all $i=1,\dots,\ell$ and $s\in J_i$. The maps $\varphi_h$ for such $h$ then witness the fact that ${{\mathcal J}}$ is a $(\rho,F,\delta,\sigma)$-independence set for ${{\boldsymbol{U}}}$. It follows that ${{\boldsymbol{U}}}$ has positive upper independence density over $\Sigma$. Hence IE-tuples are $\Sigma$-IE-tuples.
The above argument also shows that IE-tuples are sofic IE-tuples, and so we are done.
One can also give the following direct proof that IE-tuples are orbit IE-tuples. It suffices to show that if ${{\boldsymbol{A}}}= (A_1 , \dots ,A_k )$ is a tuple of subsets of $X$ and $q>0$ is such that for every nonempty finite subset $K$ of $G$ and ${\varepsilon}>0$ there exist a nonempty finite subset $F$ of $G$ with $|KF\setminus F|\le {\varepsilon}|F|$ and a $J\subseteq F$ with $|J|\ge q|F|$ which is an independence set for ${{\boldsymbol{A}}}$, then the independence density of ${{\boldsymbol{A}}}$ over $G$ is at least $q$. Let $F_1$ be a nonempty finite subset of $G$. Let $1>\delta>0$. Take ${\varepsilon}>0$ be a small number which we shall determine in a moment. Then there exist a nonempty finite subset $F$ of $G$ with $|F_1^{-1}F\setminus F|\le {\varepsilon}|F|$ and a $J\subseteq F$ with $|J|\ge q|F|$ which is an independence set for ${{\boldsymbol{A}}}$. Set $F'=\{s\in F: F_1^{-1}s\subseteq F\}$. Taking ${\varepsilon}$ to be small enough, we have $|F'|\ge (1-\delta)|F|$. Note that the function $\sum_{s\in F}1_{F_1s}$ has value $|F_1|$ at every point of $F'$. Thus $$\begin{aligned}
\sum_{t\in J\cap F'}\sum_{s\in F}1_{F_1s}(t)=|J\cap F'||F_1|.\end{aligned}$$ We also have $$\begin{aligned}
\sum_{t\in J\cap F'}\sum_{s\in F}1_{F_1s}(t)=\sum_{s\in F}\sum_{t\in J\cap F'}1_{F_1s}(t)=\sum_{s\in F}|F_1s\cap (J\cap F')|.\end{aligned}$$ Therefore we can find an $s\in F$ with $$\begin{aligned}
|F_1s\cap (J\cap F')|\ge \frac {|J\cap F'||F_1|}{|F|}\ge (q-\delta)|F_1|.\end{aligned}$$ Since $F_1\cap (J\cap F')s^{-1}$ is an independence set for ${{\boldsymbol{A}}}$, we deduce that $F_1$ has a subset of cardinality at least $(q-\delta)|F_1|$ which is an independence set for ${{\boldsymbol{A}}}$. Letting $\delta\to 0$, we get that $F_1$ has a subset of cardinality at least $q|F_1|$ which is an independence set for ${{\boldsymbol{A}}}$. Therefore the independence density $I({{\boldsymbol{A}}})$ of ${{\boldsymbol{A}}}$ is at least $q$, and so we conclude that IE-tuples are orbit IE-tuples.
The surprising fact above is that IE-tuples are orbit IE-tuples in the amenable case. It is clear however for a Bernoulli action that all tuples are orbit IE-tuples. Notice also that the argument above works equally well if in the definition of $\Sigma$-IE-tuples we use positive upper independence density over $\Sigma$ with respect to a fixed free ultrafilter ${{\mathfrak F}}$.
The product formula for ${{\rm IE}}$-tuples as defined in the amenable framework was established in Theorem 3.15 of [@KerLi07] using a measure-theoretic argument. We can now combine Theorems \[T-amenable case: orbit IE=IE\] and \[T-product for orbit IE\] to obtain a combinatorial proof.
\[R-density\] The proof of Theorem \[T-amenable case: orbit IE=IE\] shows that the independence density $I({{\boldsymbol{A}}})$, as defined on page 887 of [@KerLi07] and recalled before the theorem statement, coincides with the independence density defined in Definition \[D-independence density\]. We may thus use the notation $I({{\boldsymbol{A}}})$ without ambiguity to denote the more general independence density of Definition \[D-independence density\].
When $G$ is amenable, it is clear from the classical $(n,{\varepsilon})$-separated set formulation of topological entropy that the entropy of an action $G\curvearrowright X$ is bounded below by the supremum of $I({{\boldsymbol{A}}}) \log k$ over all pairs $(k,{{\boldsymbol{A}}})$ where $k\in{{\mathbb N}}$ and ${{\boldsymbol{A}}}$ is a $k$-tuple of pairwise disjoint closed subsets of $X$. For Bernoulli actions the two quantities are equal. In the nonamenable case, the entropy fails in general to be bounded below by $\sup_{(k,{{\boldsymbol{A}}})} I({{\boldsymbol{A}}}) \log k$, where $I({{\boldsymbol{A}}})$ is as defined in Remark \[R-density\]. Indeed an example of Ornstein and Weiss [@OrnWei87 Appendix C] shows that the Bernoulli action $F_2\curvearrowright \{ 0,1 \}^{F_2}$ over the free group on two generators has Bernoulli factors over arbitrarily large finite sets of symbols, in which case the supremum is infinite.
We next aim to establish some basic properties of $\Sigma$-IE-tuples in Proposition \[P-basic\].
From Lemma 3.6 of [@KerLi07] we obtain:
\[L-decomposition indep\] Let $k\in {{\mathbb N}}$. Then there is a constant $c>0$ depending only on $k$ with the following property. Let ${{\boldsymbol{A}}}=(A_1, \dots, A_k)$ be a $k$-tuple of subsets of $X$ and suppose $A_1 = A_{1, 1}\cup A_{1,2}$. Let $F$ be a nonempty finite subset of $G$ and $\delta > 0$. Let $\sigma$ be a map from $G$ to ${{\rm Sym}}(d)$ for some $d\in{{\mathbb N}}$. If a set $J\subseteq \{ 1,\dots ,d\}$ is a $(\rho ,F,\delta ,\sigma )$-independence set for ${{\boldsymbol{A}}}$, then there exists an $I\subseteq J$ such that $|I|\ge c|J|$ and $I$ is a $(\rho ,F,\delta ,\sigma )$-independence set for $(A_{1,1}, \dots, A_k)$ or $(A_{1,2}, \dots, A_k)$.
From Lemma \[L-decomposition indep\] we get:
\[L-decomposition E\] Let ${{\boldsymbol{A}}}= (A_1, \dots, A_k )$ be a $k$-tuple of subsets of $X$ which has positive upper independence density over $\Sigma$. Suppose that $A_1 = A_{1,
1}\cup A_{1, 2}$. Then at least one of the tuples $(A_{1,1},\dots,
A_k)$ and $(A_{1,2}, \dots, A_k)$ has positive upper independence density over $\Sigma$.
\[L-positive entropy to independence\] $h_\Sigma(X, G)>0$ if and only if there are disjoint closed subsets $A_0$ and $A_1$ of $X$ such that $(A_0, A_1)$ has positive upper independence density over $\Sigma$.
Let $\rho$ be a compatible metric on $X$ with ${{\rm diam}}_\rho(X)\le 1$. Then $h_{\Sigma, \infty}(\rho)=h_\Sigma(X, G)$. The “if” part is obvious. So assume $h_{\Sigma, \infty}(\rho)>0$. Then $h^{6{\varepsilon}}_{\Sigma, \infty}(\rho)>0$ for some ${\varepsilon}>0$. Set $c=h^{6{\varepsilon}}_{\Sigma, \infty}(\rho)/2$.
Take a finite $(\rho, 2{\varepsilon})$-dense subset $Z$ of $X$. Consider on $X$ the continuous pseudometrics $\rho^z$, for $z\in Z$, and $\rho'$ given by $$\rho^z(x, y)=|\rho(x, z)-\rho(y, z)|, \hspace*{5mm} \rho'(x, y)=\max_{z\in Z}\rho^z(x, y).$$ Note that if $\rho(x, y)\ge 6{\varepsilon}$ for some $x, y\in X$, then $\rho'(x, y)\ge 2{\varepsilon}$. It follows that if $d\in {{\mathbb N}}$ and $\varphi$ and $\psi$ are maps from $\{1, \dots, d\}$ to $X$ with $\rho_{\infty}(\varphi, \psi)\ge 6{\varepsilon}$, then $\rho'_{\infty}(\varphi, \psi)\ge 2{\varepsilon}$.
Take an increasing sequence $\{F_n\}_{n\in {{\mathbb N}}}$ of nonempty finite subsets of $G$ with union $G$ and a decreasing sequence $\{\delta_n\}_{n\in {{\mathbb N}}}$ of positive numbers converging to $0$. For each $n\in {{\mathbb N}}$, there is a cofinal set $I_n$ of $i$ for which one has $N_{6{\varepsilon}}({{\rm Map}}(\rho, F_n, \delta_n, \sigma_i), \rho_\infty)\ge \exp(c d_i)$. Then $N_{2{\varepsilon}}({{\rm Map}}(\rho, F_n, \delta_n, \sigma_i), \rho'_\infty)\ge \exp(c d_i)$ for all $i\in I_n$. For each $i\in I_n$ and $z\in Z$ take a $(\rho^z_\infty, {\varepsilon})$-separated subset $W_{i, z}$ of ${{\rm Map}}(\rho, F_n, \delta_n, \sigma_i)$ of maximum cardinality. Then $$N_{2{\varepsilon}}({{\rm Map}}(\rho, F_n, \delta_n, \sigma_i), \rho'_\infty)
\le \prod_{z\in Z}|W_{i, z}|
= \prod_{z\in Z}N_{\varepsilon}({{\rm Map}}(\rho, F_n, \delta_n, \sigma_i), \rho^z_\infty).$$ Thus $N_{\varepsilon}({{\rm Map}}(\rho, F_n, \delta_n, \sigma_i), \rho^{z_{n, i}}_\infty)\ge \exp(c d_i/|Z|)$ for some $z_{n, i}\in Z$. Replacing $I_n$ by a confinal subset if necessary, we may assume that $z_{n, i}$ is the same, say $z_n$, for all $i\in I_n$. Passing to a subsequence of $\{(F_n, \delta_n)\}_{n \in {{\mathbb N}}}$ if necessary, we may assume that $z_n$ is the same, say $\mathfrak{z}$, for all $n\in {{\mathbb N}}$.
Note that if $W$ is a $(\rho^{\mathfrak{z}}_\infty, {\varepsilon})$-separated subset of ${{\rm Map}}(\rho, F_n, \delta_n, \sigma_i)$, then the set $\{ \rho(\mathfrak{z}, \cdot)\circ \varphi: \varphi \in W\}$ in $\ell_{\infty}^{d_i}$ is $(\|\cdot \|_\infty, {\varepsilon})$-separated. By [@GlaWei95 Lemma 2.3], there are constants $c'$ and $\delta>0$ depending only on $c/|Z|$ and ${\varepsilon}$ such that for every $n\in {{\mathbb N}}$ and large enough $i\in I_n$ there are a $t_{n, i}\in [0, 1]$ and a subset $J_{n, i}$ of $\{1, \dots, d_i\}$ with $|J_{n, i}|\ge c'd_i$ so that for every $\omega: J_{n, i}\rightarrow \{0, 1\}$ there are a $\varphi_\omega\in {{\rm Map}}(\rho, F_n, \delta_n, \sigma_i)$ such that for all $a\in J_{n, i}$ we have $\rho(\mathfrak{z}, \varphi_\omega(a))\ge t_{n, i}+\delta$ or $\rho(\mathfrak{z}, \varphi_\omega(a))\le t_{n, i}-\delta$ depending on whether $\omega(a)=0$ or $\omega(a)=1$. Replacing $I_n$ by a confinal subset if necessary, we may assume that there is a $t_n\in [0, 1]$ such that $|t_{n, i}-t_n|<\delta/4$ for all $i\in I_n$. Replacing $\{F_n, \delta_n\}_{n\in {{\mathbb N}}}$ by a subsequence if necessary, we may assume that there is a $t\in [0, 1]$ such that $|t_n-t|<\delta/4$ for all $n\in {{\mathbb N}}$. Set $A_0=\{x\in X: \rho(\mathfrak{z}, x)\ge t+\delta/2\}$ and $A_1=\{x\in X: \rho(\mathfrak{z}, z)\le t-\delta/2\}$. Then for every $n\in {{\mathbb N}}$ and $i\in I_n$, the set $J_{n, i}$ is a $(\rho, F_n, \delta_n, \sigma_i)$-independence set for $(A_0, A_1)$. Thus $(A_0, A_1)$ has positive upper independence density over $\Sigma$.
The following is obvious.
\[L-nonnegative entropy\] $h_\Sigma(X, G)\ge 0$ if and only if $X$ as a $1$-tuple has positive upper independence density over $\Sigma$.
\[P-basic\] The following are true:
1. Let $(A_1, \dots , A_k )$ be a tuple of closed subsets of $X$ which has positive upper independence density over $\Sigma$. Then there exists a $\Sigma$-IE-tuple $(x_1,\dots ,
x_k)$ with $x_j\in A_j$ for all $1\le j\le k$.
2. ${{\rm IE}}_1^\Sigma(X, G)$ is nonempty if and only if $h_\Sigma(X, G)\ge 0$.
3. ${{\rm IE}}_2^\Sigma(X, G)\setminus \Delta_2(X)$ is nonempty if and only if $h_\Sigma(X, G)>0$, where $\Delta_2 (X)$ denotes the diagonal in $X^2$.
4. ${{\rm IE}}_k^\Sigma(X, G)$ is a closed subset of $X^k$ which is invariant under the product action.
5. Let $\pi:(X, G)\rightarrow (Y,G)$ be a factor map. Then $(\pi\times\cdots\times \pi )({{\rm IE}}_k^\Sigma(X, G))\subseteq {{\rm IE}}_k^\Sigma(Y, G)$.
6. Suppose that $Z$ is a closed $G$-invariant subset of $X$. Then ${{\rm IE}}_k^\Sigma(Z, G )\subseteq {{\rm IE}}_k^\Sigma(X, G)$.
Assertion (1) follows from Lemma \[L-decomposition E\] and a simple compactness argument. Assertion (2) follows from assertion (1) and Lemma \[L-nonnegative entropy\]. Assertion (3) follows directly from assertion (1) and Lemma \[L-positive entropy to independence\]. Assertion (4) follows from the observation that, given a compatible metric $\rho$ of $X$, for any $s\in G$, nonempty finite subset $F$ of $G$, and $\delta>0$ there is a $\delta'>0$ such that, for every $d\in {{\mathbb N}}$ and map $\sigma: G\rightarrow {{\rm Sym}}(d)$ which is a good enough sofic approximation for $G$, if $\varphi \in {{\rm Map}}(\rho, \{s^{-1}\}\cup (s^{-1}F), \delta', \sigma)$, then $\alpha_s\circ \varphi\circ \sigma_{s^{-1}}\in {{\rm Map}}(\rho, F, \delta, \sigma)$, where $\alpha_s$ is the transformation $x\mapsto sx$ of $X$. Assertions (5) and (6) are trivial.
The inclusion in (5) above is an equality when $G$ is amenable, since $\Sigma$-IE-tuples are the same as IE-tuples by Theorem \[T-amenable case: orbit IE=IE\]. Equality can fail however if $G$ is nonamenable: Take an action $G\curvearrowright X$ with $h_\Sigma (X,G)=-\infty$ and an action $G\curvearrowright Y$ with $h_\Sigma (Y,G) > 0$. Then $G\curvearrowright Y$ has a nondiagonal $\Sigma$-IE-pair, while the product action $G\curvearrowright X\times Y$, which factors onto $G\curvearrowright Y$ via the second coordinate projection, satisfies $h_\Sigma (X\times Y,G)=-\infty$ and hence has no nondiagonal $\Sigma$-IE-pairs.
The analogue for orbit IE-tuples of the localization in Proposition \[P-basic\](1) does not hold in the nonamenable case. Indeed for any action $G\curvearrowright X$ of a discrete group the $1$-tuple $X$ has positive independence density, while the boundary action $F_2 \curvearrowright \partial F_2$ of the free group on two generators (where $\partial F_2$ consists of infinite reduced words in the standard generators and their inverses, with the action by left concatenation and reduction) is easily seen not to admit any orbit IE-$1$-tuples.
From Proposition \[P-basic\](5) we get the following. As in Theorem \[T-product for orbit IE\], the inclusion below is understood with respect to the identification of $((x_1,\dots,x_k),(y_1,\dots,y_k))\in X^k \times Y^k$ and $((x_1,y_1),\dots,(x_k,y_k))\in (X\times Y)^k$.
\[P-product for IE\] ${{\rm IE}}^\Sigma_k (X\times Y,G)\subseteq {{\rm IE}}^\Sigma_k (X,G) \times {{\rm IE}}^\Sigma_k (Y,G)$.
The problem of the reverse inclusion will be taken up in the next section.
For the remainder of this section $X$ is the unit ball of $\ell^p(G)$ for some $1\le p<\infty$ equipped with the pointwise convergence topology, and the action $G\curvearrowright X$ is by left shifts. We will use some of the above results to compute the sofic topological entropy of this action to be zero when $G$ is infinite.
Recall from the end of Section \[S-orbit\] that a tuple ${{\boldsymbol{x}}}= (x_1 , \dots , x_k )\in X^k$ is an IN-tuple if for every product neighbourhood $U_1 \times\dots\times U_k$ of ${{\boldsymbol{x}}}$ the tuple $(U_1 ,\dots, U_k )$ has arbitrarily large finite independence sets. We write ${{\rm IN}}_k (X,G)$ for the set of IN-tuples of length $k$.
\[L-unit ball null\] For every $k\in{{\mathbb N}}$ the set ${{\rm IN}}_k(X,G)$ consists of the single element $(0, \dots, 0)$.
Clearly $(0, \dots, 0)\in {{\rm IN}}_k(X)$ for every $k\in {{\mathbb N}}$. Also note that if ${{\boldsymbol{x}}}=(x_1,\dots, x_k)\in {{\rm IN}}_k(X)$ then $x_1, \dots, x_k\in {{\rm IN}}_1(X)$. Thus it suffices to show ${{\rm IN}}_1(X)\subseteq \{0\}$.
Let $x\in X$ with $x\neq 0$. Then $(tx)_e\neq 0$ for some $t\in G$. Set $r=|(tx)_e|/2>0$ and $U=\{y\in X: |y_e|\ge r\}$. Then $U$ is a neighborhood of $tx$ in $X$. Let $F\subseteq G$ be a finite independence set for $U$. Then $\bigcap_{s\in F} s^{-1}U$ is nonempty. Take $y\in \bigcap_{s\in F} s^{-1}U$. Then $sy\in U$ and hence $|y_{s^{-1}}|=|(sy)_e|\ge r$ for every $s\in F$. It follows that $$|F|r^p\le \sum_{s\in F}|y_{s^{-1}}|^p\le \|y\|_p^p\le 1,$$ and hence $|F|\le r^{-p}$. Therefore $tx\not\in {{\rm IN}}_1(X)$. Since ${{\rm IN}}_1(X)$ is $G$-invariant, $x\not\in {{\rm IN}}_1(X)$.
\[P-unit ball zero entropy\] Suppose that $G$ is infinite. Then $h_\Sigma(X, G)=0$.
By Lemma \[L-unit ball null\], Propositions \[P-basic\](2), and Propositions \[P-sofic IE to orbit IE\] and \[P-orbit IE to IN\], we have $h_\Sigma(X, G)\le 0$. Since $X$ has the fixed point $0$, we have $h_\Sigma(X, G)\ge 0$. Therefore $h_\Sigma(X, G)=0$.
Product Formula for IE-tuples {#S-product}
=============================
In order to hope for a product formula for $\Sigma$-IE-tuples beyond the amenable case, we must be able to witness independence density in some uniform way, in analogy with the definition of orbit IE-tuples in Section \[S-orbit\] (see Theorem \[T-product for orbit IE\]). This can be achieved by taking a free ultrafilter ${{\mathfrak F}}$ on ${{\mathbb N}}$ and requiring that the independence sets in Definition \[D-positive independence density\] exist for a set of $i$ belonging to ${{\mathfrak F}}$ instead a cofinal set of $i$. Thus for the purposes of this section we fix a free ultrafilter ${{\mathfrak F}}$ on ${{\mathbb N}}$ and switch to definition of $\Sigma$-IE-tuples based on this interpretation of positive density. We will similarly understand sofic topological entropy to be defined by using an ultralimit over ${{\mathfrak F}}$ in Definition \[D-topological entropy\] instead of the limit supremum. We do not know whether our product formula results, Proposition \[P-entropy for product\] and Theorem \[T-ergodic to product\], hold for the original definitions.
For the first part of our discussion, up to and including Lemma \[L-tuple of product sets\], $G$ is a countable sofic group and $\Sigma=\{\sigma_i: G\rightarrow {{\rm Sym}}(d_i)\}_{i=1}^\infty$ a fixed but arbitrary sofic approximation sequence for $G$.
\[P-entropy for product\] Let $G$ act continuously on compact metrizable spaces $X$ and $Y$. Then $$h_\Sigma(X\times Y, G)=h_\Sigma(X, G)+h_\Sigma(Y, G).$$
Fix compatible metrics $\rho^X$ and $\rho^Y$ on $X$ and $Y$ respectively. Define a compatible metric $\rho_{X\times Y}$ on $X\times Y$ by $$\rho^{X\times Y}((x_1, y_1), (x_2, y_2))=\rho^X(x_1, x_2)+\rho^Y(y_1, y_2)$$ for $(x_1, y_1), (x_2, y_2)\in X\times Y$.
Let $d\in {{\mathbb N}}$. Identify $(X\times Y)^{\{1, \dots, d\}}$ with $X^{\{1, \dots, d\}}\times Y^{\{1, \dots, d\}}$ naturally. Note that for all $\varphi, \varphi'\in X^{\{1, \dots, d\}}$ and $\psi, \psi'\in Y^{\{1, \dots, d\}}$ one has $$\max\big(\rho^X_2(\varphi, \varphi'), \rho^Y_2(\psi, \psi' )\big)
\le \rho^{X\times Y}_2((\varphi, \psi), (\varphi', \psi'))
\le \rho^X_2(\varphi, \varphi')+\rho^Y_2(\psi, \psi').$$ Let $F$ be a nonempty finite subset of $G$, $\delta>0$, and ${\varepsilon}>0$, and let $\sigma$ be a map from $G$ to ${{\rm Sym}}(d)$. Then ${{\rm Map}}(\rho^X, F, \delta, \sigma)\times {{\rm Map}}(\rho^Y, F, \delta, \sigma)\subseteq {{\rm Map}}(\rho^{X\times Y}, F, 2\delta, \sigma)$. Furthermore, for every $(\rho^X_2, {\varepsilon})$-separated subset ${{\mathscr W}}_X$ of ${{\rm Map}}(\rho^X, F, \delta, \sigma)$ and every $(\rho^Y_2, {\varepsilon})$-separated subset ${{\mathscr W}}_Y$ of ${{\rm Map}}(\rho^X, F, \delta, \sigma)$, the set ${{\mathscr W}}_X\times {{\mathscr W}}_Y$ is $(\rho^{X\times Y}_2, {\varepsilon})$-separated. It follows that $h^{\varepsilon}_{\Sigma, 2}(\rho^{X\times Y}, F, 2\delta)\ge h^{\varepsilon}_{\Sigma, 2}(\rho^X, F, \delta)+h^{\varepsilon}_{\Sigma, 2}(\rho^Y, F, \delta)$, and hence $h_\Sigma(X\times Y, G)\ge h_\Sigma(X, G)+h_\Sigma(Y, G)$.
Note that for any $(\rho^X_2, {\varepsilon})$-spanning subset ${{\mathscr W}}_X$ of ${{\rm Map}}(\rho^X, F, \delta, \sigma)$ and any $(\rho^Y_2, {\varepsilon})$-spanning subset ${{\mathscr W}}_Y$ of ${{\rm Map}}(\rho^X, F, \delta, \sigma)$, the set ${{\mathscr W}}_X\times {{\mathscr W}}_Y$ is $(\rho^{X\times Y}_2, 2{\varepsilon})$-spanning for (though not necessarily contained in) ${{\rm Map}}(\rho^{X\times Y}, F, \delta, \sigma)$. It follows that $N_{4{\varepsilon}}(\rho^{X\times Y}, F, \delta, \sigma)\le N_{\varepsilon}(\rho^X, F, \delta, \sigma)\times N_{\varepsilon}(\rho^Y, F, \delta, \sigma)$, and hence $h^{4{\varepsilon}}_{\Sigma, 2}(\rho^{X\times Y}, F, \delta)\le h^{\varepsilon}_{\Sigma, 2}(\rho^X, F, \delta)+h^{\varepsilon}_{\Sigma, 2}(\rho^Y, F, \delta)$. Consequently, $h_\Sigma(X\times Y, G)\le h_\Sigma(X, G)+h_\Sigma(Y, G)$.
The Loeb space and the Loeb measure were introduced by Loeb in [@Loe75]. An exposition can be found in [@AleGleGor99]. The Loeb space is the ultraproduct space $\prod_{{\mathfrak F}}\{1, \dots, d_i\}$. A subset $Y$ of $\prod_{{\mathfrak F}}\{1, \dots, d_i\}$ is called [*internal*]{} if it is of the form $\prod_{{\mathfrak F}}Y_i$ for a sequence $\{Y_i\}_{i\in {{\mathbb N}}}$ with $Y_i\subseteq \{1, \dots, d_i\}$ for all $i\in {{\mathbb N}}$. The collection ${{\mathfrak I}}$ of inner subsets is an algebra. The Loeb measure is the unique probability measure $\mu$ on the $\sigma$-algebra ${{\mathfrak B}}$ generated by ${{\mathfrak I}}$ such that $\mu(Y)=\lim_{i\to {{\mathfrak F}}} |{{\mathcal Y}}_i|/d_i$ for every internal set $Y=\prod_{{\mathfrak F}}{{\mathcal Y}}_i$. For every $Z\in {{\mathfrak B}}$ there exists a $Y\in {{\mathfrak I}}$ such that $\mu(Y\Delta Z)=0$.
For each $d\in {{\mathbb N}}$, denote by $\rho_{\rm Hamm}$ the normalized Hamming distance on ${{\rm Sym}}(d)$ defined by $$\rho_{\rm Hamm}(\tau, \tau')=\frac{1}{d}|\{a\in \{1, \dots, d\}: \tau(a)\neq \tau'(a)\}|.$$
The ultraproduct group $\prod_{{\mathfrak F}}{{\rm Sym}}(d_i)$ has a natural action on $\prod_{{\mathfrak F}}\{1, \dots, d_i\}$ preserving $\mu$. One has a bi-invariant pseudometric $\rho_L$ on $\prod_{{\mathfrak F}}{{\rm Sym}}(d_i)$ defined by $\rho_L(\tau, \tau')=\mu(\{y\in \prod_{{\mathfrak F}}\{1, \dots, d_i\}: \tau y\neq \tau'y\})$. For any $\tau=(\tau_i)_i, \tau'=(\tau'_i)_i\in \prod_{{\mathfrak F}}{{\rm Sym}}(d_i)$ with $\tau_i, \tau'_i\in {{\rm Sym}}(d_i)$ for all $i\in {{\mathbb N}}$, one has $\rho_L(\tau, \tau')=\lim_{i\to {{\mathfrak F}}}\rho_{\rm Hamm}(\tau_i, \tau'_i)$. Denote by ${{\mathfrak G}}$ the quotient group of $\prod_{{\mathfrak F}}{{\rm Sym}}(d_i)$ by $\rho_L$. Then we may think of ${{\mathfrak G}}$ as acting on $\prod_{{\mathfrak F}}\{1, \dots, d_i\}$ by $\mu$-preserving transformations.
The sofic approximation sequence $\Sigma$ gives rise to a natural group embedding of $G$ into ${{\mathfrak G}}$. Thus we may think of $G$ as a subgroup of ${{\mathfrak G}}$. Denote by $G'$ the subgroup of ${{\mathfrak G}}$ consisting of elements commuting with $G$.
As before, the equality below is understood with respect to the identification of $((x_1,\dots,x_k),(y_1,\dots,y_k))\in X^k \times Y^k$ and $((x_1,y_1),\dots,(x_k,y_k))\in (X\times Y)^k$.
\[T-ergodic to product\] Suppose that the action of $G'$ on $(\prod_{{\mathfrak F}}\{1, \dots, d_i\}, {{\mathfrak B}}, \mu)$ is ergodic. Let $G$ act continuously on compact metrizable spaces $X$ and $Y$. Let $k\in {{\mathbb N}}$. Then $${{\rm IE}}^\Sigma_k (X\times Y,G)={{\rm IE}}^\Sigma_k (X,G) \times {{\rm IE}}^\Sigma_k (Y,G).$$
We prove the theorem by way of the following results.
\[D-independence set on Loeb space\] Let $G$ act continuously on a compact metrizable space $X$. Let $\rho$ be a dynamically generating continuous pseudometric on $X$. Let ${{\boldsymbol{A}}}= (A_1 , \dots ,A_k )$ be a tuple of subsets of $X$. We say that an internal set $Y=\prod_{{\mathfrak F}}Y_i$ with $Y_i\subseteq \{1, \dots, d_i\}$ for all $i\in {{\mathbb N}}$ is an [*independence set*]{} for ${{\boldsymbol{A}}}$ if for every nonempty finite subset $F$ of $G$ and every $\delta>0$ the set of all $i\in {{\mathbb N}}$ for which $Y_i$ is a $(\rho, F, \delta, \sigma_i)$-independence set for ${{\boldsymbol{A}}}$ belongs to ${{\mathfrak F}}$.
From Lemma \[L-change pseudometric\] it is easy to see that Definition \[D-independence set on Loeb space\] does not depend on the choice of $\rho$.
Consistent with our interpretation of the equality in Theorem \[T-ergodic to product\], in Proposition \[P-basics of internal independence sets\] and Lemma \[L-tuple of product sets\] we understand ${{\boldsymbol{A}}}\times {{\boldsymbol{B}}}$ to mean $(A_1 \times B_1 ,\dots , A_k \times B_k)$ where ${{\boldsymbol{A}}}= (A_1 ,\dots ,A_k)$ and ${{\boldsymbol{B}}}= (B_1 ,\dots ,B_k)$.
\[P-basics of internal independence sets\] Let $G$ act continuously on compact metrizable spaces $X$ and $Y$. Let ${{\boldsymbol{A}}}$ and ${{\boldsymbol{B}}}$ be $k$-tuples of subsets of $X$ and $Y$ respectively for some $k\in {{\mathbb N}}$. Then the following hold:
1. ${{\boldsymbol{A}}}$ has positive upper independence density over $\Sigma$ if and only if ${{\boldsymbol{A}}}$ has an internal independence set $Z$ with $\mu(Z)>0$.
2. The set of internal independence sets for ${{\boldsymbol{A}}}$ is $G'$-invariant.
3. An internal set is an independence set for ${{\boldsymbol{A}}}\times {{\boldsymbol{B}}}$ if and only if it is an independence set for both ${{\boldsymbol{A}}}$ and ${{\boldsymbol{B}}}$.
Fix a compatible metric $\rho$ on $X$ which gives $X$ diameter at most $1$.
(1). The “if” part is obvious. Suppose that ${{\boldsymbol{A}}}$ has positive upper independence density over $\Sigma$. Let $q>0$ be as in Definition \[D-positive independence density\]. Let $\{F_n\}_{n\in {{\mathbb N}}}$ be an increasing sequence of finite subsets of $G$ with $\bigcup_{n\in {{\mathbb N}}} F_n=G$. For each $n\in {{\mathbb N}}$, denote by $W'_n$ the set of all $i\in {{\mathbb N}}$ for which there is a $(\rho_X, F_n, 1/n, \sigma_i)$-independence set $Z_i$ for ${{\boldsymbol{A}}}$ with $\zeta(Z_i)\ge q$. Also set $W_n=W'_n\setminus \{1, \dots, n-1\}$. Then $W'_n\in {{\mathfrak F}}$ by our assumption and hence $W_n\in {{\mathfrak F}}$ for each $n\in {{\mathbb N}}$. Note that the sequence $\{W_n\}_{n\in {{\mathbb N}}}$ is decreasing, and $\bigcap_{n\in {{\mathbb N}}}W_n=\emptyset$.
We define an internal set $Z=\prod_{{\mathfrak F}}{{\mathcal Z}}_i$ as follows. If $i\in {{\mathbb N}}\setminus W_1$, we take any ${{\mathcal Z}}_i \subseteq \{1, \dots, d_i\}$. If $i\in W_n\setminus W_{n+1}$ for some $n\in {{\mathbb N}}$, we take ${{\mathcal Z}}_i$ to be a $(\rho, F_n, 1/n, \sigma_i)$-independence set for ${{\boldsymbol{A}}}$ with $|{{\mathcal Z}}_i|/d_i\ge q$. Then ${{\mathcal Z}}_i$ is a $(\rho, F_n, 1/n, \sigma_i)$-independence set for ${{\boldsymbol{A}}}$ for all $n\in {{\mathbb N}}$ and $i\in W_n$. Thus $Z$ is an internal independence set for ${{\boldsymbol{A}}}$. As $|{{\mathcal Z}}_i|/d_i\ge q$ for all $i\in W_1$, we have $\mu(Z)=\lim_{i\to {{\mathfrak F}}}\zeta(Z_i)\ge q$. This proves the “only if” part.
(2). Let $Z=\prod_{{\mathfrak F}}{{\mathcal Z}}_i$ be an internal independence set for ${{\boldsymbol{A}}}$, and let $\tau=(\tau_i)_i\in G'$. Then $\tau Z=\prod_{{\mathfrak F}}\tau_i{{\mathcal Z}}_i$. Let $F$ be a nonempty finite subset of $G$ and $1>\delta>0$. Then the set $W$ of all $i\in {{\mathbb N}}$ for which ${{\mathcal Z}}_i$ is a $(\rho, F, \delta, \sigma_i)$-independence set for ${{\boldsymbol{A}}}$ is in ${{\mathfrak F}}$. Since $\tau\in G'$, the set $V$ of all $i\in {{\mathbb N}}$ for which $\max_{s\in F}\rho_{\rm Hamm}(\tau^{-1}_i \sigma_{i,s}, \sigma_{i,s}\tau^{-1}_i) \le \delta^2$ is also in ${{\mathfrak F}}$. Then $V\cap W$ is in ${{\mathfrak F}}$. For every $i\in V$, $\varphi\in {{\rm Map}}(\rho, F, \delta, \sigma_i)$, and $s\in F$ one has $$\begin{aligned}
\lefteqn{\rho_2(\alpha_s\circ \varphi\circ \tau^{-1}_i, \varphi \circ \tau^{-1}_i \circ \sigma_{i,s})}\hspace*{20mm} \\
\hspace*{20mm} &\le \rho_2(\alpha_s\circ \varphi\circ \tau^{-1}_i, \varphi \circ \sigma_{i,s}\circ \tau^{-1}_i)
+\rho_2(\varphi\circ \sigma_{i,s} \circ \tau^{-1}_i, \varphi \circ \tau^{-1}_i \circ \sigma_{i,s}) \\
&\le \rho_2(\alpha_s\circ \varphi, \varphi \circ \sigma_{i,s})
+(\rho_{\rm Hamm}(\tau^{-1}_i \circ \sigma_{i,s}, \sigma_{i,s} \circ \tau^{-1}_i))^{1/2}\\
&\le \delta+\delta= 2\delta,\end{aligned}$$ where $\alpha_s$ is the transformation $x\mapsto sx$ of $X$, and hence $\varphi \circ \tau^{-1}_i\in {{\rm Map}}(\rho, F, 2\delta, \sigma_i)$. It follows that for every $i\in V\cap W$ the set $\tau_i {{\mathcal Z}}_i$ is a $(\rho, F, 2\delta, \sigma_i)$-independence set for ${{\boldsymbol{A}}}$. Therefore $\tau Z$ is an internal independence set for ${{\boldsymbol{A}}}$.
(3). This can be proved using arguments similar to the proof of Proposition \[P-entropy for product\].
\[L-ergodic to positive intersection\] Suppose that $\Gamma$ is a subgroup of ${{\mathfrak G}}$ and the action of $\Gamma$ on $(\prod_{{\mathfrak F}}\{1, \dots, d_i\}, {{\mathfrak B}}, \mu)$ is ergodic. Let $Y, Z\in {{\mathfrak B}}$ be such that $\mu(Y), \mu(Z)>0$. Then $\mu(Y\cap \tau Z)>0$ for some $\tau\in \Gamma$.
Set $r=\sup_F \mu(\bigcup_{\tau \in F} \tau Z)$ with $F$ ranging over the nonempty countable subsets of $\Gamma$. Then we can find nonempty finite subsets $F_1, F_2, \dots$ of $\Gamma$ such that $r=\lim_{n\to \infty}\mu(\bigcup_{\tau \in F_n} \tau Z)$. Set $W=\bigcup_{n\in {{\mathbb N}}} F_n$ and $Z'=\bigcup_{\tau \in W} \tau Z$. Then $W$ is a countable subset of $\Gamma$ and $r=\mu(Z')$. For every $\tau'\in \Gamma$ we have $\mu(Z\cup \tau'Z)=\mu(\bigcup_{\tau \in W\cup \tau' W} \tau Z)\le r$ and hence $\mu(\tau' Z\setminus Z)=0$. Since the action of $\Gamma$ on $(\prod_{{\mathfrak F}}\{1, \dots, d_i\}, {{\mathfrak B}}, \mu)$ is ergodic, we conclude that $r=1$. Thus $\mu(Y)=\mu(Y\cap Z')\le \sum_{\tau \in W}\mu(Y \cap \tau Z)$, and hence $\mu(Y \cap \tau Z)>0$ for some $\tau \in W$.
\[L-tuple of product sets\] Suppose that the action of $G'$ on $(\prod_{{\mathfrak F}}\{1, \dots, d_i\}, {{\mathfrak B}}, \mu)$ is ergodic. Let $G$ act continuously on compact metrizable spaces $X$ and $Y$. Let $k\in{{\mathbb N}}$ and let ${{\boldsymbol{A}}}$ and ${{\boldsymbol{B}}}$ be $k$-tuples of subsets of $X$ and $Y$, respectively. Suppose that both ${{\boldsymbol{A}}}$ and ${{\boldsymbol{B}}}$ have positive upper independence density over $\Sigma$. Then ${{\boldsymbol{A}}}\times {{\boldsymbol{B}}}$ also has positive upper independence density over $\Sigma$.
This follows from Proposition \[P-basics of internal independence sets\] and Lemma \[L-ergodic to positive intersection\].
Theorem \[T-ergodic to product\] now follows from Proposition \[P-product for IE\] and Lemma \[L-tuple of product sets\].
The remainder of this section is devoted to the problem of when the ergodicity hypothesis in Theorem \[T-ergodic to product\] is satisfied. We prove that this happens when $G$ is residually finite and $\Sigma$ arises from finite quotients of $G$, and also when $G$ is amenable and $\Sigma$ is arbitrary. A combination of results of Elek and Szabo [@EleSza11 Thm. 2] and Paunescu [@Pau11] shows on the other hand that if $G$ is nonamenable then there is always a sofic approximation sequence $\Sigma$ for which the commutant $G'$ does not act ergodically.
Let $G$ be an infinite residually finite group, and let $\{G_i\}_{i\in {{\mathbb N}}}$ be a sequence of finite-index normal subgroups of $G$ such that $\bigcap_{n\in {{\mathbb N}}}\bigcup_{i\ge n}G_i=\{e\}$. Then we have the sofic approximation sequence $\Sigma = \{ \sigma_i : G\to{{\rm Sym}}(|G/G_i| ) \}$ by identifying $\{1, \dots, |G/G_i|\}$ with $G/G_i$ and setting $\sigma_i(s)(tG_i)=stG_i$ for $s, t\in G$.
\[T-rf ergodic\] Under the above hypotheses, the action of $G'$ on $(\prod_{{\mathfrak F}}\{1, \dots, |G/G_i|\}, {{\mathfrak B}}, \mu)$ is ergodic.
Consider the right multiplication action $\sigma'$ of $G/G_i$ on itself given by $\sigma'_i(sG_i)(tG_i)=ts^{-1}G_i$ for $s, t\in G$. Since this commutes with $\sigma_i$, it suffices to show that the action of $\prod_{{\mathfrak F}}\sigma'_i(G/G_i)\subseteq G'$ on $(\prod_{{\mathfrak F}}\{1, \dots, |G/G_i|\}, {{\mathfrak B}}, \mu)$ is ergodic.
Let ${{\mathcal Y}}_i\subseteq G/G_i$. Then, using the $\ell^1$-norm with respect to the uniform probability measure on $G/G_i$, $$\begin{aligned}
\frac{1}{|G/G_i|}\sum_{sG_i\in G/G_i}|\sigma'_i(sG_i){{\mathcal Y}}_i\Delta {{\mathcal Y}}_i|
&= \sum_{sG_i\in G/G_i}\big\|1_{\sigma'_i(sG_i){{\mathcal Y}}_i}-1_{{{\mathcal Y}}_i}\big\|_1\\
&\ge \bigg\|\sum_{sG_i\in G/G_i}1_{\sigma'_i(sG_i){{\mathcal Y}}_i}-|G/G_i|\cdot 1_{{{\mathcal Y}}_i} \bigg\|_1\\
&= \big\||{{\mathcal Y}}_i|\cdot 1_{G/G_i}-|G/G_i|\cdot 1_{{{\mathcal Y}}_i}\big\|_1=2\frac{|{{\mathcal Y}}_i|}{|G/G_i|}\bigg(|G/G_i|-|{{\mathcal Y}}_i|\bigg).\end{aligned}$$ Thus there is some $s_iG_i\in G/G_i$ with $\frac{1}{|G/G_i|}|\sigma'_i(s_iG_i){{\mathcal Y}}_i\Delta {{\mathcal Y}}_i|\ge 2\frac{|{{\mathcal Y}}_i|}{|G/G_i|}\big(1-\frac{|{{\mathcal Y}}_i|}{|G/G_i|}\big)$.
Let $Y=\prod_{{\mathfrak F}}{{\mathcal Y}}_i$ be an internal subset of $\prod_{{\mathfrak F}}\{1, \dots, |G/G_n|\}$. Take $s_iG_i \in G/G_i$ as above for each $i\in {{\mathbb N}}$. Set $s=(s_iG_i)_i$. Then $$\begin{aligned}
\mu(\sigma'(s)Y\Delta Y)&=\lim_{n\to {{\mathfrak F}}}\frac{|\sigma'(s_iG_i){{\mathcal Y}}_i\Delta {{\mathcal Y}}_i|}{|G/G_i|} \\
&\ge \lim_{n\to {{\mathfrak F}}}2\frac{|{{\mathcal Y}}_i|}{|G/G_i|}\bigg(1-\frac{|{{\mathcal Y}}_i|}{|G/G_i|}\bigg)=2\mu(Y)(1-\mu(Y)).\end{aligned}$$ If $\mu(\sigma'(s)Y\Delta Y)=0$, then $\mu(Y)=0$ or $1$. This finishes the proof.
\[T-amenable ergodic\] Let $G$ be a countable amenable group. For every sofic approximation sequence $\Sigma$ for $G$, the action of $G'$ on $(\prod_{{\mathfrak F}}\{1, \dots, d_i\}, {{\mathfrak B}}, \mu)$ is ergodic.
The proof of Theorem \[T-amenable ergodic\] requires several lemmas.
We will use the following terminology. Let $(X,\mu )$ be a finite measure space and let $\delta \geq 0$. A family of measurable subsets of $X$ is said to [*$\delta$-cover*]{} $X$ if its union has measure at least $\delta \mu (X)$. A collection $\{ A_i \}_{i\in I}$ of positive measure sets is [*$\delta$-disjoint*]{} if there exist pairwise disjoint sets $\widehat{A}_i \subseteq A_i$ such that $\mu (\widehat{A}_i ) \geq (1-\delta ) \mu (A_i )$ for all $i\in I$.
The following is the Rokhlin lemma for sofic approximations, which is based on the quasitiling theory of Ornstein and Weiss and appears as Lemma 4.5 in [@KerLi10]. The statement of the latter does not contain condition (3) below, but it is not hard to see from the proof in [@KerLi10] that it can be arranged.
\[L-Rokhlin1\] Let $G$ be a countable discrete group. Let $0\le \theta<1$, and $0<\eta<1$. Then there are an $\ell'\in {{\mathbb N}}$ and $\kappa, \eta''>0$ such that, whenever $e\in F_1\subseteq F_2\subseteq \cdots \subseteq F_{\ell'}$ are finite subsets of $G$ with $|(F_{k-1}^{-1}F_k) \setminus F_k|\le \kappa |F_k|$ for $k=2, \dots, \ell'$, there exist $\lambda_1 , \dots, \lambda_{\ell'} \in [0,1]$ such that for every $\delta>0$, every sufficiently large $d\in {{\mathbb N}}$ (depending on $\delta$), every map $\sigma: G\rightarrow {{\rm Sym}}(d)$ with a set ${{\mathcal B}}\subseteq \{1, \dots, d\}$ satisfying $|{{\mathcal B}}|\ge (1-\eta'')d$ and $$\sigma_{st}(a)=\sigma_s\sigma_t(a), \ \sigma_s(a)\neq \sigma_{s'}(a),\ \sigma_e(a)=a$$ for all $a\in {{\mathcal B}}$ and $s, t, s'\in F_{\ell'}\cup F_{\ell'}^{-1}$ with $s\neq s'$, and every set ${{\mathcal V}}\subseteq \{1, \dots, d\}$ with $|{{\mathcal V}}|\ge (1-\theta)d$, there exist ${{\mathcal C}}_1, \dots, {{\mathcal C}}_{\ell'}\subseteq {{\mathcal V}}$ such that
1. for every $k=1, \dots, \ell'$ and $c\in {{\mathcal C}}_k$, the map $s\mapsto \sigma_s(c)$ from $F_k$ to $\sigma(F_k)c$ is bijective,
2. the sets $\sigma(F_1){{\mathcal C}}_1, \dots, \sigma(F_{\ell'}){{\mathcal C}}_{\ell'}$ are pairwise disjoint and the family $\bigcup_{k=1}^{\ell'}\{\sigma(F_k)c: c\in {{\mathcal C}}_k\}$ is $\eta$-disjoint and $(1-\theta-\eta)$-covers $\{1, \dots, d\}$,
3. $\sum_{k=1}^{\ell'}||\sigma(F_k){{\mathcal C}}_k|/d-\lambda_k|<\delta$.
\[L-density\] Let $G$ be a countable discrete group. Let $F$ be a nonempty finite subset of $G$. For every $d\in {{\mathbb N}}$, every map $\sigma: G\rightarrow {{\rm Sym}}(d)$, every set ${{\mathcal B}}\subseteq \{1, \dots, d\}$ satisfying $$\sigma_s(a)\neq \sigma_t(a)$$ for all $a\in {{\mathcal B}}$ and distinct $s, t\in F$, every ${{\mathcal J}}\subseteq \{1, \dots, d\}$, and every $0<\lambda<1$, there exists a ${{\mathcal V}}\subseteq {{\mathcal B}}$ such that $|{{\mathcal V}}|\ge \frac{|{{\mathcal B}}|(1-\lambda)-d+|{{\mathcal J}}| }{1-\lambda}$ and $|\sigma(F)a\cap {{\mathcal J}}|>\lambda |F| $ for all $a\in {{\mathcal V}}$.
Set $X=\{1, \dots, d\}$. Denote by $\zeta$ the uniform probability measure on $X$. One has $$\begin{aligned}
\frac{1}{d}\sum_{a\in {{\mathcal B}}}|\sigma(F)a\cap {{\mathcal J}}|&=\int_{{{\mathcal J}}}\sum_{a\in {{\mathcal B}}} \mathbf{1}_{\sigma(F)a}(x)\, d\zeta(x)\\
&=\int_X\sum_{a\in {{\mathcal B}}}\mathbf{1}_{\sigma(F)a}(x)\, d\zeta(x)-\int_{X\setminus {{\mathcal J}}}\sum_{a\in {{\mathcal B}}} \mathbf{1}_{\sigma(F)a}(x)\, d\zeta(x)\\
&\ge \frac{|{{\mathcal B}}|\cdot |F|}{d}-\int_{X\setminus {{\mathcal J}}}|F| \, d\zeta(x)\\
&=\frac{|{{\mathcal B}}|\cdot |F|}{d}-\bigg(1-\frac{|{{\mathcal J}}|}{d}\bigg)|F|.\end{aligned}$$ Set ${{\mathcal V}}=\{a\in {{\mathcal B}}: |\sigma(F)a\cap {{\mathcal J}}|> \lambda |F|\}$. Then $$\begin{aligned}
\frac{1}{d}\sum_{a\in {{\mathcal B}}}|\sigma(F)a\cap {{\mathcal J}}|\le \frac{|{{\mathcal V}}|\cdot |F|}{d}+\frac{(|{{\mathcal B}}|-|{{\mathcal V}}|)\lambda |F|}{d}.\end{aligned}$$ Thus $$\frac{|{{\mathcal V}}|\cdot |F|}{d}+\frac{(|{{\mathcal B}}|-|{{\mathcal V}}|)\lambda |F|}{d}\ge \frac{|{{\mathcal B}}|\cdot |F|}{d}-\bigg(1-\frac{|{{\mathcal J}}|}{d}\bigg)|F|.$$ It follows that $$|{{\mathcal V}}|\ge \frac{|{{\mathcal B}}|(1-\lambda)-d+|{{\mathcal J}}| }{1-\lambda}.
\qedhere$$
The proof of Lemma 4.4 in [@KerLi10] shows the following.
\[L-disjointcover\] Let $(X,\mu )$ be a finite measure space. Let $\delta ,\eta\in [0,1)$ and let $\{ A_i \}_{i\in I}$ be a finite $\delta$-even covering of $X$ by positive measure sets. Then every $\eta$-disjoint subcollection of $\{ A_i \}_{i\in I}$ can be enlarged to an $\eta$-disjoint subcollection of $\{ A_i \}_{i\in I}$ which $\eta (1-\delta )$-covers $X$.
\[L-bijection\] Let $G$ be a countable discrete group. Let $F$ be a nonempty finite subset of $G$, $0<\tau\le 1$, and $0<\eta<1/2$. Then for every large enough $d\in {{\mathbb N}}$, every map $\sigma: G\rightarrow {{\rm Sym}}(d)$ with sets ${{\mathcal B}}_1, {{\mathcal B}}_2 \subseteq \{1, \dots, d\}$ satisfying $|{{\mathcal B}}_i|\ge (\frac{\tau}{2}+\frac{2-2\tau}{2-\tau})d$ and $$\sigma_s(a)\neq \sigma_{t}(a)$$ for all $a\in {{\mathcal B}}_i$ and distinct $s, t\in F$, and every ${{\mathcal J}}_1, {{\mathcal J}}_2\subseteq \{1, \dots, d\}$ with $|{{\mathcal J}}_i|\ge \tau d$ for $i=1, 2$, there exist ${{\mathcal C}}_i\subseteq {{\mathcal B}}_i$ such that
1. for every $i=1, 2$, the family $\{\sigma(F)c: c\in {{\mathcal C}}_i\}$ is $\eta$-disjoint and $\eta\frac{\tau}{16}$-covers $\{1, \dots, d\}$,
2. there is a bijection $\varphi: {{\mathcal C}}_1\rightarrow {{\mathcal C}}_2$ such that for any $c\in {{\mathcal C}}_1$, one has $|\{s\in F: \sigma_s(c)\in {{\mathcal J}}_1, \sigma_s(\varphi(c))\in {{\mathcal J}}_2\}|\ge (\frac{\tau}{2})^2 |F|$.
Note that for all distinct $a, c\in \{1, \dots, d\}$ and $s\in F$ we have $$\sigma_s(a)\neq \sigma_s(c).$$
Taking $\lambda=\tau/2$ and ${{\mathcal J}}={{\mathcal J}}_1$ in Lemma \[L-density\], we find a ${{\mathcal V}}_1\subseteq {{\mathcal B}}_1$ such that $|{{\mathcal V}}_1|/d\ge \frac{|{{\mathcal B}}_1|(1-\lambda)/d-1+|{{\mathcal J}}_1|/d}{1-\lambda}\ge \frac{(\tau/2+(2-2\tau)/(2-\tau))(1-\lambda)-1+\tau}{1-\lambda}=\frac{\tau}{2}$ and $|\sigma(F)a\cap {{\mathcal J}}_1|/|F|\ge \frac{\tau}{2}$ for all $a\in {{\mathcal V}}_1$. Observe that $$\sum_{c\in {{\mathcal V}}_1}|\sigma(F)c|=|F|\cdot |{{\mathcal V}}_1|\ge |F|\cdot \frac{\tau}{2}d=|F|\cdot \bigg(1-\frac{2-\tau}{2}\bigg)d ,$$ so that the family $\{\sigma(F)c\}_{c\in {{\mathcal V}}_1}$ is a $\frac{2-\tau}{2}$-even covering of $\{1, \dots, d\}$ with multiplicity $|F|$. By Lemma \[L-disjointcover\], we can find a set ${{\mathcal W}}_1\subseteq {{\mathcal V}}_1$ such that the family $\{\sigma(F)c\}_{c\in {{\mathcal W}}_1}$ is $\eta$-disjoint and $\eta\frac{\tau}{2}$-covers $\{1, \dots, d\}$. We may assume that $|\sigma(F){{\mathcal W}}_1|< \eta \tau d/2 +|F|$.
List all the subsets of $F$ with cardinality $\lceil |F|\tau/2\rceil$ as $F_1, \dots, F_n$ for some $n\in {{\mathbb N}}$, where $\lceil x\rceil$ for a real number $x$ denotes the smallest integer no less than $x$. Then we can write ${{\mathcal W}}_1$ as the disjoint union of sets ${{\mathcal W}}_{1, j}$ for $1\le j\le n$ such that $\sigma(F_j)c\subseteq {{\mathcal J}}_1$ for all $1\le j\le n$ and $c\in {{\mathcal W}}_{1, j}$. Throwing away those empty ${{\mathcal W}}_{1, j}$, we may assume that each ${{\mathcal W}}_{1, j}$ is nonempty.
For each $1\le j\le n$, taking $\lambda=\tau/2$ and ${{\mathcal J}}={{\mathcal J}}_2$ in Lemma \[L-density\], we find a ${{\mathcal V}}_{2, j}\subseteq {{\mathcal B}}_2$ such that $|{{\mathcal V}}_{2, j}|/d\ge \frac{|{{\mathcal B}}_2|(1-\lambda)/d-1+|{{\mathcal J}}_2|/d}{1-\lambda}\ge \frac{(\tau/2+(2-2\tau)/(2-\tau))(1-\lambda)-1+\tau}{1-\lambda}=\frac{\tau}{2}$ and $|\sigma(F_j)a\cap {{\mathcal J}}_2|/|F_j|\ge \frac{\tau}{2}$ for all $a\in {{\mathcal V}}_{2, j}$.
We will recursively construct pairwise disjoint sets ${{\mathcal C}}_{2, 1}, \dots, {{\mathcal C}}_{2, n}$ such that the family $\{\sigma(F)c: c\in {{\mathcal C}}_{2, j}, 1\le j\le n\}$ is $\eta$-disjoint, and ${{\mathcal C}}_{2, j}\subseteq {{\mathcal V}}_{2, j}$ and $|{{\mathcal C}}_{2, j}|=\lfloor |{{\mathcal W}}_{1, j}|/2\rfloor$ for every $1\le j\le n$, where $\lfloor x\rfloor$ for any real number $x$ denotes the largest integer no bigger than $x$.
Note that $$\sum_{c\in {{\mathcal V}}_{2, 1}}|\sigma(F)c|=|F|\cdot |{{\mathcal V}}_{2, 1}|\ge |F|\cdot \frac{\tau}{2}d=|F|\cdot \bigg(1-\frac{2-\tau}{2}\bigg)d ,$$ so that the family $\{\sigma(F)c\}_{c\in {{\mathcal V}}_{2, 1}}$ is a $\frac{2-\tau}{2}$-even covering of $\{1, \dots, d\}$ with multiplicity $|F|$. By Lemma \[L-disjointcover\], we can find a set ${{\mathcal W}}_{2, 1}\subseteq {{\mathcal V}}_{2, 1}$ such that the family $\{\sigma(F)c\}_{c\in {{\mathcal W}}_{2, 1}}$ is $\eta$-disjoint and $\eta\frac{\tau}{2}$-covers $\{1, \dots, d\}$. Note that $$|{{\mathcal W}}_{2, 1}|\cdot |F|\ge |\sigma(F){{\mathcal W}}_{2, 1}|\ge \eta\frac{\tau}{2}d,$$ and since the family $\{\sigma(F)c\}_{c\in {{\mathcal W}}_1}$ is $\eta$-disjoint, we have $$\begin{aligned}
\label{E-Rokhlin1}
\frac{1}{2}|{{\mathcal W}}_1|\cdot |F|\le(1-\eta)|{{\mathcal W}}_1|\cdot |F|\le |\sigma(F){{\mathcal W}}_1|< \eta\frac{\tau}{2}d+|F|.\end{aligned}$$ Thus $$\frac{1}{2}|{{\mathcal W}}_1|\cdot |F|<|{{\mathcal W}}_{2, 1}|\cdot |F|+|F|,$$ and hence $$|{{\mathcal W}}_{2, 1}|> \frac{1}{2}|{{\mathcal W}}_1|-1\ge \frac{1}{2}|{{\mathcal W}}_{1, 1}|-1.$$ Therefore we can take a subset ${{\mathcal C}}_{2, 1}$ of ${{\mathcal W}}_{2, 1}$ with cardinality $\lfloor \frac{1}{2}|{{\mathcal W}}_{1, 1}|\rfloor$.
Suppose that we have found pairwise disjoint sets ${{\mathcal C}}_{2, 1}, \dots, {{\mathcal C}}_{2, k}$ for some $1\le k<n$ such that the family $\{\sigma(F)c: c\in {{\mathcal C}}_{2, j}, 1\le j\le k\}$ is $\eta$-disjoint, and ${{\mathcal C}}_{2, j}\subseteq {{\mathcal V}}_{2, j}$ and $|{{\mathcal C}}_{2, j}|=\lfloor |{{\mathcal W}}_{1, j}|/2\rfloor$ for every $1\le j\le k$. Note that $$\begin{aligned}
\sum_{c\in {{\mathcal V}}_{2, k+1}\cup \bigcup_{1\le j\le k}{{\mathcal C}}_{2, j}}|\sigma(F)c|
&=|F |\cdot \bigg|{{\mathcal V}}_{2, k+1}\cup \bigcup_{1\le j\le k}{{\mathcal C}}_{2, j} \bigg| \\
&\ge |F|\cdot |{{\mathcal V}}_{2, k+1}|\ge |F|\cdot \frac{\tau}{2}d=|F|\cdot \bigg(1-\frac{2-\tau}{2}\bigg)d ,\end{aligned}$$ so that the family $\{\sigma(F)c\}_{c\in {{\mathcal V}}_{2, k+1}\cup \bigcup_{1\le j\le k}{{\mathcal C}}_{2, j}}$ is a $\frac{2-\tau}{2}$-even covering of $\{1, \dots, d\}$ with multiplicity $|F|$. By Lemma \[L-disjointcover\], we can find a set ${{\mathcal W}}_{2, k+1}\subseteq {{\mathcal V}}_{2, k+1}\setminus \bigcup_{1\le j\le k}{{\mathcal C}}_{2, j}$ such that the family $\{\sigma(F)c\}_{c\in {{\mathcal W}}_{2, k+1}\cup \bigcup_{1\le j\le k}{{\mathcal C}}_{2, j}}$ is $\eta$-disjoint and $\eta\frac{\tau}{2}$-covers $\{1, \dots, d\}$. Note that $$\bigg(|{{\mathcal W}}_{2, k+1}|+\sum_{1\le j\le k}|{{\mathcal C}}_{2, j}|\bigg)\cdot |F|
\ge \bigg|\sigma(F)\bigg({{\mathcal W}}_{2, k+1}\cup \bigcup_{1\le j\le k}{{\mathcal C}}_{2, j}\bigg)\bigg|\ge \eta\frac{\tau}{2}d.$$ Thus, combining with , we have $$\begin{aligned}
\frac{1}{2}\sum_{1\le j\le k+1}|{{\mathcal W}}_{1, j}|\cdot |F|&\le \frac{1}{2}|{{\mathcal W}}_1|\cdot |F|\\
&<\bigg(|{{\mathcal W}}_{2, k+1}|+\sum_{1\le j\le k}|{{\mathcal C}}_{2, j}|\bigg)\cdot |F|+|F|\\
&\le \bigg(|{{\mathcal W}}_{2, k+1}|+\frac{1}{2}\sum_{1\le j\le k}|{{\mathcal W}}_{1, j}|\bigg)\cdot |F|+|F|,\end{aligned}$$ and hence $$|{{\mathcal W}}_{2, k+1}|> \frac{1}{2}|{{\mathcal W}}_{1, k+1}|-1.$$ Therefore we can take a subset ${{\mathcal C}}_{2, k+1}$ of ${{\mathcal W}}_{2, k+1}$ with cardinality $\lfloor \frac{1}{2}|{{\mathcal W}}_{1, k+1}|\rfloor$. This completes the recursive construction.
For each $1\le j\le n$ take a subset ${{\mathcal C}}_{1, j}$ of ${{\mathcal W}}_{1, j}$ with cardinality $\lfloor |{{\mathcal W}}_{1, j}|/2\rfloor$. Set ${{\mathcal C}}_i=\bigcup_{1\le j\le n}{{\mathcal C}}_{i, j}$ for $i=1, 2$. Take a bijection $\varphi: {{\mathcal C}}_1\rightarrow {{\mathcal C}}_2$ such that $\varphi({{\mathcal C}}_{1, j})={{\mathcal C}}_{2, j}$ for all $1\le j\le n$. For each $c\in {{\mathcal C}}_1$, considering $j$ such that $c\in {{\mathcal C}}_{1, j}$ one has $$\begin{aligned}
|\{s\in F: \sigma_s(c)\in {{\mathcal J}}_1, \sigma_s(\varphi(c))\in {{\mathcal J}}_2\}|
&\ge |\{s\in F_j: \sigma_s(\varphi(c))\in {{\mathcal J}}_2\}| \\
&\ge \frac{\tau}{2}|F_j| \ge \bigg(\frac{\tau}{2}\bigg)^2|F|.\end{aligned}$$ Note that $$|{{\mathcal W}}_1|\cdot |F|\ge |\sigma(F){{\mathcal W}}_1|\ge \eta\frac{\tau}{2}d,$$ and hence for $i=1, 2$, $$|{{\mathcal C}}_i|=\sum_{1\le j\le n}| {{\mathcal C}}_{i, j}|\ge \sum_{1\le j\le n}\bigg(\frac{1}{2}|{{\mathcal W}}_{1, j}|-1\bigg)
\ge \frac{1}{2}|{{\mathcal W}}_1|-2^{|F|}\ge \frac{1}{4}|{{\mathcal W}}_1|$$ when $d$ is sufficiently large. Since the family $\{\sigma(F)c: c\in {{\mathcal C}}_i\}$ is $\eta$-disjoint, we get $$|\sigma(F){{\mathcal C}}_i|\ge (1-\eta)|{{\mathcal C}}_i|\cdot |F|\ge (1-\eta)\eta\frac{\tau}{8}d\ge \eta\frac{\tau}{16}d.$$
\[L-Rokhlin\] Let $G$ be a countable discrete group. Let $0<\tau\le 1$, and $0<\eta<1/2$ with $\eta\frac{\tau}{16}<\frac{1-\tau'}{24}$, where $\tau'=\frac{\tau}{2}+\frac{2-2\tau}{2-\tau}<1$. Then there are an $\ell\in {{\mathbb N}}$ and $\eta'>0$ such that, whenever $e\in F_1\subseteq F_2\subseteq \cdots \subseteq F_\ell$ are finite subsets of $G$ with $|(F_{k-1}^{-1}F_k) \setminus F_k|\le |F_k|$ for $k=2, \dots, \ell$, for every large enough $d\in {{\mathbb N}}$, every map $\sigma: G\rightarrow {{\rm Sym}}(d)$ with a set ${{\mathcal B}}\subseteq \{1, \dots, d\}$ satisfying $|{{\mathcal B}}|\ge (1-\eta')d$ and $$\sigma_{st}(a)=\sigma_s\sigma_t(a),\ \sigma_s(a)\neq \sigma_{s'}(a),\ \sigma_e(a)=a$$ for all $a\in {{\mathcal B}}$ and $s, t, s'\in F_\ell\cup F_\ell^{-1}$ with $s\neq s'$, and any ${{\mathcal J}}_1, {{\mathcal J}}_2\subseteq \{1, \dots, d\}$ with $|{{\mathcal J}}_i|\ge \tau d$ for $i=1, 2$, there exist ${{\mathcal C}}_{i, 1}, \dots, {{\mathcal C}}_{i, \ell}\subseteq {{\mathcal B}}$ such that
1. for every $i=1, 2$, $k=1, \dots, \ell$ and $c\in {{\mathcal C}}_{i, k}$, the map $s\mapsto \sigma_s(c)$ from $F_k$ to $\sigma(F_k)c$ is bijective,
2. for every $i=1, 2$, the sets $\sigma(F_1){{\mathcal C}}_{i, 1}, \dots, \sigma(F_\ell){{\mathcal C}}_{i, \ell}$ are pairwise disjoint, the family $\bigcup_{k=1}^\ell\{\sigma(F_k)c: c\in {{\mathcal C}}_{i, k}\}$ is $\eta$-disjoint, and $(1-\eta)\frac{1-\tau'}{24}d\le |\bigcup_{k=1}^\ell\sigma(F_k){{\mathcal C}}_{i, k}|\le (\frac{1}{1-\eta}\frac{1-\tau'}{24}+\eta)d$,
3. for every $k=1, \dots, \ell$, there is a bijection $\varphi_k: {{\mathcal C}}_{1, k}\rightarrow {{\mathcal C}}_{2, k}$ such that for each $c\in {{\mathcal C}}_{1, k}$ one has $|\{s\in F_k: \sigma_s(c)\in {{\mathcal J}}_1, \sigma_s(\varphi_k(c))\in {{\mathcal J}}_2\}|\ge (\frac{\tau}{2})^2 |F_k|$.
Set $\eta'=\frac{1-\tau'}{2}$. Take $\ell$ to be the largest integer satisfying $\ell \eta\frac{\tau}{16}\le \frac{1-\tau'}{12}$. Then $\ell \eta\frac{\tau}{16}\ge \frac{1-\tau'}{24}$. We will recursively construct sets ${{\mathcal C}}_{i, 1}', \dots, {{\mathcal C}}_{i, \ell}'$ in reverse order so that (i) for every $i=1, 2$ and $1\le k\le \ell$, the sets $\sigma(F_k){{\mathcal C}}_{i, k}', \dots, \sigma(F_\ell){{\mathcal C}}_{i, \ell}'$ are pairwise disjoint and the family $\bigcup_{n=k}^\ell\{\sigma(F_n)c: c\in {{\mathcal C}}'_{i, n}\}$ is $\eta$-disjoint and $(\ell-k+1)\eta\frac{\tau}{16}$-covers $\{1, \dots, d\}$, and (ii) for every $k=1, \dots, \ell$, there is a bijection $\varphi_k: {{\mathcal C}}_{1, k}'\rightarrow {{\mathcal C}}_{2, k}'$ such that for every $c\in {{\mathcal C}}_{1, k}'$ one has $|\{s\in F_k: \sigma_s(c)\in {{\mathcal J}}_1, \sigma_s(\varphi_k(c))\in {{\mathcal J}}_2\}|\ge (\frac{\tau}{2})^2 |F_k|$.
Taking ${{\mathcal B}}_i={{\mathcal B}}$ for $i=1, 2$ in Lemma \[L-bijection\] we find ${{\mathcal C}}_{i, \ell}'\subseteq {{\mathcal B}}$ for $i=1, 2$ such that the family $\{\sigma(F_\ell)c: c\in {{\mathcal C}}_{i, \ell}'\}$ is $\eta$-disjoint and $\eta\frac{\tau}{16}$-covers $\{1, \dots, d\}$ for $i=1, 2$ and there is a bijection $\varphi_\ell: {{\mathcal C}}_{1, \ell}'\rightarrow {{\mathcal C}}_{2, \ell}'$ with $|\{s\in F_\ell: \sigma_s(c)\in {{\mathcal J}}_1, \sigma_s(\varphi_\ell(c))\in {{\mathcal J}}_2\}|\ge (\frac{\tau}{2})^2|F_\ell|$ for all $c\in {{\mathcal C}}_{1, \ell}'$.
Suppose that $1\le k<\ell$ and we have found ${{\mathcal C}}_{i, k+1}', \dots, {{\mathcal C}}_{i, \ell}'\subseteq {{\mathcal B}}$ for $i=1, 2$ such that the sets $\sigma(F_{k+1}){{\mathcal C}}_{i, k+1}', \dots, \sigma(F_\ell){{\mathcal C}}_{i,\ell}'$ are pairwise disjoint and the family $\bigcup_{n=k+1}^\ell\{\sigma(F_n)c: c\in {{\mathcal C}}_{i, n}'\}$ is $\eta$-disjoint and $(\ell-k)\eta\frac{\tau}{16}$-covers $\{1, \dots, d\}$ for each $i=1,2$, and there is a bijection $\varphi_j:{{\mathcal C}}_{1, j}'\rightarrow {{\mathcal C}}_{2, j}'$ with $|\{s\in F_j: \sigma_s(c)\in {{\mathcal J}}_1, \sigma_s(\varphi_j(c))\in {{\mathcal J}}_2\}|\ge (\frac{\tau}{2})^2|F_j|$ for all $j=k+1, \dots, \ell$ and $c\in {{\mathcal C}}_{1, j}'$. Set $\theta_{i, k}=|\bigcup_{j=k+1}^\ell \sigma(F_j){{\mathcal C}}_{i, j}'|/d$ and ${{\mathcal B}}_{i, k}=\big\{c\in {{\mathcal B}}: \sigma(F_k)c\cap \big(\bigcup_{j=k+1}^\ell\sigma(F_j){{\mathcal C}}_{i, j}'\big)=\emptyset\big\}$ for $i=1, 2$.
If $1-\tau'-\eta'< 3\theta_{m, k}$ for some $m=1, 2$, then we set ${{\mathcal C}}_{i, k}'=\emptyset$ for each $i=1, 2$. Then $$\begin{aligned}
\sum_{j=k}^\ell|{{\mathcal C}}'_{m, j}|\cdot |F_j|\ge \bigg|\bigcup_{j=k}^\ell\sigma(F_j){{\mathcal C}}_{m, j}' \bigg|
=\theta_{m, k}d\ge \frac{1-\tau'-\eta'}{3}d= \frac{1-\tau'}{6}d.\end{aligned}$$ Since the family $\bigcup_{j=k}^\ell\{\sigma(F_j)c: c\in {{\mathcal C}}_{i, j}'\}$ is $\eta$-disjoint, one has $$\begin{aligned}
\bigg|\bigcup_{j=k}^\ell\sigma(F_j){{\mathcal C}}_{i, j}' \bigg|
&\ge (1-\eta)\sum_{j=k}^\ell|{{\mathcal C}}_{i, j}'|\cdot |F_j| \\
&\ge (1-\eta)\frac{1-\tau'}{6}d\ge \frac{1-\tau'}{12}d\ge \ell\eta\frac{\tau}{16}d\ge (\ell-k+1)\eta\frac{\tau}{16}d\end{aligned}$$ for $i=1, 2$.
Assume that $1-\tau'-\eta' \ge 3\theta_{i, k}$ for every $i=1, 2$. Let $i\in \{1, 2\}$. For every $c\in {{\mathcal B}}\setminus {{\mathcal B}}_{i, k}$ we have $\sigma_s(c)=\sigma_t(a)$ for some $j\in \{k+1, \dots, \ell \}$, $a\in {{\mathcal C}}_{i, j}'$, $t\in F_j$, and $s\in F_k$, and hence $$c=\sigma_{s^{-1}}\sigma_s(c)=\sigma_{s^{-1}}\sigma_t(a)=\sigma_{s^{-1}t}(a)\in \bigcup_{j=k+1}^\ell\sigma(F_k^{-1}F_j){{\mathcal C}}_{i, j}'.$$ Therefore $${{\mathcal B}}\setminus {{\mathcal B}}_{i, k}\subseteq \bigcup_{j=k+1}^\ell\sigma(F_k^{-1}F_j){{\mathcal C}}_{i, j}'.$$ Since the family $\bigcup_{j=k+1}^\ell \{\sigma(F_j)c: c\in {{\mathcal C}}_{i, j}'\}$ is $\eta$-disjoint we have $$\frac{1}{2}\sum_{j=k+1}^\ell |F_j|\cdot |{{\mathcal C}}_{i, j}'|\le \sum_{j=k+1}^\ell (1-\eta)|F_j|\cdot |{{\mathcal C}}_{i, j}'|
\le \bigg|\bigcup_{j=k+1}^\ell \sigma(F_j){{\mathcal C}}_{i,j}' \bigg|=\theta_{i, k}d.$$ Thus $$\begin{aligned}
\bigg|\bigcup_{j=k+1}^\ell \sigma(F_k^{-1}F_j){{\mathcal C}}_{i, j}'\bigg|
&\le \bigg|\bigcup_{j=k+1}^\ell \sigma((F_k^{-1}F_j)\setminus F_j){{\mathcal C}}_{i, j}'\bigg|+\bigg|\bigcup_{j=k+1}^\ell \sigma(F_j){{\mathcal C}}_{i, j}'\bigg|\\
&\le \sum_{j=k+1}^\ell |(F_k^{-1}F_j)\setminus F_j|\cdot |{{\mathcal C}}_{i, j}'|+\theta_{i, k}d\\
&\le \sum_{j=k+1}^\ell |(F_{j-1}^{-1}F_j)\setminus F_j|\cdot |{{\mathcal C}}_{i, j}'|+\theta_{i, k}d\\
&\le \sum_{j=k+1}^\ell |F_j|\cdot |{{\mathcal C}}_{i, j}'|+\theta_{i, k}d\\
&\le 3 \theta_{i, k}d.\end{aligned}$$ Therefore $$\begin{aligned}
|{{\mathcal B}}_{i, k}|=|{{\mathcal B}}|-|{{\mathcal B}}\setminus {{\mathcal B}}_{i, k}| &\ge (1-\eta')d-\bigg|\bigcup_{j=k+1}^\ell \sigma(F_k^{-1}F_j){{\mathcal C}}_{i, j}'\bigg|\\
&\ge (1-\eta')d-3\theta_{i, k}d \\
&\ge \tau' d.\end{aligned}$$
Taking ${{\mathcal B}}_i={{\mathcal B}}_{i, k}$ in Lemma \[L-bijection\], we find ${{\mathcal C}}'_{i, k}\subseteq {{\mathcal B}}_{i, k}$ for $i=1, 2$ such that the family $\{\sigma(F_k)c: c\in {{\mathcal C}}_{i, k}'\}$ is $\eta$-disjoint and $\eta\frac{\tau}{16}$-covers $\{1, \dots, d\}$ for $i=1, 2$ and there is a bijection $\varphi_k: {{\mathcal C}}_{1, k}'\rightarrow {{\mathcal C}}_{2, k}'$ with $|\{s\in F_k: \sigma_s(c)\in {{\mathcal J}}_1, \sigma_s(\varphi_k(c))\in {{\mathcal J}}_2\}|\ge (\frac{\tau}{2})^2|F_k|$ for all $c\in {{\mathcal C}}_{1, k}'$. Then for each $i=1, 2$, the sets $\sigma(F_k){{\mathcal C}}_{i, k}', \dots, \sigma(F_\ell){{\mathcal C}}_{i, \ell}'$ are pairwise disjoint, the family $\bigcup_{j=k}^\ell\{\sigma(F_j)c: c\in {{\mathcal C}}_{i, j}'\}$ is $\eta$-disjoint, and $$\begin{aligned}
\bigg|\bigcup_{j=k}^\ell\sigma(F_j){{\mathcal C}}_{i, j}'\bigg|&=|\sigma(F_k){{\mathcal C}}_{i, k}'|+\bigg|\bigcup_{j=k+1}^\ell\sigma(F_j){{\mathcal C}}_{i, j}'\bigg|\\
&\ge \eta\frac{\tau}{16}d+(\ell-k)\eta\frac{\tau}{16}d=(\ell-k+1)\eta\frac{\tau}{16}d,\end{aligned}$$ completing the recursive construction.
When $d$ is large enough, take a subset ${{\mathcal C}}_{1, k}$ of ${{\mathcal C}}_{1, k}'$ for each $1\le k\le \ell$ such that $$\frac{1-\tau'}{24}d\le \bigg|\bigcup_{k=1}^\ell\sigma(F_k){{\mathcal C}}_{1, k}\bigg|\le \frac{1-\tau'}{24}d+|F_\ell|\le \frac{1-\tau'}{24}d+\eta(1-\eta)d.$$ Set ${{\mathcal C}}_{2, k}=\varphi_k({{\mathcal C}}_{1, k})$ for each $1\le k\le \ell$. Since the families $\bigcup_{k=1}^\ell\{\sigma(F_k)c: c\in {{\mathcal C}}_{i, k}\}$ for $i=1, 2$ are $\eta$-disjoint, we have $$\begin{aligned}
\bigg|\bigcup_{k=1}^\ell \sigma(F_k){{\mathcal C}}_{2, k}\bigg|
\ge (1-\eta)\bigg|\bigcup_{k=1}^\ell \sigma(F_k){{\mathcal C}}_{1, k}\bigg|\ge (1-\eta)\frac{1-\tau'}{24}d,\end{aligned}$$ and $$\begin{aligned}
\bigg|\bigcup_{k=1}^\ell \sigma(F_k){{\mathcal C}}_{2, k}\bigg|
\le \frac{1}{1-\eta}\bigg|\bigcup_{k=1}^\ell \sigma(F_k){{\mathcal C}}_{1, k}\bigg|\le \bigg(\frac{1}{1-\eta}\cdot\frac{1-\tau'}{24}+\eta\bigg)d.\end{aligned}$$
We are ready to prove Theorem \[T-amenable ergodic\].
It suffices to show that for any internal sets $Y=\prod_{{{\mathfrak F}}}{{\mathcal Y}}_n$ and $Z=\prod_{{{\mathfrak F}}}{{\mathcal Z}}_n$ with strictly positive measure, there is some $s\in G'$ with $\mu(Z\cap sY)>0$. In turn it is enough to show that there is some $\lambda>0$ such that for every finite subset $F$ of $G$ and ${\varepsilon}>0$ the set of all $n\in {{\mathbb N}}$ for which there is some $\varphi\in {{\rm Sym}}(d_n)$ satisfying $\rho_{\rm Hamm}(\varphi\sigma_s, \sigma_s\varphi)<{\varepsilon}$ for all $s\in F$ and $\frac{|\varphi({{\mathcal Y}}_n)\cap {{\mathcal Z}}_n|}{d_n}\ge \lambda$ belongs to ${{\mathfrak F}}$.
Set $\tau=\min(\mu(Y), \mu(Z))/2$, $\tau'=\frac{\tau}{2}+\frac{2-2\tau}{2-\tau}$, and $\lambda=\frac{\tau^2(1-\tau')}{384}$. Take $0<\eta<1/2$ to be a small number with $\eta\frac{\tau}{16}<\frac{1-\tau'}{24}$, to be determined in a moment. Then the set $V$ of all $n\in {{\mathbb N}}$ satisfying $\min(|{{\mathcal Y}}_n|/d_n, |{{\mathcal Z}}_n|/d_n)\ge \tau$ belongs to ${{\mathfrak F}}$. Let $\ell$ and $\eta'$ be as in Lemma \[L-Rokhlin\]. We may assume that $\eta'<\varepsilon/2$. Set $\theta=\frac{1}{(1-\eta)^2}\frac{1-\tau'}{24}+\frac{\eta}{1-\eta}+\eta'$. Let $\ell', \kappa$, and $\eta''$ be as in Lemma \[L-Rokhlin1\]. Take $F'_1\subseteq F'_2\subseteq \dots \subseteq F'_{\ell'}\subseteq F_1\subseteq F_2\subseteq \dots \subseteq F_\ell$ to be finite subsets of $G$ containing $e$ such that
1. $|((F'_{\ell'})^{-1}F_k)\setminus F_k|<\eta |F_k|$ for all $k=1, \dots, \ell$,
2. $|((F'_{k-1})^{-1}F'_k)\setminus F'_k|<\kappa |F'_k|$ for all $k=2, \dots, \ell'$ and $|\tilde{F}'_k|\ge (1-\eta)|F'_k|$ for all $k=1, \dots, \ell'$, where $\tilde{F}'_k=\{s\in F'_k: Fs\subseteq F'_k\}$, and
3. $|(F_{k-1}^{-1}F_k)\setminus F_k|<|F_k|$ for all $k=2, \dots, \ell$ and $|\tilde{F}_k|\ge (1-\eta)|F_k|$ for all $k=1, \dots, \ell$, where $\tilde{F}_k=\{s\in F_k: Fs\subseteq F_k\}$.
Then we have $\lambda_1, \dots, \lambda_{\ell'}$ as in Lemma \[L-Rokhlin1\]. When $n\in V$ is large enough, one has $|{{\mathcal B}}|\ge (1-\min(\eta', \eta''))d_n$ where ${{\mathcal B}}$ denotes the set of all $a\in \{1, \dots, d_n\}$ satisfying $$\sigma_{n,st}(a)=\sigma_{n, s}\sigma_{n, t}(a), \ \sigma_{n, s}(a)\neq \sigma_{n, s'}(a),\ \sigma_{n, e}(a)$$ for all $s,t\in (F\cup F_\ell)\cup(F\cup F_\ell)^{-1}$ and distinct $s, s'\in F_\ell \cup F_\ell^{-1}$, and one has ${{\mathcal C}}_{i, 1}, \dots, {{\mathcal C}}_{i, \ell}\subseteq {{\mathcal B}}$ for $i=1, 2$ as in Lemma \[L-Rokhlin\] for $d=d_n$, $\sigma=\sigma_n$, ${{\mathcal J}}_1={{\mathcal Y}}_n$, and ${{\mathcal J}}_2={{\mathcal Z}}_n$.
Let $i\in \{1, 2\}$. Set ${{\mathcal V}}_i=\{c\in {{\mathcal B}}: \sigma_n(F'_{\ell'})c \cap \bigcup_{k=1}^\ell\sigma_n(F_k){{\mathcal C}}_{i, k}=\emptyset\}$. Then ${{\mathcal B}}\setminus {{\mathcal V}}_i\subseteq \bigcup_{k=1}^\ell \sigma_n((F'_{\ell'})^{-1}F_k){{\mathcal C}}_{i, k}$. Since the family $\bigcup_{k=1}^\ell\{\sigma_n(F_k)c: c\in {{\mathcal C}}_{i, k}\}$ is $\eta$-disjoint, one has $$\begin{aligned}
|{{\mathcal B}}\setminus {{\mathcal V}}_i|&\le \bigg|\bigcup_{k=1}^\ell \sigma_n((F'_{\ell'})^{-1}F_k){{\mathcal C}}_{i, k}\bigg|\\
&\le
\bigg|\bigcup_{k=1}^\ell \sigma_n(((F'_{\ell'})^{-1}F_k)\setminus F_k){{\mathcal C}}_{i, k}\bigg|+\bigg|\bigcup_{k=1}^\ell \sigma_n(F_k){{\mathcal C}}_{i, k}\bigg|\\
&\le \sum_{k=1}^\ell |\sigma_n(((F'_{\ell'})^{-1}F_k)\setminus F_k){{\mathcal C}}_{i, k}|+\bigg|\bigcup_{k=1}^\ell \sigma_n(F_k){{\mathcal C}}_{i, k}\bigg|\\
&\le \sum_{k=1}^\ell |((F'_{\ell'})^{-1}F_k)\setminus F_k|\cdot |{{\mathcal C}}_{i, k}|+\bigg|\bigcup_{k=1}^\ell \sigma_n(F_k){{\mathcal C}}_{i, k}\bigg|\\
&\le \eta\sum_{k=1}^\ell |F_k|\cdot |{{\mathcal C}}_{i, k}|+\bigg|\bigcup_{k=1}^\ell \sigma_n(F_k){{\mathcal C}}_{i, k}\bigg|\\
&\le \bigg(\frac{\eta}{1-\eta}+1\bigg)\bigg|\bigcup_{k=1}^\ell \sigma_n(F_k){{\mathcal C}}_{i, k}\bigg|\\
&\le \frac{1}{(1-\eta)^2}\frac{1-\tau'}{24}d_n+\frac{\eta}{1-\eta}d_n,\end{aligned}$$ and thus $$|{{\mathcal V}}_i|= |{{\mathcal B}}|-|{{\mathcal B}}\setminus {{\mathcal V}}_i|\ge (1-\theta)d_n.$$ Take $\delta>0$ with $2\eta\delta+2\eta\delta \ell'+2\delta\ell'\le \eta$. Taking ${{\mathcal V}}={{\mathcal V}}_i$ in Lemma \[L-Rokhlin1\], when $n\in V$ is large enough, we find ${{\mathcal C}}_{i, 1}', \dots, {{\mathcal C}}_{i, \ell'}'\subseteq {{\mathcal V}}_i$ such that
1. for every $k=1, \dots, \ell'$ and $c\in {{\mathcal C}}_{i, k}'$, the map $s\mapsto \sigma_{n, s}(c)$ from $F'_k$ to $\sigma_n(F'_k)c$ is bijective,
2. the sets $\sigma_n(F'_1){{\mathcal C}}_{i, 1}', \dots, \sigma_n(F'_{\ell'}){{\mathcal C}}_{i, \ell'}'$ are pairwise disjoint and the family $\bigcup_{k=1}^{\ell'}\{\sigma_n(F'_k)c: c\in {{\mathcal C}}_{i, k}'\}$ is $\eta$-disjoint and $(1-\theta-\eta)$-covers $\{1, \dots, d\}$,
3. $\sum_{k=1}^{\ell'}||\sigma_n(F'_k){{\mathcal C}}_{i, k}'|/d_n-\lambda_k|<\delta$.
Note that $$\sum_{k=1}^{\ell'}\lambda_k\le \frac{1}{d_n} \bigg|\bigcup_{k=1}\sigma_n(F'_k){{\mathcal C}}_{1, k}' \bigg|+\delta\le 1+\delta.$$ For each $1\le k\le \ell'$, take ${{\mathcal C}}''_{1, k}\subseteq {{\mathcal C}}'_{1, k}$ and ${{\mathcal C}}''_{2, k}\subseteq {{\mathcal C}}'_{2, k}$ with $$|{{\mathcal C}}''_{1, k}|=|{{\mathcal C}}''_{2, k}|=\min(|{{\mathcal C}}'_{1, k}|, |{{\mathcal C}}'_{2, k}|).$$ Take a bijection $\varphi'_k: {{\mathcal C}}''_{1, k}\rightarrow {{\mathcal C}}''_{2, k}$. We have $$\begin{aligned}
|{{\mathcal C}}'_{1, k}|\cdot |F'_k|-|{{\mathcal C}}'_{2, k}|\cdot |F'_k| &\le \frac{1}{1-\eta}|\sigma_n(F'_k){{\mathcal C}}'_{1, k}|-|\sigma_n(F'_k){{\mathcal C}}'_{2, k}|\\
&\le (1+2\eta)|\sigma_n(F'_k){{\mathcal C}}'_{1, k}|-|\sigma_n(F'_k){{\mathcal C}}'_{2, k}|\\
&\le (1+2\eta)(\lambda_k+\delta)d_n-(\lambda_k-\delta)d_n\\
&= (2\eta\lambda_k+2\eta\delta+2\delta)d_n,\end{aligned}$$ and similarly $|{{\mathcal C}}'_{2, k}|\cdot |F'_k|-|{{\mathcal C}}'_{1, k}|\cdot |F'_k|\le (2\eta\lambda_k+2\eta\delta+2\delta)d_n$. Thus for each $i=1, 2$ one has $$\begin{aligned}
|\sigma_n(F'_k)({{\mathcal C}}'_{i, k}\setminus {{\mathcal C}}''_{i, k})|
&\le |{{\mathcal C}}'_{i, k}\setminus {{\mathcal C}}''_{i, k}|\cdot |F'_k| \\
&=||{{\mathcal C}}'_{1, k}|\cdot |F'_k|-|{{\mathcal C}}'_{2, k}|\cdot |F'_k||\le (2\eta\lambda_k+2\eta\delta+2\delta)d_n,\end{aligned}$$ and hence $$\begin{aligned}
\bigg|\bigcup_{k=1}^{\ell'}\sigma_n(F'_k)({{\mathcal C}}'_{i, k}\setminus {{\mathcal C}}''_{i, k})\bigg|&=\sum_{k=1}^{\ell'}|\sigma_n(F'_k)({{\mathcal C}}'_{i, k}\setminus {{\mathcal C}}''_{i, k})|\\
&\le \sum_{k=1}^{\ell'}(2\eta\lambda_k+2\eta\delta+2\delta)d_n\\
&\le (2\eta(1+\delta)+2\eta\delta \ell'+2\delta\ell')d_n\le 3\eta d_n.\end{aligned}$$ Therefore $$\begin{aligned}
\bigg|\bigcup_{k=1}^{\ell'}\sigma_n(F'_k){{\mathcal C}}''_{i, k}\bigg|
&\ge \bigg|\bigcup_{k=1}^{\ell'}\sigma_n(F'_k){{\mathcal C}}'_{i, k}\bigg|-\bigg|\bigcup_{k=1}^{\ell'}\sigma_n(F'_k)({{\mathcal C}}'_{i, k}\setminus {{\mathcal C}}''_{i, k})\bigg| \\
&\ge (1-\theta-\eta)d_n-3\eta d_n=(1-\theta-4\eta)d_n\end{aligned}$$ for $i=1, 2$.
Since the families $\bigcup_{k=1}^\ell\{\sigma_n(F_k)c: c\in {{\mathcal C}}_{i, k}\}$ for $i=1, 2$ are $\eta$-disjoint, we can find $F_{i, c}\subseteq F_k$ with $|F_{i, c}|\ge (1-\eta)|F_k|$ for all $i=1, 2$, $k=1,\dots, \ell$, and $c\in {{\mathcal C}}_{i, k}$ so that for each $i=1, 2$, the sets $\sigma_n(F_{i, c})c$ for $c\in \bigcup_{k=1}^\ell {{\mathcal C}}_{i, k}$ are pairwise disjoint. For every $k=1,\dots,\ell$ and $c\in {{\mathcal C}}_{1, k}$, set $\bar{F}_c=F_{1, c}\cap F_{2, \varphi_k(c)}$ and $\hat{F}_c=\{s\in \bar{F}_c: Fs\subseteq \bar{F}_c\}$. Then $|\bar{F}_c|\ge (1-2\eta)|F_k|$ and $|\hat{F}_c|\ge |\tilde{F}_k|-2\eta |F|\cdot |F_k|\ge (1-(2|F|+1)\eta)|F_k|$.
Similarly, for every $1\le k\le \ell'$ and $c\in {{\mathcal C}}''_{1, k}$, we find some $\tilde{F}'_c\subseteq F'_k$ with $|\tilde{F}'_c|\ge (1-2\eta)|F'_k|$ such that the sets $\sigma_n(\tilde{F}'_c)c$ for $c\in \bigcup_{k=1}^\ell {{\mathcal C}}''_{1, k}$, as well as the sets $\sigma_n(\tilde{F}'_c)\varphi'_k(c)$ for $c\in \bigcup_{k=1}^\ell {{\mathcal C}}''_{1, k}$, are pairwise disjoint. Setting $\hat{F}'_c=\{s\in \bar{F}'_c: Fs\subseteq \bar{F}'_c\}$, we have $|\hat{F}'_c|\ge (1-(2|F|+1)\eta)|F'_k|$.
Note that $$\begin{aligned}
\bigg|\bigcup_{k=1}^\ell\bigcup_{c\in {{\mathcal C}}_{1, k}}\sigma_n(\hat{F}_c)c\bigg|&=\sum_{k=1}^\ell\sum_{c\in {{\mathcal C}}_{1, k}}|\hat{F}_c|\\
&\ge \sum_{k=1}^\ell\sum_{c\in {{\mathcal C}}_{1, k}}\big(1-(2|F|+1)\eta\big)|F_k|\\
&\ge \big(1-(2|F|+1)\eta\big)\bigg|\bigcup_{k=1}^\ell\sigma_n(F_k){{\mathcal C}}_{1, k}\bigg|\\
&\ge \big(1-(2|F|+1)\eta\big)(1-\eta)\frac{1-\tau'}{24}d_n.\end{aligned}$$ Similarly, $$\begin{aligned}
\bigg|\bigcup_{k=1}^{\ell'}\bigcup_{c\in {{\mathcal C}}''_{1, k}}\sigma_n(\hat{F}'_c)c \bigg|
&\ge \big(1-(2|F|+1)\eta\big)\bigg|\bigcup_{k=1}^{\ell'}\sigma_n(F'_k){{\mathcal C}}''_{1, k}\bigg|\\
&\ge \big(1-(2|F|+1)\eta\big)(1-\theta-4\eta)d_n.\end{aligned}$$ Set ${{\mathcal W}}=\big(\bigcup_{k=1}^\ell\bigcup_{c\in {{\mathcal C}}_{1, k}}\sigma_n(\hat{F}_c)c\big)\cup\big(\bigcup_{k=1}^{\ell'}\bigcup_{c\in {{\mathcal C}}''_{1, k}}\sigma_n(\hat{F}'_c)c\big)$. Then $$|{{\mathcal W}}|\ge \big(1-(2|F|+1)\eta\big)(1-\eta)\frac{1-\tau'}{24}d_n+\big(1-(2|F|+1)\eta\big)(1-\theta-4\eta)d_n.$$
Take a $\varphi\in {{\rm Sym}}(d_n)$ such that $\varphi(\sigma_{n, s}(c))=\sigma_{n, s}(\varphi_k(c))$ for all $k=1,\dots,\ell$, $c\in {{\mathcal C}}_{1, k}$, and $s\in \bar{F}_c$, and $\varphi(\sigma_{n, s}(c))=\sigma_{n, s}(\varphi'_k(c))$ for all $k=1,\dots,\ell'$, $c\in {{\mathcal C}}''_{1, k}$, and $s\in \bar{F}'_c$. For every $s\in F$, note that $\sigma_{n, s}\varphi=\varphi\sigma_{n, s}$ on ${{\mathcal W}}$, and hence $$\begin{aligned}
\rho_{\rm Hamm}(\sigma_{n, s}\varphi, \varphi\sigma_{n, s})
&\le 1-\frac{|{{\mathcal W}}|}{d_n} \\
&\le 1-\big(1-(2|F|+1)\eta\big)(1-\eta)\frac{1-\tau'}{24}-\big(1-(2|F|+1)\eta\big)(1-\theta-4\eta)<{\varepsilon}\end{aligned}$$ when $\eta$ is small enough. We also have $$\begin{aligned}
|\varphi({{\mathcal Y}}_n)\cap {{\mathcal Z}}_n|&\ge \sum_{k=1}^\ell\sum_{c\in {{\mathcal C}}_{1, k}}|\{s\in \bar{F}_c:\sigma_{n, s}(c)\in {{\mathcal Y}}_n, \sigma_{n, s}(\varphi_k(c))\in {{\mathcal Z}}_n\}|\\
&\ge\sum_{k=1}^\ell\sum_{c\in {{\mathcal C}}_{1, k}}(|\{s\in F_k:\sigma_{n, s}(c)\in {{\mathcal Y}}_n, \sigma_{n, s}(\varphi_k(c))\in {{\mathcal Z}}_n\}|-2\eta|F_k|)\\
&\ge \sum_{k=1}^\ell\sum_{c\in {{\mathcal C}}_{1, k}}\bigg(\bigg(\frac{\tau}{2}\bigg)^2|F_k|-2\eta|F_k|\bigg)\\
&\ge \sum_{k=1}^\ell\sum_{c\in {{\mathcal C}}_{1, k}}\frac{\tau^2}{8}|F_k|
\ge \frac{\tau^2}{8}\bigg|\bigcup_{k=1}^\ell\sigma_n(F_k){{\mathcal C}}_{1, k}\bigg|\\
&\ge \frac{\tau^2}{8}(1-\eta)\frac{1-\tau'}{24} d_n
\ge \frac{\tau^2}{16}\frac{1-\tau'}{24}d_n=\lambda d_n\end{aligned}$$ when $\eta$ is small enough.
Does every countable sofic group $G$ admit a sofic approximation sequence $\Sigma$ such that the action of $G'$ on $(\prod_{{\mathfrak F}}\{1, \dots, d_i\}, {{\mathfrak B}}, \mu)$ is ergodic?
IE-tuples and algebraic actions {#S-algebraic}
===============================
By an [*algebraic action*]{} we mean an action of a countable discrete group $G$ on a compact metrizable Abelian group $X$ by (continuous) automorphisms. The structure of such an action is captured by the Pontryagin dual $\widehat{X}$ viewed as a module over the integral group ring ${{\mathbb Z}}G$. The ring ${{\mathbb Z}}G$ consists of the finitely supported ${{\mathbb Z}}$-valued functions on $G$, which we write in the form $\sum_{s\in G} f_s s$, with addition $(\sum_{s\in G} f_s s )+(\sum_{s\in G} g_s s) = \sum_{s\in G} (f_s + g_s)s$ and multiplication $(\sum_{s\in G} f_s s )(\sum_{s\in G} g_s s) = \sum_{s\in G} (\sum_{t\in G} f_t g_{t^{-1} s} )s$.
Given a matrix $A$ in $M_n({{\mathbb Z}}G)$, the left action of $G$ on $({{\mathbb Z}}G)^n/({{\mathbb Z}}G)^n A$ gives rise via Pontryagin duality to the algebraic action $G\curvearrowright X_A := \widehat{({{\mathbb Z}}G)^n/({{\mathbb Z}}G)^nA}$. Write $A^*$ for the matrix in $M_n({{\mathbb Z}}G)$ whose $(i,j)$ entry is the result of applying the involution $(\sum_{s\in G} f_s s )^* = \sum_{s\in G} f_s s^{-1}$ to the $(j,i)$ entry of $A$. Viewing $\widehat{({{\mathbb Z}}G)^n}$ as $(({{\mathbb R}}/{{\mathbb Z}})^G )^n$, we can then identify $X_A$ with the closed $G$-invariant subset $$\big\{ x\in (({{\mathbb R}}/{{\mathbb Z}})^G )^n : xA^* = 0_{(({{\mathbb R}}/{{\mathbb Z}})^G)^n} \big\}$$ of $(({{\mathbb R}}/{{\mathbb Z}})^G )^n$ equipped with the action of $G$ by left translation. In the case that $A$ is invertible in $M_n(\ell^1 (G))$ the action $G\curvearrowright X_A$ is expansive, and in fact such actions and their restrictions to closed $G$-invariant subgroups constitute precisely all of the expansive algebraic actions [@ChuLi11 Thm. 3.1]. When $G$ is amenable, given an action of the form $G\curvearrowright X_A$ with $A$ invertible in $M_n (\ell^1 (G))$, every tuple of points in $X$ is an IE-tuple (see Lemma 5.4 and Theorems 7.3 and 7.8 in [@ChuLi11]). We will extend this result in two ways in Theorems \[T-invertible to dense\] and \[T-invertible to UPE\], which demonstrate that in broader contexts independent behaviour similarly saturates the structure of actions of the form $G\curvearrowright X_A$ with $A$ invertible in $M_n(\ell^1 (G))$.
First however we examine orbit IE-tuples in the context of actions $G\curvearrowright X$ on a compact metrizable (not necessarily Abelian) group by automorphisms. It was shown in [@ChuLi11 Theorem 7.3] that, when $G$ is amenable, the IE-tuples for such an action are determined by a closed $G$-invariant normal subgroup of $X$ called the [*IE group*]{}. We now proceed to record some observations showing that the basic theory of the IE-group from [@ChuLi11] can be extended from amenable $G$ to general $G$ using orbit IE-tuples. Thus $G$ will be an arbitrary countable discrete group until we turn to the sofic setting in Theorem \[T-invertible to UPE\].
The proof of Lemma 3.11 in [@KerLi07] shows the following:
\[L-measure to density\] Let $G$ act continuously on a compact metrizable space $X$. Let $A$ be a Borel subset of $X$, and $\mu$ a $G$-invariant Borel probability measure on $X$. Then $A$ has independence density at least $\mu(A)$ over $G$.
From Lemma \[L-measure to density\] we immediately obtain:
\[L-support to orbit\] Let $G$ act continuously on a compact metrizable space $X$. Let $\mu$ be a $G$-invariant Borel probability measure on $X$. Then every point in the support of $\mu$ is an orbit ${{\rm IE}}$-$1$-tuple.
We now suppose that $G$ acts continuously on a compact metrizable group $X$ by automorphisms. From Lemma \[L-support to orbit\] we have:
\[L-orbit 1 tuple\] Every point of $X$ is an orbit ${{\rm IE}}$-$1$-tuple.
Denote by ${{\rm IE}}(X)$ the set of all $x\in X$ such that $(x, e_X)$ is an orbit ${{\rm IE}}$-pair, where $e_X$ is the identity element of $X$. The proof of Theorem 7.3 in [@ChuLi11] shows the following.
\[T-IE group\] ${{\rm IE}}(X)$ is a closed $G$-invariant normal subgroup of $X$. For every $k\in {{\mathbb N}}$ the set ${{\rm IE}}_k(X, G)$ of all orbit IE-$k$-tuples is a closed $G$-invariant subgroup of the group $X^k$ and $$\begin{aligned}
{{\rm IE}}_k(X, G)&=\{(x_1y, \dots, x_ky): x_1, \dots, x_k\in {{\rm IE}}(X),\ y\in X\}\\
&=\{(yx_1, \dots, yx_k): x_1, \dots, x_k\in {{\rm IE}}(X),\ y\in X\}.\end{aligned}$$
Now we suppose that $X$ is Abelian. In this case a point $x\in X$ is said to be [*$1$-homoclinic*]{} if the function $s\mapsto \varphi (sx) - 1$ on $G$ lies in $\ell^1 (G)$ for every $\varphi$ in the Pontryagin dual $\widehat{X}$. The set of $1$-homoclinic points is written $\Delta^1(X)$. This set was studied in [@LSV; @LSV12; @SV] in the case $G={{\mathbb Z}}^d$ and in [@ChuLi11] for more general $G$. From the proof of Theorem 7.8 in [@ChuLi11] we obtain the following.
\[T-homoclinic to IE\] Suppose that $\widehat{X}$ is a finitely generated left ${{\mathbb Z}}G$-module. Then $\Delta^1(X)\subseteq {{\rm IE}}(X)$.
From Theorem \[T-homoclinic to IE\] and [@ChuLi11 Lemma 5.4] we obtain:
\[T-invertible to dense\] Let $n\in{{\mathbb N}}$, and let $A$ be an element of $M_n({{\mathbb Z}}G)$ which is invertible in $M_n(\ell^1(G))$. Then for the action $G\curvearrowright X_A$ one has ${{\rm IE}}(X_A)=X_A$.
Now we let $G$ be a countable sofic group and $\Sigma=\{\sigma_i: G\rightarrow {{\rm Sym}}(d_i)\}_{i=1}^\infty$ a sofic approximation sequence for $G$.
\[T-invertible to UPE\] Let $n \in {{\mathbb N}}$, and let $A$ be an element of $M_n({{\mathbb Z}}G)$ which is invertible in $M_n(\ell^1(G))$. Consider the action $G\curvearrowright X_A$. Then, for each $k\in {{\mathbb N}}$, every $k$-tuple of points in $X_A$ is a $\Sigma$-${{\rm IE}}$-tuple.
Before proceeding to the proof of Theorem \[T-invertible to UPE\], we give an application to a problem of Deninger. For an invertible element $f$ in the group von Neumann algebra ${{\mathcal L}}G$ of a countable discrete group $G$ the Fuglede-Kadison determinant is defined by $\det_{{{\mathcal L}}G} f = \exp {{\rm tr}}(\log |f|)$ where ${{\rm tr}}$ is the canonical trace on ${{\mathcal L}}G$.
In [@Den09 Question 26] Deninger asked whether $\det_{{{\mathcal L}}G} f>1$ whenever $f\in {{\mathbb Z}}G$ is invertible in $\ell^1(G)$ and has no left inverse in ${{\mathbb Z}}G$. An affirmative answer was given by Deninger and Schmidt in the case that $G$ is residually finite and amenable [@DenSch07 Cor. 6.7] and more generally by Chung and the second author in the case $G$ is amenable [@ChuLi11 Corollary 7.9]. Using Theorem \[T-invertible to UPE\], Proposition \[P-basic\](3), Theorem 7.1 in [@KerLi11], and the argument in the proof of Corollary 7.9 in [@ChuLi11], we obtain an answer to Deninger’s question for all countable residually finite groups:
\[C-answer to Deninger\] Suppose that $G$ is residually finite and that $f$ is an element of ${{\mathbb Z}}G$ which is invertible in $\ell^1(G)$ and has no left inverse in ${{\mathbb Z}}G$. Then $\det_{{{\mathcal L}}G} f>1$.
Let $n\in {{\mathbb N}}$. For $A=(A_{ij})_{1\le i, j\le n}\in M_n(\ell^1(G))$, we set $$\|A\|_1=\sum_{1\le i, j\le n}\|A_{ij}\|_1.$$ For $(a_1,\dots, a_n)\in {{\mathbb R}}^d$, we set $\|(a_1, \dots, a_n)\|_\infty=\max_{1\le j\le n}|a_j|$. For $\xi: \{1, \dots, d\}\rightarrow {{\mathbb Z}}^n$, we set $$\|\xi\|_\infty=\max_{1\le j\le d}\|\xi(j)\|_\infty.$$ Denote by $P$ the natural quotient map $({{\mathbb R}}^n)^G\rightarrow (({{\mathbb R}}/{{\mathbb Z}})^n)^G$. Denote by $\rho$ the canonical metric on ${{\mathbb R}}/{{\mathbb Z}}$ defined by $$\rho(t_1+{{\mathbb Z}}, t_2+{{\mathbb Z}}):=\min_{m\in {{\mathbb Z}}}|t_1-t_2-m|.$$ By abuse of notation, we also use $\rho$ to denote the metric on $({{\mathbb R}}/{{\mathbb Z}})^n$ defined by $$\rho((a_1, \dots, a_n), (b_1, \dots, b_n)):=\max_{1\le j\le n}\rho(a_j, b_j).$$ Via the coordinate map at the identity element of $G$, we will think of $\rho$ as a continuous pseudometric on $(({{\mathbb R}}/{{\mathbb Z}})^n)^G$.
\[L-point\] Let $n \in {{\mathbb N}}$, and let $A$ be an element of $M_n({{\mathbb Z}}G)$ which is invertible in $M_n(\ell^1(G))$. Consider the action $G\curvearrowright X_A$. Let $F$ be a nonempty finite subset of $G$ and let $M, \delta>0$. For every $d\in {{\mathbb N}}$, good enough sofic approximation $\sigma: G\rightarrow {{\rm Sym}}(d)$, and $\xi: \{1, \dots, d\}\rightarrow {{\mathbb Z}}^n$ with $\|\xi\|_\infty\le M$, if we define $h:\{1, \dots, d\}\rightarrow ({{\mathbb Z}}^n)^G$ and $\varphi: \{1, \dots, d\}\rightarrow X_A$ by $$(h(a))_{t^{-1}}=\xi(ta) \text{ for all } t\in G$$ and $$\varphi(a)=P((h(a))(A^*)^{-1})$$ then $\varphi\in {{\rm Map}}(\rho, F, \delta, \sigma)$.
Since $(A^*)^{-1}\in M_d(\ell^1(G))$, there exists a nonempty finite subset $K$ of $G$ such that for all $z_1, z_2\in ({{\mathbb Z}}^n)^G$ such that $\|z_1\|_\infty, \|z_2\|_\infty\le M$ and $z_1, z_2$ coincide on $K$, one has $\|(z_1(A^*)^{-1})_e-(z_2(A^*)^{-1})_e\|_\infty<\delta/2$, which implies that $\rho(P(z_1(A^*)^{-1}), P(z_2(A^*)^{-1}))<\delta/2$.
Denote by $\Lambda$ the set of all $a\in \{1, \dots, d\}$ satisfying $t(sa)=(ts)a$ for all $t\in K^{-1}$ and $s\in F$. When $\sigma$ is a good enough sofic approximation for $G$, one has $|\Lambda|\ge (1-(\delta/2)^2)d$. Let $a\in \Lambda$ and $s\in F$. Then $$s(\varphi(a))=P((s(h(a)))(A^*)^{-1})$$ and $$\varphi(sa)=P((h(sa))(A^*)^{-1}).$$ For every $t\in K^{-1}$ one has $$(s(h(a)))_{t^{-1}}=(h(a))_{s^{-1}t^{-1}}=\xi((ts)a)=\xi(t(sa))=(h(sa))_{t^{-1}}.$$ Thus, by the choice of $K$, we have $\rho(s(\varphi(a)), \varphi(sa))<\delta/2$. Note that $(({{\mathbb R}}/{{\mathbb Z}})^n)^G$ has diameter $1$ under $\rho$. It follows that $$\rho_2(s\varphi(\cdot), \varphi(s\cdot))\le ((\delta/2)^2+1-|\Lambda|/d)^{1/2}<\delta.$$ Therefore $\varphi\in {{\rm Map}}(\rho, F, \delta, \sigma)$.
We are ready to prove Theorem \[T-invertible to UPE\].
Let ${{\boldsymbol{x}}}=(x_1,\dots, x_k)$ be a $k$-tuple of points in $X_A$. Then for each $1\le j\le k$ there is a $z_j\in ({{\mathbb Z}}^n)^G$ such that $\|z_j\|_\infty\le \|A\|_1$ and $x_j=P(z_j(A^*)^{-1})$.
Let $U_1\times \cdots \times U_k$ be a product neighborhood of ${{\boldsymbol{x}}}$ in $X^k$. Since the map from bounded subsets of $({{\mathbb Z}}^n)^G$ equipped with the pointwise convergence topology to $X_A$ sending $z$ to $P(z(A^*)^{-1})$ is continuous [@DenSch07 Prop. 4.2], there is a nonempty finite subset $K$ of $G$ such that for every $1\le j\le k$ and $z\in ({{\mathbb Z}}^n)^G$ with $\|z\|_\infty\le \|A\|_1$ and $z|_K=z_j|_K$, one has $P(z(A^*)^{-1})\in U_j$.
Let $F$ be a nonempty finite subset of $G$ and $\delta>0$. Let $d\in {{\mathbb N}}$ and let $\sigma$ be a map from $G$ to ${{\rm Sym}}(d)$. Denote by $\Lambda$ the set of all $a\in \{1, \dots, d\}$ such that $sa\neq ta$ for all distinct $s, t\in K^{-1}$. When $\sigma$ is a good enough sofic approximation for $G$, we have $|\Lambda|\ge d/2$. Let ${{\mathcal J}}$ be a maximal subset of $\Lambda$ subject to the condition that the sets $K^{-1}a$ for $a\in {{\mathcal J}}$ are pairwise disjoint. Then $\Lambda\subseteq (\sigma(K^{-1}))^{-1}\sigma(K^{-1}){{\mathcal J}}$, and hence $|\Lambda|\le |K|^2|{{\mathcal J}}|$. Therefore $|{{\mathcal J}}|\ge d/(2|K|^2)$.
We claim that ${{\mathcal J}}$ is a $(\rho, F, \delta, \sigma)$-independence set for ${{\boldsymbol{U}}}=(U_1, \dots, U_k)$ when $\sigma$ is a good enough sofic approximation for $G$. Let $\omega$ be a map from $\{1, \dots, d\}$ to $\{1, \dots, k\}$. Define $\xi: \{1, \dots, d\}\rightarrow {{\mathbb Z}}^n$ by $\xi(ta)=(z_{\omega(a)})_{t^{-1}}$ for all $a\in {{\mathcal J}}$ and $t\in K^{-1}$, and $\xi(b)=0$ for all $b$ not in $K^{-1}{{\mathcal J}}$. Then we have $h:\{1, \dots, d\}\rightarrow ({{\mathbb Z}}^n)^G$ and $\varphi\in {{\rm Map}}(\rho, F, \delta, \sigma)$ defined in Lemma \[L-point\] for $M=\|A\|_1$ when $\sigma$ is a good enough sofic approximation. Let $a\in {{\mathcal J}}$. For any $t\in K^{-1}$, one has $$(h(a))_{t^{-1}}=\xi(ta)=(z_{\omega(a)})_{t^{-1}}.$$ By the choice of $K$ we have $\varphi(a)=P(h(a)(A^*)^{-1})\in U_{\omega(a)}$. This proves our claim, and finishes the proof of the theorem.
Orbit ${{\rm IE}}$-tuples and untameness {#S-untame}
========================================
Let $G$ be a countably infinite group acting continuously on a compact Hausdorff space $X$.
\[T-orbit IE to nontame\] Let $k\in{{\mathbb N}}$ and let ${{\boldsymbol{A}}}$ be a $k$-tuple of subsets of $X$. Suppose that ${{\boldsymbol{A}}}$ has positive independence density over $G$. Then ${{\boldsymbol{A}}}$ has an infinite independence set in $G$.
Denote by $q$ the density of ${{\boldsymbol{A}}}$ over $G$.
Let $F_1$ be a nonempty finite subset of $G$. Take $s_1, s_2, \dots$ in $G$ such that setting $F_{n+1}=F_n \cup F_ns_n$ for all $n\in {{\mathbb N}}$ one has $F_n\cap F_ns_n=\emptyset$ for all $n\in {{\mathbb N}}$.
Let $n\in {{\mathbb N}}$. Take an independence set $E_n$ of ${{\boldsymbol{A}}}$ contained in $F_n$ with $|E_n|\ge q|F_n|$. We will construct, inductively on $m$, nonempty finite subsets $F^{(n)}_{m, k}$ and $E^{(n)}_m$ of $G$ for all $1\le m\le k\le n$ and $t^{(n)}_m\in G$ for all $1\le m<n$ such that
1. $F^{(n)}_{n, n}=F_n$ and $E^{(n)}_n=E_n$;
2. $t^{(n)}_m$ is equal to either $e$ or $s_m^{-1}$ for each $1\le m<n$;
3. $F^{(n)}_{m, k}=F^{(n)}_{m+1, k}t^{(n)}_m$ and $F^{(n)}_{m, m}=F_m$ for all $1\le m< k\le n$;
4. $E^{(n)}_m=E^{(n)}_{m+1}t^{(n)}_m$ for each $1\le m<n$;
5. $|E^{(n)}_m\cap F^{(n)}_{m, k}|\ge q|F^{(n)}_{m, k}|$ for all $1\le m\le k\le n$.
To start with, we define $F^{(n)}_{n, n}$ and $E^{(n)}_n$ according to (1). If $|E^{(n)}_n\cap F_{n-1}|\ge q|F_{n-1}|$, we set $t^{(n)}_{n-1}=e$. Otherwise, since $|E^{(n)}_n\cap F^{(n)}_{n, n}|\ge q|F^{(n)}_{n, n}|$ and $F^{(n)}_{n, n}=F_n$ is the disjoint union of $F_{n-1}$ and $F_{n-1}s_{n-1}$, we must have $|E^{(n)}_n\cap F_{n-1}s_{n-1}|\ge q|F_{n-1}s_{n-1}|$, and we set $t^{(n)}_{n-1}=s^{-1}_{n-1}$. Defining $F^{(n)}_{n-1, k}$ for $n-1\le k\le n$ and $E^{(n)}_{n-1}$ according to (3) and (4) respectively, we have that (5) holds for $m=n-1$. Next, if $|E^{(n)}_{n-1}\cap F_{n-2}|\ge q|F_{n-2}|$, we set $t^{(n)}_{n-2}=e$. Otherwise, since $|E^{(n)}_{n-1}\cap F^{(n)}_{n-1, n-1}|\ge q|F^{(n)}_{n-1, n-1}|$ and $F^{(n)}_{n-1, n-1}=F_{n-1}$ is the disjoint union of $F_{n-2}$ and $F_{n-2}s_{n-2}$, we must have $|E^{(n)}_{n-1}\cap F_{n-2}s_{n-2}|\ge q|F_{n-2}s_{n-2}|$, and we set $t^{(n)}_{n-2}=s^{-1}_{n-2}$. Defining $F^{(n)}_{n-2, k}$ for $n-2\le k\le n$ and $E^{(n)}_{n-2}$ according to (3) and (4) respectively, we have that (5) holds for $m=n-2$. Continuing in this way, we define $F^{(n)}_{m, k}, E^{(n)}_m$, and $t^{(n)}_m$ satisfying the above conditions.
Note that if $E'$ is an independence set for ${{\boldsymbol{A}}}$ in $G$, then $E's$ is an independence set for ${{\boldsymbol{A}}}$ in $G$ for all $s\in G$. By induction on $m$, we find easily that $E^{(n)}_m$ is an independence set for ${{\boldsymbol{A}}}$ in $G$ for all $n\in {{\mathbb N}}$ and $1\le m\le n$. Also note that for any $1\le m\le k\le n$, $F^{(n)}_{m, k}$ depends only on $F_k\cap E^{(n)}_k$. In particular, for any fixed $k\in {{\mathbb N}}$ the number of sets appearing in $F^{(n)}_{1, k}$ for all $n\ge k$ is finite. Thus we can find a strictly increasing sequence $n_1<n_2<\dots $ in ${{\mathbb N}}$ such that for any fixed $k\in {{\mathbb N}}$ the sets $F^{(n_l)}_{1, k}$ and $E^{(n_l)}_1\cap F^{(n_l)}_{1, k}$ do not depend on $l\ge k$. Set $E=\bigcup_{k\in {{\mathbb N}}}(E^{(n_k)}_1\cap F^{(n_k)}_{1, k})$. Since $|E^{(n_k)}_1\cap F^{(n_k)}_{1, k}|\ge q|F^{(n_k)}_{1, k}|=q|F_k|=q|F_1|2^{k-1}$ for every $k\in {{\mathbb N}}$, the set $E$ is infinite. For evey $k\in {{\mathbb N}}$ one has $$\begin{aligned}
(E^{(n_{k+1})}_1\cap F^{(n_{k+1})}_{1, k+1})\cap F^{(n_k)}_{1, k}&=(E^{(n_{k+1})}_1
\cap F^{(n_{k+1})}_{1, k+1})\cap F^{(n_{k+1})}_{1, k}\\
&=E^{(n_{k+1})}_1\cap F^{(n_{k+1})}_{1, k}\\
&=E^{(n_k)}_1\cap F^{(n_k)}_{1, k}.\end{aligned}$$ Thus the sequence $\{E^{(n_k)}_1\cap F^{(n_k)}_{1, k}\}_{k\in {{\mathbb N}}}$ is increasing. Since the family of independence sets for ${{\boldsymbol{A}}}$ in $G$ is closed under taking increasing unions, we conclude that $E$ is an independence set for ${{\boldsymbol{A}}}$ in $G$.
Recall that that a tuple $(x_1 , \dots , x_k ) \in X^k$ is an [*IT-tuple*]{} if for every product neighbourhood $U_1 \times\cdots\times U_k$ of $(x_1 , \dots , x_k )$ the tuple $(U_1 ,\dots, U_k )$ has an infinite independence set [@KerLi07].
\[C-orbit IE to IT\] Every orbit IE-tuple of the action $G\curvearrowright X$ is an IT-tuple.
Write $C(X)$ for the Banach space of continuous complex-valued functions on $X$ with the supremum norm. The action $G\curvearrowright X$ is said to be [*tame*]{} if no element $f\in C(X)$ admits an infinite subset $J$ of $G$ such that, for $s$ ranging in $J$, the family of functions $x\mapsto f(s^{-1} x)$ in $C(X)$ is equivalent to the standard basis of $\ell^1$, meaning that there is a bijection between the two which extends to an isomorphism (i.e., a bounded linear map with bounded inverse) between the closures of their linear spans [@Koh95; @Gla06]. The action is tame if and only if there is no nondiagonal IT-pair in $X\times X$ [@KerLi07 Prop. 6.4]. Thus from the above corollary we see that a tame action has no nondiagonal orbit IE-tuples.
$\Sigma$-IE-tuples and Li-Yorke Chaos {#S-chaos}
=====================================
Let $G$ be a countably infinite sofic group and $\Sigma=\{\sigma_i: G\rightarrow {{\rm Sym}}(d_i)\}_{i=1}^\infty$ a sofic approximation sequence for $G$. We fix a free ultrafilter ${{\mathfrak F}}$ on ${{\mathbb N}}$ and use it in the definitions of sofic topological entropy and $\Sigma$-IE-tuples, as in Section \[S-product\].
Let $G\curvearrowright X$ be a continuous action on a compact metrizable space. Let $\rho$ be a compatible metric on $X$. We say that $(x, y)\in X\times X$ is a [*Li-Yorke pair*]{} if $$\limsup_{G \ni s\to \infty}\rho(sx, sy)>0 \hspace*{3mm}\text{and} \hspace*{3mm} \liminf_{G \ni s\to \infty}\rho(sx, sy)=0.$$ where the limit supremum and limit infimum mean the limits of $\sup_{s\in G\setminus F} \rho(sx, sy)$ and$\inf_{s\in G\setminus F} \rho(sx, sy)$, respectively, over the net of finite subsets $F$ of $G$. Note that the definition of Li-Yorke pair does not depend on the choice of the metric $\rho$. We say that the action $G\curvearrowright X$ is [*Li-Yorke chaotic*]{} if there is an uncountable subset $Z$ of $X$ such that every nondiagonal pair $(x, y)$ in $Z\times Z$ is a Li-Yorke pair. These definitions adapt those for continuous ${{\mathbb N}}$-actions, which have their origins in [@LiYor75]. In that setting Blanchard, Glasner, Kolyada, and Maass showed that positive entropy implies Li-Yorke chaos [@BlaGlaKolMaa02]. The following theorem demonstrates that, in our sofic context, positive topological entropy with respect to some sofic approximation sequence implies Li-Yorke chaos (cf. [@KerLi07 Thm. 3.18]).
\[T-positive entropy to chaos\] Suppose that $k\ge 2$ and ${{\boldsymbol{x}}}=(x_1, \dots, x_k)$ is a $\Sigma$-${{\rm IE}}$-tuple in $X^k$ with $x_1, \dots, x_k$ pairwise distinct. For each $1\le j\le k$, let $A_j$ be a neighbourhood of $x_j$. Then there exist Cantor sets $Z_j\subseteq A_j$ for $j=1,\dots ,k$ such that the following hold:
1. every nonempty finite tuple of points in $Z:=\bigcup_jZ_j$ is a $\Sigma$-${{\rm IE}}$-tuple;
2. for all $m\in {{\mathbb N}}$, distinct $y_1, \dots, y_m \in Z$, and $y'_1, \dots, y'_m \in Z$ one has $$\liminf_{G\ni s\to \infty}\max_{1\le i\le m} \rho(sy_i, y'_i)=0.$$
We now set out to prove Theorem \[T-positive entropy to chaos\]. We begin with the following lemmas.
\[L-LY\] Let $k\ge 2$ and ${{\boldsymbol{A}}}=(A_1, \dots, A_k)$ be a tuple of closed subsets of $X$ with positive upper independence density over $\Sigma$. For each $j=1, \dots, k$ let $U_j$ be an open set containing $A_j$. Let $E$ be a finite subset of $G$. Then there exists an $s\in G\setminus E$ such that the tuple ${{\boldsymbol{A}}}'$ consisting of $A_i\cap s^{-1}U_j$ for all $i, j=1, \dots, k$ has positive upper independence density over $\Sigma$.
Take $1<\lambda<\frac{k}{k-1}$. Then we have the constant $c>0$ in Lemma \[L-KM\]. Take a $q>0$ such that for every nonempty finite subset $F$ of $G$ and $\delta>0$ the set $V_{F, \delta}$ of all $i\in {{\mathbb N}}$ for which ${{\boldsymbol{A}}}$ has a $(\rho, F, \delta, \sigma_i)$-independence set of cardinality at least $qd_i$ is in ${{\mathfrak F}}$. Take a finite subset $W$ of $G$ such that $cq|W|>8$ and for any distinct $s, t\in W$ one has $s^{-1}t\not \in E$. When $0<|W|^2\kappa<1/2$, the number of subsets of $\{1, \dots, d\}$ of cardinality no greater than $|W|^2\kappa d$ is equal to $\sum^{\lfloor |W|^2\kappa d\rfloor}_{j=0}\binom{d}{j}$, which is at most $|W|^2\kappa d \binom{d}{|W|^2\kappa d}$, which by Stirling’s approximation is less than $\exp(\beta d)$ for some $\beta > 0$ depending on $\kappa$ but not on $d$ when $d$ is sufficiently large with $\beta\to 0$ as $\kappa\to 0$. Take $cq/(2|W|^2)>\kappa>0$ such that for any $1\le j\le k$ and $x\in X\setminus U_j$ one has $\rho(x, A_j)>\sqrt{\kappa}$ and for all sufficiently large $d\in {{\mathbb N}}$ the number of subsets of $\{1, \dots, d\}$ of cardinality no greater than $|W|^2\kappa d$ is at most $\big(\frac{k}{(k-1)\lambda}\big)^{q d}$.
Let $F$ be a nonempty finite subset of $G$ and $\delta>0$. Set $F'=F\cup W$ and $\delta'=\min(\delta, \kappa)$. Let $i\in{{\mathbb N}}$ be such that ${{\boldsymbol{A}}}$ has a $(\rho, F', \delta', \sigma_i)$-independence set ${{\mathcal J}}_i$ of cardinality at least $qd_i$. For each $\omega\in \{1, \dots, k\}^{{{\mathcal J}}_i}$ take a $\varphi_\omega\in {{\rm Map}}(\rho, F', \delta', \sigma_i)$ such that $\varphi_\omega(a)\in A_{\omega(a)}$ for every $a\in {{\mathcal J}}_i$. For each $\omega\in \{1, \dots, k\}^{{{\mathcal J}}_i}$, there is some $\Lambda_\omega\subseteq \{1, \dots, d_i\}$ with $|\Lambda_\omega|\ge (1-|W|^2\delta')d_i$ such that $\rho(\varphi_\omega(\sigma_i(s)a),s\varphi_\omega(a))<\sqrt{\delta'}$ for all $s\in W^{-1}W$ and $a\in \Lambda_\omega$. By the choice of $\kappa$, when $i$ is large enough there is a subset $\Omega_i$ of $\{1, \dots, k\}^{{{\mathcal J}}_i}$ with $\big(\frac{k}{(k-1)\lambda}\big)^{q d_i}|\Omega_i|\ge k^{|{{\mathcal J}}_i|}$ such that the set $\Lambda_\omega$ is the same, say $\Theta_i$, for every $\omega \in \Omega_i$, and $|\Theta_i|/d_i\ge 1-|W|^2\delta'>1-cq/2$. Then $$|\Omega_i|\ge k^{|{{\mathcal J}}_i|}\bigg(\frac{(k-1)\lambda}{k}\bigg)^{q d_i}
\ge k^{|{{\mathcal J}}_i|}\bigg(\frac{(k-1)\lambda}{k}\bigg)^{|{{\mathcal J}}_i|}=((k-1)\lambda)^{|{{\mathcal J}}_i|}.$$ By our choice of $c$, we can find a subset ${{\mathcal J}}'_i$ of ${{\mathcal J}}_i$ with $|{{\mathcal J}}'_i|\ge c|{{\mathcal J}}_i|\ge cq d_i$ such that every map ${{\mathcal J}}'_i\rightarrow \{1, \dots, k\}$ extends to some $\omega\in \Omega_i$. When $i$ is large enough, one also has $|{{\mathcal W}}_i|\ge (1-cq/4)d_i$ for the set $$\begin{aligned}
{{\mathcal W}}_i &= \big\{a\in \{1, \dots, d_i\} : ((\sigma_i(s))^{-1}\sigma_i(t))(a)=\sigma_i(s^{-1}t)(a)
\text{ for all } s, t\in W \\&\hspace*{40mm} \text{and } \sigma_i(s)(a)\neq a \text{ for all } s\in W^{-1}W\setminus \{e\} \big\}.\end{aligned}$$ Note that $|{{\mathcal W}}_i\cap \Theta_i\cap {{\mathcal J}}'_i|\ge cqd_i/4$ and every map ${{\mathcal W}}_i\cap \Theta_i\cap {{\mathcal J}}'_i\rightarrow \{1, \dots, k\}$ extends to some $\omega\in \Omega_i$.
Denote by $\eta$ the maximum of $|\sigma_i(s)({{\mathcal W}}_i\cap \Theta_i\cap {{\mathcal J}}'_i)\cap \sigma_i(t)({{\mathcal W}}_i\cap \Theta_i\cap {{\mathcal J}}'_i)|/d_i$ for $s, t$ ranging over distinct elements of $W$. Then for each $s\in W$ there is a subset $\Upsilon_{i, s}$ of $\sigma_i(s)({{\mathcal W}}_i\cap \Theta_i\cap {{\mathcal J}}'_i)$ with cardinality at most $\eta |W|d_i$ such that the sets $(\sigma_i(s)({{\mathcal W}}_i\cap \Theta_i\cap {{\mathcal J}}'_i))\setminus \Upsilon_{i, s}$ for $s\in W$ are pairwise disjoint. It follows that $$\begin{aligned}
\sum_{s\in W}|\sigma_i(s)({{\mathcal W}}_i\cap \Theta_i\cap {{\mathcal J}}'_i)|
&\le \eta |W|^2d_i
+\bigg|\bigcup_{s\in W}((\sigma_i(s)({{\mathcal W}}_i\cap \Theta_i\cap {{\mathcal J}}'_i))\setminus \Upsilon_{i, s})\bigg| \\
&\le \eta |W|^2d_i+d_i.\end{aligned}$$ On the other hand, we have $$\sum_{s\in W}|\sigma_i(s)({{\mathcal W}}_i\cap \Theta_i\cap {{\mathcal J}}'_i)|=|W|\cdot |{{\mathcal W}}_i\cap \Theta_i\cap {{\mathcal J}}'_i|\ge |W|cq d_i/4\ge 2d_i.$$ Thus $\eta\ge 1/|W|^2$. Then we can find some distinct $t_i, t'_i\in W$ with $|\sigma_i(t_i)({{\mathcal W}}_i\cap \Theta_i\cap {{\mathcal J}}'_i)\cap \sigma_i(t'_i)({{\mathcal W}}_i\cap \Theta_i\cap {{\mathcal J}}'_i)|\ge d_i/|W|^2$. Set $s_i=t_i^{-1}t'_i$. Then $s_i\in W^{-1}W\setminus \{e\}$, and $$\begin{aligned}
\lefteqn{|({{\mathcal W}}_i\cap \Theta_i\cap {{\mathcal J}}'_i)\cap (\sigma_i(s_i))^{-1}({{\mathcal W}}_i\cap \Theta_i\cap {{\mathcal J}}'_i)|}\hspace*{35mm} \\
\hspace*{30mm} &=|({{\mathcal W}}_i\cap \Theta_i\cap {{\mathcal J}}'_i)\cap \sigma_i(s_i)({{\mathcal W}}_i\cap \Theta_i\cap {{\mathcal J}}'_i)|\\
&=|\sigma_i(t_i)({{\mathcal W}}_i\cap \Theta_i\cap {{\mathcal J}}'_i)\cap \sigma_i(t'_i)({{\mathcal W}}_i\cap \Theta_i\cap {{\mathcal J}}'_i)|\\
&\ge d_i/|W|^2.\end{aligned}$$ Take a maximal subset $\Xi_i$ of $({{\mathcal W}}_i\cap \Theta_i\cap {{\mathcal J}}'_i)\cap (\sigma_i(s_i))^{-1}({{\mathcal W}}_i\cap \Theta_i\cap {{\mathcal J}}'_i)$ subject to the condition that for any $a\in \Xi_i$, neither $\sigma_i(s_i)(a)$ nor $(\sigma_i(s_i))^{-1}(a)$ is in $\Xi_i$. Then $\Xi_i\cup \sigma_i(s_i)\Xi_i\cup (\sigma_i(s_i))^{-1}\Xi_i\supseteq ({{\mathcal W}}_i\cap \Theta_i\cap {{\mathcal J}}'_i)\cap (\sigma_i(s_i))^{-1}({{\mathcal W}}_i\cap \Theta_i\cap {{\mathcal J}}'_i)$. It follows that $|\Xi_i|\ge |({{\mathcal W}}_i\cap \Theta_i\cap {{\mathcal J}}'_i)\cap (\sigma_i(s_i))^{-1}({{\mathcal W}}_i\cap \Theta_i\cap {{\mathcal J}}'_i)|/3\ge d_i/(3|W|^2)$. Note that $\Xi_i$ and $\sigma_i(s_i)\Xi_i$ are disjoint subsets of ${{\mathcal W}}_i\cap \Theta_i\cap {{\mathcal J}}'_i$.
Let $\xi=(\xi_1, \xi_2): \Xi_i\rightarrow \{1, \dots, k\}^2$. Define a map $\xi': \Xi_i\cup \sigma_i(s_i)\Xi_i\rightarrow \{1, \dots, k\}$ by $\xi'(a)=\xi_1(a)$ and $\xi'(\sigma_i(s_i)(a))=\xi_2(a)$ for all $a\in \Xi_i$. Extend $\xi'$ to some $\omega\in \Omega_i$. Then $\varphi_\omega \in {{\rm Map}}(\rho, F, \delta, \sigma_i)$, $\varphi_\omega(a)\in A_{\omega(a)}=A_{\xi_1(a)}$ and $\varphi_\omega(\sigma_i(s_i)(a))\in A_{\omega(\sigma_i(s_i)(a))}=A_{\xi_2(a)}$ for all $a\in \Xi_i$. For any $a\in \Xi_i$, since $\rho(\varphi_\omega(\sigma_i(s_i)a),s_i\varphi_\omega(a))<\sqrt{\delta'}\le \sqrt{\kappa}$, by the choice of $\kappa$ we have $s_i\varphi_\omega(a)\in U_{\xi_2(a)}$, and hence $\varphi_\omega(a)\in A_{\xi_1(a)}\cap s_i^{-1}U_{\xi_2(a)}$. Therefore $\Xi_i$ is a $(\rho, F, \delta, \sigma_i)$-independence set of cardinality at least $d_i/(3|W|^2)$ for the tuple consisting of $A_l\cap s_i^{-1}U_j$ for all $l, j=1, \dots, k$.
There is some $s_{F, \delta}\in W^{-1}W\setminus \{e\}$ such that the set of $i\in V_{F', \delta'}$ for which $s_i$ is defined and $s_i=s_{F, \delta}$ lies in ${{\mathfrak F}}$. It follows that we can find an $s\in W^{-1}W\setminus \{e\}$ such that for any nonempty finite subset $F$ of $G$ and $\delta>0$ there are some nonempty finite subset $\tilde{F}$ of $G$ and $\tilde{\delta}>0$ with $F\subseteq \tilde{F}$ and $\delta>\tilde{\delta}$ such that $s_{\tilde{F}, \tilde{\delta}}=s$. Then the tuple ${{\boldsymbol{A}}}'$ consisting of $A_l\cap s^{-1}U_j$ for all $l, j=1, \dots, k$ has upper independence density at least $1/(3|W|^2)$ over $\Sigma$. From the choice of $W$ we have $s\not \in E$.
From Lemma \[L-LY\] by induction on $m$ we have:
\[L-LY multiple\] Let $k\ge 2$ and ${{\boldsymbol{A}}}=(A_1, \dots, A_k)$ be a tuple of closed subsets of $X$ with positive upper independence density over $\Sigma$. For each $j=1, \dots, k$ let $U_j$ be an open set containing $A_j$. Let $E$ be a finite subset of $G$ and $m\in {{\mathbb N}}$. Then there exist $s_1, \dots, s_m\in G\setminus E$ such that $s_i^{-1}s_j\not \in E$ for all distinct $1\le i, j\le m$ and the tuple ${{\boldsymbol{A}}}'$ consisting of $A_i\cap s^{-1}_1U_{\omega(1)}\cap \dots \cap s^{-1}_mU_{\omega(m)}$ for all $1\le i\le k$ and $\omega \in \{1, \dots, k\}^m$ has positive upper independence density over $\Sigma$.
We are ready to prove Theorem \[T-positive entropy to chaos\].
We may assume that the $A_j$ are closed and pairwise disjoint. Take an increasing sequence $E_1\subseteq E_2\subseteq \dots$ of finite subsets of $G$ with union $G$. We shall construct, via induction on $m$, closed nonempty subsets $A_{m, j}$ of $X$ for $1\le j\le k^{2^{m-1}}$ with the following properties:
1. $A_{1, j} = A_j$ for all $1\le j\le k$,
2. for every $m\ge 2$ and $1\le i\le k^{2^{m-2}}$, $A_{m-1, i}$ contains exactly $k^{2^{m-2}}$ of the $A_{m, j}$ for $1\le j\le k^{2^{m-1}}$,
3. for every $m\ge 2$ and map $\gamma:\{1, \dots, k^{2^{m-1}}\}\rightarrow \{1, \dots, k^{2^{m-2}}\}$ there exists a $t_{\gamma}\in G\setminus E_{m-1}$ such that $t_{\gamma}A_{m, j}\subseteq \overline{U_{m-1, \gamma(j)}}$ for all $1\le j\le k^{2^{m-1}}$, where $U_{m-1, i}=\{x\in X: \rho(x, A_{m-1, i})<2^{-m}\delta_{m-1}\}$ for all $1\le i\le k^{2^{m-2}}$ and $\delta_{m-1}=\min \rho(x, y)$ for $x, y$ ranging over points in distinct $A_{m-1, j}$,
4. when $m\ge 2$, ${{\rm diam}}(A_{m, j})\le 2^{-m}$ for all $1\le j\le k^{2^{m-1}}$,
5. for every $m$, the sets $A_{m, j}$ for $1\le j\le k^{2^{m-1}}$ are pairwise disjoint,
6. for every $m$, the collection $\{A_{m, j} : 1\le j\le k^{2^{m-1}}$}, ordered into a tuple, has positive upper independence density over $\Sigma$.
Suppose that we have constructed such $A_{m, j}$ over all $m$. Properties (b), (d) and (e) imply that $Z=\bigcap_{m\in {{\mathbb N}}}\bigcup_{j=1}^{k^{2^{m-1}}}A_{m, j}$ is a Cantor set. Property (a) implies that $Z_j:=Z\cap A_j$ is also a Cantor set for each $1\le j\le k$. Condition (1) follows from properties (d) and (f). Condition (2) follows from properties (c) and (d).
We now construct the $A_{m, j}$. Define $A_{1, j}$ for $1\le j\le k$ according to property (a). By assumption properties (e) and (f) are satisfied for $m=1$. Assume that we have constructed $A_{m, j}$ for all $j=1,\dots , k^{2^{m-1}}$ with the above properties. Set $n=1+(k^{2^{m-1}})^{k^{2^m}}$. By Lemma \[L-LY multiple\] we can find $s_1, \dots, s_n\in G\setminus E_m$ such that the tuple consisting of $A_{m,i}\cap s^{-1}_1U_{m, \omega(1)}\cap \dots \cap s^{-1}_nU_{m, \omega(n)}$ for all $1\le i\le k^{2^{m-1}}$ and $\omega \in \{1, \dots, k^{2^{m-1}}\}^n$ has positive upper independence density over $\Sigma$. Take a bijection $\varphi: \{1, \dots, k^{2^{m-1}}\}^{\{1, \dots, k^{2^m}\}}\rightarrow \{2, \dots, n\}$. For each $\gamma:\{1, \dots, k^{2^{m}}\}\rightarrow \{1, \dots, k^{2^{m-1}}\}$, set $t_\gamma=s_{\varphi(\gamma)}$. For all $1\le i, j\le k^{2^{m-1}}$, define $\omega_{i, j}\in \{1, \dots, k^{2^{m-1}}\}^n$ by $\omega_{i, j}(1)=j$ and $\omega_{i, j}(\varphi(\gamma))=\gamma((i-1)k^{2^{m-1}}+j)$ for all $\gamma \in \{1, \dots, k^{2^{m-1}}\}^{\{1, \dots, k^{2^m}\}}$, and set $A_{m+1, (i-1)k^{2^{m-1}}+j}=A_{m,i}\cap s^{-1}_1\overline{U_{m, \omega_{i, j}(1)}}\cap \dots \cap s^{-1}_n\overline{U_{m, \omega_{i, j}(n)}}$. Then properties (b), (c), (e) and (f) hold for $m+1$. For each $1\le j\le k^{2^m}$ write $A_{m+1, j}$ as the union of finitely many closed subsets each with diameter no bigger than $2^{-(m+1)}$. Using Lemma \[L-decomposition E\] we may replace $A_{m+1, j}$ by one of these subsets. Consequently, property (d) is also satisfied for $m+1$. This completes the induction procedure and hence the proof of the theorem.
\[C-positive entropy to chaos\] If $h_\Sigma (X,G) > 0$ for some sofic approximation sequence $\Sigma$ then the action is Li-Yorke chaotic.
An action $G\curvearrowright X$ is said to be [*distal*]{} if $\inf_{s\in G}\rho(sx, sy)>0$ for all distinct $x, y\in X$. We refer the reader to [@Auslander] for the basics of distal actions. Since distal actions have no Li-Yorke pairs, from Corollary \[C-positive entropy to chaos\] we obtain the following consequence, which extends the result of Parry that distal integer actions on compact metrizable spaces have zero entropy [@Parry]. For amenable $G$ we write $h_{{\text{\rm top}}}(X,G)$ for the classical topological entropy, which is equal to the sofic entropy $h_\Sigma (X,G)$ for every $\Sigma$ [@KerLi10].
\[C-distal\] If the action $G\curvearrowright X$ is distal, then $h_\Sigma (X,G)=0$ or $-\infty$. In particular, if $G$ is amenable and $G\curvearrowright X$ is distal, then $h_{{\text{\rm top}}}(X,G)=0$.
We remark that every distal action has an invariant Borel probability measure [@Auslander page 125] [@Vries page 496]. But we do not know whether one can conclude that $h_\Sigma (X,G)=0$ in Corollary \[C-distal\].
[999]{}
M. A. Alekseev, L. Yu. Glebskiǐ, and E. I. Gordon. On approximations of groups, group actions and Hopf algebras. [*Zap. Nauchn. Sem. S.-Peterburg. Otdel. Mat. Inst. Steklov. (POMI)*]{} [**256**]{} (1999), [*Teor. Predst. Din. Sist. Komb. i Algoritm. Metody. 3*]{}, 224–262, 268; translation in [*J. Math. Sci. (New York)*]{} [**107**]{} (2001), no. 5, 4305–4332.
J. Auslander. [*Minimal Flows and their Extensions*]{}. North-Holland Mathematics Studies, 153. North-Holland Publishing Co., Amsterdam, 1988.
F. Blanchard. Fully positive topological entropy and topological mixing. In: [*Symbolic Dynamics and its Applications (New Haven, CT, 1991)*]{}, pp. 95–105. Contemp. Math., 135, Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI, 1992.
F. Blanchard, E. Glasner, S. Kolyada, and A. Maass. On Li-Yorke pairs. [*J. Reine Angew. Math.*]{} [**547**]{} (2002), 51–68.
F. Blanchard and Y. Lacroix. Zero entropy factors of topological flows. [*Proc. Amer. Math. Soc.*]{} [**119**]{} (1993), no. 3, 985–992.
L. Bowen. Measure conjugacy invariants for actions of countable sofic groups. [*J. Amer. Math. Soc.*]{} [**23**]{} (2010), no. 1, 217–245.
L. Bowen. Entropy for expansive algebraic actions of residually finite groups. [*Ergod. Th. Dynam. Sys.*]{} [**31**]{} (2011), no. 3, 703–718.
L. Bowen. Sofic entropy and amenable groups. [*Ergod. Th. Dynam. Sys.*]{} [**32**]{} (2012), no. 2, 427–466.
N.-P. Chung and H. Li. Homoclinic groups, IE groups, and expansive algebraic actions. Preprint, 2011.
C. Deninger. Fuglede-Kadison determinants and entropy for actions of discrete amenable groups. [*J. Amer. Math. Soc.*]{} [**19**]{} (2006), no. 3, 737–758.
C. Deninger. Mahler measures and Fuglede–Kadison determinants. [*Münster J. Math.*]{} [**2**]{} (2009), 45–63.
C. Deninger and K. Schmidt. Expansive algebraic actions of discrete residually finite amenable groups and their entropy. [*Ergod. Th. Dynam. Sys.*]{} [**27**]{} (2007), no. 3, 769–786.
M. Einsiedler and T. Ward. [*Ergodic Theory, with a View towards Number Theory*]{}. Springer-Verlag, London, 2011.
G. Elek and E. Szabo. Sofic representations of amenable groups. [*Proc. Amer. Math. Soc.*]{} [**139**]{} (2011), 4285–4291.
E. Glasner. [*Ergodic Theory via Joinings*]{}. American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2003.
E. Glasner. On tame enveloping semigroups. [*Colloq. Math.*]{} [**105**]{} (2006), no. 2, 283–295.
E. Glasner and B. Weiss. Quasi-factors of zero entropy systems. [*J. Amer. Math. Soc.*]{} [**8**]{} (1995), no. 3, 665–686.
E. Glasner and B. Weiss. Topological entropy of extensions. In: [*Ergodic Theory and its Connections with Harmonic Analysis (Alexandria, 1993)*]{}, pp. 299–307. London Math. Soc. Lecture Note Ser., 205, Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 1995.
E. Glasner and X. Ye. Local entropy theory. [*Ergod. Th. Dynam. Sys.*]{} [**29**]{} (2009), no. 2, 321–356.
M. Gromov. Endomorphisms of symbolic algebraic varieties. [*J. Eur. Math. Soc.*]{} [**1**]{} (1999), no. 2, 109–197.
W. Huang and X. Ye. A local variational relation and applications. [*Israel J. Math.*]{} [**151**]{} (2006), 237–279.
M. G. Karpovsky and V. D. Milman. Coordinate density of sets of vectors. [*Discrete Math.*]{} [**24**]{} (1978), no. 2, 177–184.
D. Kerr. Sofic measure entropy via finite partitions. To appear in [*Groups Geom. Dyn.*]{}
D. Kerr and H. Li. Independence in topological and $C^*$-dynamics. [*Math. Ann.*]{} [**338**]{} (2007), no. 4, 869–926.
D. Kerr and H. Li. Combinatorial independence in measurable dynamics [*J. Funct. Anal.*]{} [**256**]{} (2009), no. 5, 1341–1386.
D. Kerr and H. Li. Entropy and the variational principle for actions of sofic groups. [*Invent. Math.*]{} [**186**]{} (2011), no. 3, 501–558.
D. Kerr and H. Li. Soficity, amenability, and dynamical entropy. To appear in [*Amer. J. Math.*]{}
A. K[ö]{}hler. Enveloping semigroups for flows. [*Proc. Roy. Irish Acad. Sect. A*]{} [**95**]{} (1995), no. 2, 179–191.
H. Li. Compact group automorphisms, addition formulas and Fuglede-Kadison determinants. [*Ann. of Math. (2)*]{} [**176**]{} (2012), no. 1, 303–347.
H. Li and A. Thom. Entropy, determinants, and $L^2$-torsion. Preprint, 2012.
T. Y. Li and J. A. Yorke. Period three implies chaos. [*Amer. Math. Monthly*]{} [**82**]{} (1975), no. 10, 985–992.
D. Lind, K. Schmidt, and E. Verbitskiy. Entropy and growth rate of periodic points of algebraic ${{\mathbb Z}}^d$-actions. In: [*Dynamical Numbers: Interplay between Dynamical Systems and Number Theory*]{}, pp. 195–211. Contemp. Math., vol. 532, American Mathematical Society, Providence, R.I., 2010.
D. Lind, K. Schmidt, and E. Verbitskiy. Homoclinic points, atoral polynomials, and periodic points of algebraic ${{\mathbb Z}}^d$-actions. To appear in [*Ergod. Th. Dynam. Sys.*]{}
D. Lind, K. Schmidt, and T. Ward. Mahler measure and entropy for commuting automorphisms of compact groups. [*Invent. Math.*]{} [**101**]{} (1990), no.3, 593–629.
P. A. Loeb. Conversion from nonstandard to standard measure spaces and applications in probability theory. [*Trans. Amer. Math. Soc.*]{} [**211**]{} (1975), 113–122.
D. S. Ornstein and B. Weiss. Entropy and isomorphism theorems for actions of amenable groups. [*J. Analyse Math.*]{} [**48**]{} (1987), 1–141.
W. Parry. Zero entropy of distal and related transformations. In: [*Topological Dynamics (Symposium, Colorado State Univ., Ft. Collins, Colo., 1967)*]{}, pp. 383–389. Benjamin, New York, 1968.
L. Paunescu. A convex structure on sofic embeddings. To appear in [*Ergod. Th. Dynam. Sys.*]{}
N. Sauer. On the density of families of sets. [*J. Combinatorial Theory Ser. A*]{} [**13**]{} (1972), 145–147.
K. Schmidt and E. Verbitskiy. Abelian sandpiles and the harmonic model. [*Comm. Math. Phys.*]{} [**292**]{} (2009), no. 3, 721–759.
S. Shelah. A combinatorial problem; stability and order for models and theories in infinitary languages. [*Pacific J. Math.*]{} [**41**]{} (1972), 247–261.
J. de Vries. [*Elements of Topological Dynamics*]{}. Mathematics and its Applications, 257. Kluwer Academic Publishers Group, Dordrecht, 1993.
G. Zhang. Local variational principle concerning entropy of sofic group action. [*J. Funct. Anal.*]{} [**262**]{} (2012), 1954–1985.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'The multidimensional quantization procedure, proposed by the first author and its modifications (reduction to radicals and lifting on $U(1)$-coverings) give us a almost universal theoretical tools to find irreducible representations of Lie groups. By using this method and the root theory, we realize in this paper the representations of the degenerate principal series of symplectic groups.'
address:
- 'Institute of Mathematics, National Center for Science and Technology, P. O. Box 631, Bo Ho 10.000, Hanoi, Vietnam'
- 'Department of Mathematics, Vinh University, Vinh City, Vietnam'
author:
- Do Ngoc Diep
- Truong Chi Trung
date: 'September 15, 1998 and, in revised form, ...., 1998.'
title: |
A Geometric Realization of Degenerate Principal Series Representations of\
Symplectic groups
---
[^1]
Introduction
============
Let us consider a Lie group $G$ and its Lie algebra ${\mathfrak g}$. The group $G$ acts on its Lie algebra ${\mathfrak g}$ by adjoint representation $Ad$ and in the dual vector space ${\mathfrak g}^*$ by coadjoint action $K:= \coAd$. The vector space ${\mathfrak g}^*$ is therefore divided into the disjoint union of coadjoint orbits (or $K$-orbits). Each coadjoint orbit $\Omega \in {\mathfrak g}^*/G$ admits a natural $G$-homogeneous symplectic structure, corresponding to the Kirillov form $B_\Omega$ associated with the bilinear form $$B_F(X,Y) := \langle F,
[X,Y]\rangle,$$ where $F\in {\mathfrak g}^*$, the kernel $\ker B_F$ of which is just isomorphic to the Lie algebra ${\mathfrak g}_F := \Lie G_F$ of the stabilizer $G_F$ of a fixed point $F\in \Omega$. Therefore, the triple $(\Omega, B_\Omega, G)$ is a homogeneous symplectic manifold (Hamiltonian system) with a [*flat action*]{}, i.e. $$\{f_X,f_Y \}= f_{[X,Y]},
\forall X,Y \in {\mathfrak g},$$ where $f_X$ is such a function that $df_X =
-\imath(\xi_X)B_\Omega$ and $$\xi_X(m) := \frac{d}{dt}|_{t=0}\exp(tX)m,$$ see [@diep3] of $G$. Following the well known classification theorem of A. Kirillov-B. Kostant-Souriaux, every homogeneous symplectic manifold with a flat action of $G$ is locally diffeomorphic to a coadjoint orbit of $G$ or its central extension $\widetilde{G}$ by ${\mathbb R}$. This means that all the Hamiltonian systems with a flat action of $G$ are locally classified by the coadjoint orbits of $G$ or its central extension $\widetilde{G}$ by ${\mathbb R}$. The Hamiltonian systems can be quantized to become quantum systems with unitary symmetry representations of) $G$. In order to do this, one uses affine connection $\nabla$ with the symplectic curvature $$\curv(\nabla) = \frac{2\pi i}{h} \omega$$ on the homogeneous symplectic manifold $(M,\omega,G)$ with a flat action of $G$ to produce a [*quantization procedure*]{} $$Q : C^\infty(\Omega) \to {\mathcal L}({\mathbf H}),$$ $$f
\mapsto Q(f) := f + \frac{h}{2\pi i}\nabla_{\xi_f},$$ where $\xi_f$ is the symplectic gradient of $f\in C^\infty(\Omega)$, i.e. $$\imath(\xi_f)\omega
= - df$$ and ${\mathbf H}$ is a separable Hilbert space. This correspondence is a geometric quantization procedure because it satisfies the following relations $$Q(\{f,g\}) = \frac{2\pi i}{h} [Q(f), Q(g)],$$ $$Q(1) = \Id_{\mathbf H}.$$ It means that this correspondence defines a homomorphism $$\Lambda : C^\infty(\Omega) \to {\mathcal L}({\mathbf H}),$$ $$f \mapsto \Lambda(f) := \frac{2\pi i}{h} Q(f),$$ i.e. a representation of the Lie algebra of smooth functions with respect to the Poisson brackets in the Hilbert space ${\mathbf H}$.
An element $X\in {\mathfrak g}$ can be considered as a function on ${\mathfrak g}^*$ and therefore the restriction $X\vert_\Omega$ belongs to $C^\infty(\Omega)$ and we can obtain the corresponding Hamiltonian field $X_\Omega$ from the condition $$\imath(X_\Omega)B_\Omega = dX\vert_\Omega.$$ The condition asserting that the action is flat means that the correspondence $$X \in{\mathfrak g} \mapsto X\vert_\Omega \in C^\infty(\Omega)$$ is the Lie algebra homomorphism and we have a representation of Lie algebra ${\mathfrak g}$ $$X \in {\mathfrak g} \mapsto \Lambda(X) := \frac{2\pi i}{h}
Q(X\vert_\Omega)$$ by auto-adjoint operators in the Hilbert space ${\mathbf H}$, which is as usually constructed as the completion of some subspace of so called partially invariant partially holomorphic sections of the quantum bundle, associated with some fixed polarization. This is what we means the [*multidimensional quantization procedure*]{}.
One considers also the [*reductions*]{} of this multidimensional quantization procedure in the following sense. Let us denote the (solvable) radical of $G_F$ by $R_F$ and the unipotent radical by ${}^uR_F$.
In the above construction, there appeared some so called [*Mackey obstruction*]{}. In order to kill this Mackey obstruction, we supposed some additional conditions on the action of stabilizers $G_F$ on the dual object of inducing subgroups $\widehat{H_0}$ is trivial, see [@diep3]. Duflo [@duflo] proposed another method of Killing this Mackey obstruction by [*lifting to the ${\mathbf Z}/(2)$ coverings*]{} of the stabilizers. One has a lifting of any homomorphism of $G_F$ into the symplectic groups of the orbit at the fixed point $F$ onto a homomorphism of ${\mathbf Z}/(2)$ covering $G_F^{{\mathbf Z}/(2)}$ of $G_F$ into the metaplectic group $\Mp(T_F\Omega)$, following the commutative diagram $$\CD 1 @>>> {\mathbf Z}/(2) @>>> G_F^{{\mathbf Z}/(2)} @>>> G_F @>>> 1\\
@. @\vert @VVV @VVV \\ 1 @>>> {\mathbf Z}/(2) @>>> \Mp(T_F\Omega) @>>>
\Sp(T_F\Omega) @>>> 1 \endCD$$
Replacing the metaplectic groups $\Mp$ by the (complex) metaplectic $\Mp^c$ groups, Tran Vui [@vui] and Tran Dao Dong [@dong] considered the same [*lifting to $U(1)$ coverings*]{} of the the stabilizers. One has to lift each homomorphism of $G_F$ into the symplectic groups of the orbit at the fixed point $F$ onto a homomorphism of $U(1)$ covering $G_F^{U(1)}$ of $G_F$ into the metaplectic group $\Mp^c(T_F\Omega)$, following the commutative diagram $$\CD
1 @>>> U(1) @>>> G_F^{U(1)} @>>> G_F @>>> 1\\
@. @\vert @VVV @VVV \\
1 @>>> U(1) @>>> \Mp^c(T_F\Omega) @>>> \Sp(T_F\Omega) @>>> 1
\endCD$$
It was shown that these modifications give us some privileges for constructing irreducible unitary representations. The theory was settled in the general context, but still it is difficult to realize in concrete situations. The [*discrete series representations*]{} of semi-simple Lie groups are realized by these constructions as globalization of Harish-Chandra modules, see [@schmidwolf],[@wong].
The [*degenerate principal series representations*]{} of semisimple Lie groups were constructed and studied in many works, beginning from Harish-Chandra, updated by Vogan and others see e.g. Vogan [@vogan] for the general semisimple Lie groups, Lee [@lee] for symplectic groups, etc. The theories however were purely analytic. It is natural to try to use the developed geometric quantization method to describe these representation. In this paper, the general theory of geometric quantization is applied in the situation of symplectic groups and we describe the computation results.
Structure of Coadjoint Orbits
=============================
Let $G = \Sp_{2n}({\mathbb R})$ be the symplectic group, ${\mathfrak g} :=
\Lie G$ its Lie algebra and ${\mathfrak g}^* = \Hom_{\mathbb
R}({\mathfrak g}, {\mathbb R})$ the vector space dual to the Lie algebra ${\mathfrak g}$. We study in detail the coadjoint orbits of the symplectic group.
The Lie algebra ${\mathfrak g}$, its dual vector space ${\mathfrak g}^*$ are realized by matrices and the coadjoint action of $G$ in ${\mathfrak g}^*$ is just the conjugation $$K=\coAd : G \times {\mathfrak g}^* \to {\mathfrak g}^*,$$ $$(g, F) \mapsto K(g)F = gFg^{-1}.$$
Recall that the adjoint action of $G$ on ${\mathfrak g}$ can be realized as conjugation $$\Ad: G \times {\mathfrak g} \to {\mathfrak g},$$ $$(g,X) \mapsto \Ad(g)X = gXg^{-1}.\label{2.1}$$ Let us denote the trace of a matrix by $tr$. To each matrix $Y \in
{\mathfrak g}$ we define the associate functional $F_Y\in {\mathfrak g}^*$ by $$\langle F_Y,X\rangle = tr(Y.X), \forall X \in
{\mathfrak g}.\label{2.2}$$ Then the map ${\mathfrak g} \to {\mathfrak g}^*,$ $Y \mapsto F_Y$ is an isomorphism from ${\mathfrak g}$ onto ${\mathfrak
g}^*$. We identify therefore $F\in {\mathfrak g}^*$ with a matrix denote by the same letter $F$ and \[2.2\] become $$\langle F,X\rangle = tr(F.X)\label{2.3}$$
Recall that $$\langle K(g)F,X\rangle = \langle F,\Ad(g^{-1})X\rangle$$ and using \[2.1\] and \[2.3\] we have $$\begin{array}{lll}
\langle K(g)F,X\rangle & = & \langle F,\Ad(g^{-1})X\rangle \\
& = & \langle F, g^{-1}Xg \rangle \\
& = & tr(F.g^{-1}Xg)\\
& = & tr(gFg^{-1}X)\\
& = & \langle gFg^{-1}, X, \rangle,
\end{array}$$ for all $g\in G$, $x\in {\mathfrak g}$ and $F \in {\mathfrak g}^*$.
We have therefore, $$K(g)F = gFg^{-1}, \forall g \in G, \forall F\in{\mathfrak g}^*.$$
We fix a special element $F \in {\mathfrak g}^*$ presented by a matrix of type $$F = \left(\begin{matrix}\left[\begin{matrix} 0 & -\lambda_1\\ \lambda_1
& 0\end{matrix}\right] & & & 0\\ &\ddots & & \\ & &\left[\begin{matrix}
0 & -\lambda_r\\ \lambda_r &
0\end{matrix}\right]& \\ 0 & & & \left[\begin{matrix} 0 & \ldots\\ \vdots
& \dots\end{matrix}\right] \end{matrix}\right),$$ where $\lambda_i \in {\mathbb R}$, $\lambda_i > 0$, $\lambda_i \ne
\lambda_j$, $i,j = 1,\dots, n$. Consider the coadjoint orbit $\Omega_F$ passing through this point $F$, $$\Omega_F = \{ K(g)F \quad \vert \quad g \in G \}.$$
The stabilizer $G_F$ of $F$ consists of the matrices of type $$\left(\begin{matrix}g_{11}& & & & \\ & g_{22}& & & \\ & & \dots & & \\
& & &g_{rr}& \\ & & & & g_{r+1,r+1}\end{matrix}\right),$$ where $$g_{ii}
= \left[\begin{matrix} \cos\lambda_i & \sin\lambda_i \\ \sin\lambda_i &
\cos\lambda_i\end{matrix}\right],$$ $i= 1,\dots r$, $g_{r+1,r+1}
\in \Sp_{2(n-r)}({\mathbb R}).$
We can write each element of $\Sp_{2n}({\mathbb R})$ into block format $$g = \left( \begin{matrix} g_{11} & g_{12} & \dots & g_{1r}
& g_{1,r+1}\\ g_{21} & g_{22} & \dots & g_{2r} & g_{2,r+1}\\ \ldots &
\ldots & \ldots & \ldots & \ldots \\ g_{r+1,1} & g_{r+1,2} & \dots &
g_{r+1,r} & g_{r+1,r+1} \end{matrix}\right),$$ where $g_{ij}$ is a $2
\times 2$ matrix, for $i,j = 1,...,r$, $g_{i,r+1}$ is a $2 \times 2(n-r)$ matrix, for $i = 1,...,r$, $g_{r+1,j}$ is a $2(n-r) \times 2$ matrix, for $j = 1,...,r$, $g_{r+1,r+1}$ is a $2(n-r) \times 2(n-r)$ matrix. We write $F$ in the same format form $$g = \left( \begin{matrix} F_{11} & F_{12} &
\dots & F_{1r} & F_{1,r+1}\\ F_{21} & F_{22} & \dots & F_{2r} &
F_{2,r+1}\\ \ldots & \ldots & \ldots & \ldots & \ldots \\ F_{r+1,1} &
F_{r+1,2} & \dots & F_{r+1,r} & F_{r+1,r+1} \end{matrix}\right),$$ where $F_{ij} = 0$ is $2\times 2$ matrix, for $i,j = 1,\ldots,r$, $i\ne j$, $F_{ii} = \left[ \begin{matrix} 0 & -\lambda_i\\ \lambda_i &
0\end{matrix}\right],$ for $i= 1,\dots,r$, $F_{i,r+1} = 0$ is $2\times
2(n-r)$ matrix, for $i = 1,\ldots,r$, $F_{r+1,j} = 0$ is $2(n-r)\times 2$ matrix, for $j = 1,\ldots,r$, $F_{r+1,r+1} = 0$ is $2(n-r)\times 2(n-r)$ matrix. We recall that $$G_F = \{ g\in G \quad\vert\quad K(g)F = F \}$$ $$= \{ g\in G \quad\vert\quad gFg^{-1} = F \} = \{ g\in G \quad\vert\quad
gF = Fg \}.$$ We deduce from $gF = Fg$ that $g \in G_F$ if and only iff the following 3 conditions hold: $$g_{r+1,j}F_{jj} = 0,
\forall j = 1,\dots,r, \label{2.4}$$ $$F_{ii}g_{i,r+1} = 0, \forall j = 1,\dots,r, \label{2.5}$$ $$g_{ij}F_{jj} = F_{ii}g_{ij}, \forall i,j = 1,\dots,r.
\label{2.6}$$ Because $F_{ii} = \left[ \begin{matrix} 0 &
-\lambda_i \\ \lambda_i & 0\end{matrix} \right],$ for all $i = 1,\dots ,
r$ are invertible then from \[2.4\] and \[2.5\] we have $$g_{r+1,j} = 0, \forall j = 1,\dots,r,
\label{2.7}$$ $$g_{i,r+1} = 0, \forall i =
1,\dots,r. \label{2.8}$$ We now resolve the equation \[2.8\]. Let us denote $$g_{ij} = \left[\begin{matrix}a_{ij} & b_{ij}\\
c_{ij} & d_{ij} \end{matrix} \right].$$ Then $$g_{ij}F_{jj} =
\lambda_j\left[\begin{matrix}b_{ij} & -a_{ij}\\ d_{ij} & -c_{ij}
\end{matrix} \right],$$ $$F_{ii}g_{ij} =
\lambda_i\left[\begin{matrix}-c_{ij} & -d_{ij}\\ a_{ij} & b_{ij}
\end{matrix} \right].$$ From the condition $$g_{ij}F_{jj} = F_{ii}g_{ij}$$ we deduce that $$\left\{\begin{matrix}
\lambda_ib_{ij} - \lambda_jc_{ij} & = 0\\
\lambda_jb_{ij} + \lambda_ic_{ij} & = 0\\
\lambda_ia_{ij} - \lambda_jd_{ij} & = 0\\
\lambda_ja_{ij} - \lambda_id_{ij} & = 0\\
\end{matrix} \right.$$ what is equivalent that $$a_{ij} = b_{ij} = c_{ij} = d_{ij} =0,$$ because of the assumption, $\lambda_i \ne
\lambda_j; \lambda_i, \lambda_j > 0$, i.e. $$g_{ij} = 0, \forall i,j =
1,\dots,r, i\ne j.\label{2.9}$$
From \[2.7\]-\[2.9\] we conclude that the element $g$, as matrix should be of the diagonal form $$g = diag( g_{11}, g_{22}, \dots, g_{rr}, g_{r+1,r+1}),$$ where $g_{ii}$ is a $2\times 2$ matrix, for all $i = 1,\dots, r$, $g_{r+1,r+1}$ is a $2(n-r) \times 2(n-r)$ matrix.
Denote $$g_{i1} = \left[\begin{matrix}
a_i & b_i\\ c_i & d_i
\end{matrix} \right],\qquad F_i = \left[\begin{matrix}
0 & -\lambda_i\\ \lambda_i & 0
\end{matrix} \right]$$ we have $$g_{i1}F_i = \lambda_i \left[\begin{matrix}
b_i & -a_i\\ d_i & -c_i
\end{matrix} \right],$$ $$F_ig_{i1} = \lambda_i \left[\begin{matrix}
-c_i & -d_i\\ a_i & b_i
\end{matrix} \right].$$ Our condition means that $$\lambda_i \left[\begin{matrix}
b_i & -a_i\\ d_i & -c_i
\end{matrix} \right] = \lambda_i \left[\begin{matrix}
-c_i & -d_i\\ a_i & b_i
\end{matrix} \right],$$ what is equivalent to the conditions $$\left\{ \begin{matrix}
a_i & = & d_i ,\\
b_i & = & -c_i .
\end{matrix} \right.
\label{2.10}$$ Let us denote $$J_1 = \left[\begin{matrix} 0 & -1\\ 1 & 0
\end{matrix}\right] .$$ then the matrix of the symplectic form is $$J_n = \left(\begin{matrix}
\left[\begin{matrix} 0 & -1\\ 1 & 0
\end{matrix}\right] & & & 0\\
&\ddots & & \\
& &\left[\begin{matrix} 0 & -1\\ 1 & 0
\end{matrix}\right] & \\
0 & & & [J_{n-r}]
\end{matrix}\right)= \left(\begin{matrix} [J_1] & & & 0\\
& \ddots & & \\
& & [J_1] & \\
& & &[J_{n-r}]\end{matrix} \right) .$$ We have therefore $$gJ_ng^t = \left(\begin{matrix} [g_{11}J_1g_{11}^t] & & & 0\\
& \ddots & & \\
& & [g_{rr}J_1g_{rr}^t] & \\
& &
&[g_{r+1,r+1}J_{n-r}g_{r+1,r+1}^t]\end{matrix} \right) ,$$ and the condition $$gJ_ng^t = J_n,$$ guaranting that $g\in \Sp_{2n}({\mathbb
R})$ is equivalent to the conditions $$\left\{ \begin{array}{lll} g_{ii}J_1g_{ii}^t &= &J_1, \forall i =
1,\dots,n ,\\
g_{r+1,r+1}J_{n-r}g_{r+1,r+1}^t &= &J_{n-r} \end{array}\right. .$$ It means also that $g_{ii} \in \Sp_2({\mathbb R}), \forall i=1,\dots,r$ and $g_{r+1,r+1} \in
\Sp_{2(n-r)}({\mathbb R}).$ For $i = 1,\dots,r$, because $g_{ii}\in
\Sp_{2}({\mathbb R}) \cong \SL_2({\mathbb R})$ means that $$a_id_i - b_ic_i = 1.\label{2.11}$$ From \[2.10\] and \[2.11\] we have $$a_i^2 + c_i^2 = 1,$$ i.e. $g_{ii} \in {\mathbf S}^1$, for $i=1,\dots,r$. We conclude therefore that $$g\in G_F \mbox{ iff and only if } g = \left(\begin{matrix}
[g_{11}] & & & 0\\
& &\ddots & & \\
& & &[g_{r,r}]& \\
0& & & &[g_{r+1,r+1}]
\end{matrix} \right),$$ where $g_{ii}\in {\mathbf S}^1$, $i=1,\dots,r$ and $g_{r+1,r+1}\in
\Sp_{2(n-2)}({\mathbb R}).$
If the functional $F\in {\mathfrak g}^*$ is presented by a matrix of type $$F = \left(\begin{matrix}
\left[\begin{matrix}0 & -\lambda_1\\ \lambda_1 & 0 \end{matrix}\right] &
& & 0\\
& \ddots & & \\
& & \left[\begin{matrix}0 & -\lambda_r\\ \lambda_r & 0
\end{matrix}\right] & \\
0 & & & \left[\begin{matrix}0 & ...\\ \vdots & \ldots
\end{matrix}\right]
\end{matrix}\right) ,$$ where all $\lambda_i, i=1,\dots,n$ are pairwise different, then its stabilizer is $$G_F \cong ({\mathbf S}^1)^r \times \Sp_{2(n-r)}({\mathbb R})$$ and the corresponding Lie algebra is $${\mathfrak g}_F \cong (\Lie {\mathbf S}^1) \times (\Lie {\mathbf S}^1)
\times \ldots \times (\Lie {\mathbf S}^1) \times \sp_{2(n-r)}({\mathbb R})$$ $$\cong {\mathbb R}^r \times \sp_{2(n-r)}({\mathbb R}).$$
Construction of Degenerate Principal Series Representations
===========================================================
We give in this section a geometric realization of degenerate principal series representations by multidimensional quantization procedure and the modified versions. We use the root theory to construct polarization associated to the orbits.
Let us recall from [@diep1]-[@diep2] an important notion of polarization.
A triple $({\mathfrak
p},\rho,\sigma_0)$ is a $(\tilde{\sigma},F)$-[*polarization*]{} iff:
1. ${\mathfrak p}$ is a complex Lie subalgebra of ${\mathfrak
g}_{\mathbb C} := {\mathfrak g} \otimes_{\mathbb R} {\mathbb C}$, containing $({\mathfrak g}_F)_{\mathbb C}$.
2. The subalgebra ${\mathfrak p}$ is invariant with respect to all the operators $\Ad_{{\mathfrak g}_{\mathbb C}}x,$ $x\in G_F$.
3. The vector space ${\mathfrak p} + \overline{\mathfrak p}$ is the complexification of the real Lie subalgebra ${\mathfrak m} = ({\mathfrak
p}+ \overline{\mathfrak p}) \cap {\mathfrak g}$
4. All the subgroups $M_0$, $H_0$, $M$, $H$ are closed in $G$, where $M_0$ (resp. $H_0$) is the connected subgroup of $G$, corresponding to the Lie algebra ${\mathfrak m}$ (resp. ${\mathfrak h} = {\mathfrak p} \cap
{\mathfrak g}$) and $M := G_F \ltimes M_0$, $H := G_F \ltimes H_0$.
5. $\sigma_0$ is an irreducible representation of the group $H_0$ in a Hilbert space $V$ such that: (i) the restriction $\sigma\vert_{G_F \cap
H_0}$ is a multiple of the restriction to $G_F\cap H_0$ of $\widetilde{\sigma}\chi_F$ and (ii) the point $\sigma_0$ is fixed under the action of group $G_F$ in the dual $\widehat{H_0}$ of the group $H_0$.
6. $\rho$ is a representation of the complex algebra ${\mathfrak p}$ in $V$, which satisfies all the Nelson’s conditions for $H_0$, and $\rho\vert_{\mathfrak h} = D\sigma_0$.
For the group $G=\Sp_{2n}({\mathbb R})$ and the functional $F$ of special type as in the previous section, the stabilizer ${\mathfrak
g}_F$ contains a Cartan subalgebra. It is therefore naturally to choose the polarizing complex subalgebras between parabolic ones. Let us denote by $A$ the split torus of that cartan subgroup. It is easy to see that the centralizer ${\mathcal Z}(A)$ is reductive and is coincided with the stabilizer of the functional $F$. Denote ${\mathcal Z}(A)= MA$ the Cartan-Levi-Maltsev decomposition into the product of Abelian and semi-simple parts, where $A = {\mathbb S}^1 \times\dots\times {\mathbb
S}^1$ and $M=\Sp_{2(n-r)}({\mathbb R})$.
The two-fold covering of the stabilizer $G_F=MA$ is $G_F^{{\mathbb Z}/(2)} = {\mathbb S}^1 \times \dots \times {\mathbb S}^1
\times \Mp_{2(n-r)}({\mathbb R})$
Let $P = MAN$ be Langlands decomposition of a parabolic subgroup $P$ with Lie algebra ${\mathfrak p}= \Lie P$, ${\mathfrak
p}_{\mathbb C}$ its complexification, $\sigma \in \hat{M}_{disc}$ a discrete series irreducible representation of $M=\Sp_{2(n-r)}({\mathbb
R})$ and $\chi_F= \exp(\frac{2\pi i}{h}\langle F,.\rangle)$ to be the character of $G_F$, extended by null from $A$. Then $({\mathfrak
p}_{\mathbb C}, P,F, \sigma\chi_F)$ is a $(\sigma,F)$ polarization. The multidimensional quantization procedure gives us the degenerate principal series representations.
The first assertion is just followed from the definition of $(P,N)$ pairs, which are constructed from the theory of root of parabolic pairs.
Let us recall about the root theory for ${\mathfrak g} = \sp_{2n}({\mathbb
R})$ with respect to the pair $(G,A)= (\Sp_{2n}({\mathbb R}),{\mathbb S}^1
\times\dots\times {\mathbb S}^1)$ of a split torus $A$. Consider the complexification ${\mathfrak g}_{\mathbb C}$. If $\alpha$ is a functional over a subalgebra ${\mathfrak a}_{\mathbb C} \cong {\mathbb C}^r$, then the corresponding root space $${\mathfrak g}^{\alpha} := \{ X \in
{\mathfrak g}_{\mathbb C} \quad ;\quad [H,X] = \alpha(H)X, \forall H\in
{\mathfrak a}_{\mathbb C} \}.$$ If $\alpha$ and ${\mathfrak g}^\alpha$ are non-zero, then $\alpha$ is called a root. In that case, $\dim_{\mathbb
C}{\mathfrak g}^\alpha =1$. Denote the unique $H_\alpha$ such that $\alpha(H_\alpha) = 2$, the unique $X_\alpha$ and $X_{-\alpha}$, such that $$[H_\alpha, X_\alpha] = 2 X_\alpha,$$ $$[H_\alpha, X_{-\alpha}] = -2
X_{-\alpha}.$$ The triple $(H_\alpha, X_\alpha,X_{-\alpha})$ form a complex Lie subalgebra, which is isomorphic to the complexification of either $\Sl_2({\mathbb R})$ or $\su_2$. In the first case, we call the root [*noncompact*]{} and in the second - [*compact*]{}. One denotes the set of all roots by $\Delta({\mathfrak g},{\mathfrak a})$ and calls it the [*root system*]{} with respect to the split torus $A$. Denote also the set of all compact (respectively, noncompact) roots by $\Delta_c({\mathfrak
g},{\mathfrak a})$ (resp., $\Delta_n({\mathfrak g},{\mathfrak a})$). Let us denote by $$\rho(\Delta^+_c({\mathfrak g},{\mathfrak a}) :=
\frac{1}{2}\sum_{\alpha\in \Delta^+_c({\mathfrak g},{\mathfrak a})}\alpha
\quad ( \mbox {resp., } \rho(\Delta^+_n({\mathfrak g},{\mathfrak a}) :=
\frac{1}{2}\sum_{\alpha\in \Delta^+_n({\mathfrak g},{\mathfrak
a})}\alpha$$) the half-sum of all compact (resp., noncompact) roots.
Remark that in our case, ${\mathfrak g}^0 = ({\mathfrak g}_F)_{\mathbb C}
= {\mathfrak a}_{\mathbb C} \oplus \sp_{2(n-r)}({\mathbb C})$ and we have $${\mathfrak g}_{\mathbb C} = ({\mathfrak g}_F)_{\mathbb C} \oplus
\sum_{\alpha\in\Delta({\mathfrak g},{\mathfrak a})} {\mathfrak
g}^\alpha.$$ With each root $\alpha$ one associates a reflection $R_\alpha$ in the space ${\mathfrak a}_{\mathbb C}^*$ $$R_\alpha(\beta) :=
\beta -2\frac{\langle \alpha,\beta\rangle}{\langle \alpha,\alpha\rangle }
\alpha.$$ The Weyl group $W(G,A)$ is generated by all these reflection and one can fix one of the [*fundamental domain (camera)*]{} to define the cones of positive roots $\Delta^+({\mathfrak g},{\mathfrak a})$ and the corresponding cones of positive compact roots $\Delta^+_c({\mathfrak
g},{\mathfrak a})$ and noncompact roots $\Delta^+_n({\mathfrak
g},{\mathfrak a})$.
Choose $$D\delta^F := \rho(\Delta^+_n({\mathfrak g},{\mathfrak a})) -
\rho(\Delta^+_c({\mathfrak g},{\mathfrak a})).$$
Because in our case we can choose a charcters $\delta^F$ od the two-fold covering $G_F^{{\mathbb Z}/(2)} = {\mathbb S}^1 \times \dots
\times {\mathbb S}^1 \times \Mp_{2(n-r)}({\mathbb
R})$ we can choose a complex parabolic subalgebra $${\mathfrak p} := ({\mathfrak g}_F)_{\mathbb C} \oplus
\sum_{\alpha\in\Delta^+_n({\mathfrak g},{\mathfrak a})} {\mathfrak g}^\alpha
\oplus \sum_{\alpha\in\Delta^+_c({\mathfrak g},{\mathfrak a})} {\mathfrak
g}^{-\alpha}$$
From the properties of parabolic subgroups, it is easy to check that we have a $(\sigma,F)$ polarization.
Let us first explain the construction of the degenerate principal series. We recall some notations from D. Vogan : By $R(G_F)$ denote the set of all the so called $G_F$-[*regular unitary pseudo-characters*]{} $(\Lambda,F)$ consisting of a ${\mathfrak g}_F$-regular functional $F\in {\mathfrak g}_F^*$ and a unitary representation $\Lambda$ of $G_F$ with differential $$D\Lambda = (\frac{2\pi i}{h}F + D\delta^F) \Id \quad
.$$ Remark that the last condition is equivalent to the assertion that $$\Lambda|_{(G_F)_0} = \mult \delta^F\chi_F \quad,$$ what figures in the orbit method.
Denote by $R^{irr}(G_F)$ the subset of $R(G_F)$, consisting of the irreducible pseudo-characters. For a fixed $F\in {\mathfrak g}_F^*$, denote $$R(G_F,F) := \{ (\Lambda,F) \in R(G_F); D\Lambda = (\frac{2\pi
i}{h}F + \delta ^F)\Id \}$$ and $$R^{irr}(G_F,F) := R(G_F,F) \cap
R^{irr}(G_F).$$ The Weyl group $$W(G,A) := {\mathcal N} _G(A)/A$$ acts on both $R(G_F)$ and $R^{irr}(G_F)$.
Recall [*Harish-Chandra construction of $\pi(\Lambda,F)$*]{} : Consider the characters of type $$\xi_{\alpha}(.) := \exp{\langle
\alpha,.\rangle}$$ for each $\alpha\in\Delta$. Let us denote $${\mathbf F}
:= \{ x\in G_F ; x \enskip centralizers \enskip {\mathfrak m}\enskip and
\enskip |\xi_{\alpha}| = 1, \forall \alpha \in \Delta \}.$$ Then $$G_F :=
{\mathbf F}(G_F)_0 := {\mathbf F} \ltimes (G_F)_0,$$ $$G_F \cap G_0 =
(G_F)_0$$ and $${\mathbf F}(G_F)_0 = {\mathbf F} \ltimes (G_F)_0.$$ Denote $${\mathfrak k_{\mathfrak m}} = (({\mathfrak g}_F)_{\mathbb C}
\oplus \bigoplus_ {\alpha\in\Delta_{{\mathfrak m},c}} {\mathfrak
g}^{\alpha}) \cap {\mathfrak g}$$ and $K_{M_0}$ the corresponding analytic subgroup. Let us denote $\pi^{M_0} (F)$ the irreducible unitary representation of $M_0$, which is square-integrable modulo the center of $M_0$, and which is associated with $F$. This representation, following Harish-Chandra is characterized by the following condition.
[*The restriction $\pi^{G_0}(F)|_{K_{M_0}}$ contains the ( finite dimensional ) irreducible unitary representation of $K_{M_0}$ with the dominant weight $ \frac{2\pi i}{h}F +D\delta^F$ with respect to $\Delta^+_{{\mathfrak m},c}$, as a minimal $K_{M_0}$-type*]{}
Now a representation $\pi^{{\mathbf F}M_0}(\Lambda,F)$ of ${\mathbf F}M_0
:= {\mathbf F}\ltimes M_0$ can be constructed as follows $$\pi^{{\mathbf
F}M_0}(\Lambda,F)(y.x) := \Lambda(y) \otimes \pi^{M_0}(F) (x), \forall
x\in M_0,y\in {\mathbf F} \quad .$$Let $P = MN$ be a parabolic subgroup of $G$ with the Levi component $M$ and the unipotent radical $N$, $$M =
{\mathbf F}M_0 = {\mathbf F}M_0 \quad,$$ $$P = MN = ({\mathbf F}M_0)
\ltimes N \quad.$$ Define now $$\pi(\Lambda,F) := \Ind^G_{{\mathbf F}M_0
\ltimes N}(\pi^{{\mathbf F}M_0} \otimes \Id _N) \quad.$$ Recall that [*if $\Lambda$ is is irreducible and $F$ is ${\mathfrak g}_F$-regular, the representation $\pi(\Lambda,\lambda)$ is irreducible.*]{}
Now we have $$\Lambda\in R^{irr}(G_F,F) = X_G^{irr}(F){\buildrel 1-1
\over \longleftrightarrow} \tilde{X}^{irr}(F).$$ This means that there exists a unique $\tau = \sigma\chi_F \in \widehat{G_F}$, with $\sigma \in
\hat{M}_{disc}$, such that $$\tau|_{P_0} = \mult(\chi_F\delta^F)$$ and $\Lambda = \tau\delta^F$, $$\pi(\tau\delta^F,F) = \Ind(G;{\mathfrak
p}_{\mathbb C},P ,\tau\chi_F).$$
The restrictions of $F$ to the radical ${}^rG_F$ and unipotent radical ${}^uG_F$ are equal to the split torus $A$, with Lie algebra ${\mathfrak a} \cong {\mathbb R}^r$ and therefore the reductions to the radical and unipotent radical of $P$ give the same results as the above exposed ones.
The U(1)-covering of the stabilizer $G_F=MA$ is $G_F^{U(1)}
= {\mathbb S}^1 \times \dots \times {\mathbb S}^1 \times
\Mp^c_{2(n-r)}({\mathbb R})$
Lifting to the ${\mathbb Z}/(2)$- and $U(1)$- coverings we obtain the Shale-Weil representations of the symplectic groups $\Sp_{2n}({\mathbb R})$.
Up to conjugation, the maximal parabolic subgroups are of the form $$\left(
\begin{matrix}
\cos\theta & \begin{matrix}0 &\dots &0 & 0 & \dots & 0 \end{matrix} &
-\sin\theta\\
\begin{matrix}0\\ \vdots\\ 0\\ 0\\ \vdots\\ 0 \end{matrix} & \Id
&\begin{matrix} 0\\ \vdots\\ 0\\ 0\\
\vdots\\ 0\end{matrix} \\
\sin\theta & \begin{matrix}0 &\dots &0 & 0 & \dots & 0 \end{matrix} &
\cos\theta
\end{matrix}
\right).
\left(
\begin{matrix}
1 & \begin{matrix}x_1 &\dots &x_n & y_1 & \dots & y_n \end{matrix} & z\\
\begin{matrix}0\\ \vdots\\ 0\\ 0\\ \vdots\\ 0 \end{matrix} & \Sp_{2(n-1)}
&\begin{matrix} -y_1\\ \vdots\\ -y_n\\ x_1\\
\vdots\\ x_n\end{matrix} \\
0 & \begin{matrix}0 &\dots &0 & 0 & \dots & 0 \end{matrix} & 1
\end{matrix}
\right)$$ and therefore the construction gives us the representation of degenerate principal series considered by S. T. Lee in [@lee].
For the maximal parabolic subgroups $P = ({\mathbb S}^1
\times \Sp_{2(n-1)}({\mathbb R}))\ltimes ({\mathbb R}^{2n}\times {\mathbb
R})$ the corresponding degenerate principal series representations can be realized in the space of homogeneous functions of 2n variables.
Acknowledgments {#acknowledgments .unnumbered}
===============
This work was completed during the stay of the first author as a visiting mathematician at the Abdus Salam International Centre for Theoretical Physics, Trieste, Italy. He would like to thank the Abdus Salam ICTP for the hospitality, without which this work would not have been possible and the IMU Commission of Development and Exchange for a generous grant.
This work is supported in part by the Abdus Salam International Centre for Theoretical Physics, Trieste, Italy, the IMU Commission on Development and Exchange and the Vietnam National Foundation for Research in Fundamental Sciences.
[10]{}
Do Ngoc Diep, *A survey of noncommutative geometry methods for group algebras*, J. of Lie Theory, **3**(1993), 149-176.
Do Ngoc Diep, *Multidimensional quantization and degenerate principal series*, Vietnam J. of Math. **23**(1995), 127-132.
Do Ngoc Diep, *Non-commutative Geometry Methods for Group C\*-Algebras*, to appear in [*Pitman Research Notes in Mathematics Series*]{}.
M. Duflo, *Théorie de Mackey pour les groupes de Lie algébriques*, Acta Math. **149**(1982), 153-213.
Tran Dao Dong, *On the globalization over U(1)-covering of Zuckermann $({\mathfrak g},K)$ modules*, Tap Chi Toan hoc (Vietnam J. of Math.), **19**(1991), No 1, 60-72.
S. T. Lee, *Degenerate principal series representations of $\Sp(2n,{\mathbb R})$*, Compositio Mathematica, **103**(1996), 123-151.
W. Schmid and J. A. Wolf, *Geometric quantization and derived functor modules for semi-simples Lie groups*, Preprint MSRI Berkeley, California; J. Funct. Anal.
D. Vogan, *Noncommutative algebras and unitary representations*, in [*The Mathematical Heritage of Hermann Weyl*]{}, Proc. Symp. Pure Math. vol. **48**(1988), Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI, 35-60.
Tran Vui, *Multidimensional quantization and U(1)-coverings*, Acta mathematica Vietnamica, **15**(1990), No 2, 35-55.
H. W. Wong, *Dolbeault cohomologies and Zuckermann modules associated with finite rank representations*, Ph. D. Diss., Harvard Univ., 1992.
[^1]: The first author was supported in part by a generous Grant from The IMU Exchange Commission on Development and the Abdus Salam ICTP
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'Docking is an important tool in computational drug discovery that aims to predict the binding pose of a ligand to a target protein through a combination of pose scoring and optimization. A scoring function that is differentiable with respect to atom positions can be used for both scoring and gradient-based optimization of poses for docking. Using a differentiable grid-based atomic representation as input, we demonstrate that a scoring function learned by training a convolutional neural network (CNN) to identify binding poses can also be applied to pose optimization. We also show that an iteratively-trained CNN that includes poses optimized by the first CNN in its training set performs even better at optimizing randomly initialized poses than either the first CNN scoring function or AutoDock Vina.'
author:
- |
Matthew Ragoza\
Computational & Systems Biology\
University of Pittsburgh\
Pittsburgh, PA 15213\
`[email protected]`\
Lillian Turner\
Department of Computer Science\
University of Pittsburgh\
Pittsburgh, PA 15213\
`[email protected]`\
David Ryan Koes\
Computational & Systems Biology\
University of Pittsburgh\
Pittsburgh, PA 15213\
`[email protected]`\
bibliography:
- 'biblio.bib'
title: 'Ligand Pose Optimization with Atomic Grid-Based Convolutional Neural Networks'
---
Introduction
============
A primary goal of structure-based drug design is to use the known three-dimensional structures of target proteins and ligands to discover new active compounds. One technique for this is virtual screening, in which a target structure is scored with molecules from a large database to identify potential actives *in silico*. While orders of magnitude faster and cheaper than testing with experimental assays, virtual screening still has significant issues that limit hit rates (true actives per molecule screened) [@shoichet2004]. Virtual screening relies on docking to predict the conformation of each molecule when bound to the target in a stable complex, so its success is highly dependent on the accuracy of the binding poses and scores predicted by the underlying docking method.
A common approach to docking combines a scoring function with an optimization algorithm. The scoring function quantifies the favorability of the protein-ligand interactions in a single pose, which can be conceptualized as a point in a continuous conformation space. A stochastic global optimization algorithm is used to explore and sample this conformation space. Then, local optimization is employed on the sampled points, usually by iteratively adjusting the pose in search of a local extremum of the scoring function. Ideally, the scoring function is differentiable to support efficient gradient-based optimization.
With the abundant structural data now publicly available in online resources like the Protein Data Bank [@Berman2000pdb], machine learning finds a natural application in scoring function development for docking. In our previous work, we demonstrated that deep learning models, in particular convolutional neural networks, can effectively learn to discriminate between correct and incorrect binding poses when trained on three-dimensional protein-ligand structures [@ragoza2017cnn]. We also introduced an atomic grid representation for this task that ensured the convolutional neural network scoring function that was learned was differentiable with respect to atom positions.
In this paper, we extend our previous work with the following contributions:
- We train a convolutional neural network (CNN) scoring function to discriminate binding poses using the differentiable atomic grid format as input. Then, we optimize a set of randomized poses by maximizing the binding class output of the CNN using its gradient with respect to ligand atom positions.
- We implement an iterative procedure where we extend the training set with the optimized poses and subsequently train an additional CNN scoring function with this extended training set. We also use the iteratively-trained CNN to optimize the randomized poses.
- We compare poses optimized with a basic CNN and an iteratively-trained CNN as described above to poses optimized with AutoDock Vina. [@Trott2010]
Related Work
============
A fundamental question in structure-based drug design is how to quantify the complex chemical interactions between proteins and small molecules that correlate with binding [@shoichet2004]. Protein-ligand scoring functions have been developed specifically for this task. Scoring functions map from a three-dimensional conformation of a protein and ligand to a single value estimating the strength of the interaction. The various types of scoring functions are often motivated by empirical [@Bohm1994score; @Eldridge1997; @Wang2002xscore; @Friesner2004glide; @Korb2009plants; @sminapaper] or knowledge-based [@Muegge1999; @Gohlke2000; @Mooij2005; @Ballester2010; @Huang2010; @Zhou2011] strategies. These are generally simple functions of weighted terms designed to represent important noncovalent features of binding, like electrostatic interactions and hydrophobic contact. AutoDock Vina [@Trott2010] is a popular open-source docking program with a scoring function that combines both approaches–it has a physically-inspired functional form that was parameterized to fit experimental binding data.
Machine learning has emerged as an additional, increasingly popular approach to scoring function design. Algorithms including random forests, support vector machines, and neural networks have all been applied to scoring problems in various contexts [@Ashtawy2015; @Sato2009; @Ballester2010; @zilian2013sfcscore; @jorissen2005; @schietgat2015predicting; @sminapaper; @deng2004; @chupakhin2013predicting; @durrant2015ml; @gonczarek2016; @durrant2010nnscore; @durrant2011nnscore; @wallach2015atomnet]. These have greater capacity to express nonlinear dependencies between chemical features [@li2014importance]. However, rigorous validation with carefully curated benchmarks is needed to mitigate sources of generalization error such as artificial enrichment and analogue bias [@Rohrer2009; @Kramer2010; @gabel2014beware; @wallach2015atomnet]. In addition, most of these machine learning techniques still rely on feature engineering, which may omit factors of binding not fully understood or represented in the chosen features.
In computer vision, deep learning has superseded traditional feature-based techniques. Convolutional neural networks (CNNs) have revolutionized image recognition, as evidenced by the remarkable performance increases achieved by winners of the ImageNet Large Scale Visual Recognition Challenge in recent years [@imagenet; @krizhevsky2012imagenet; @simonyan2015vgg; @szegedy2015going; @msdeepresidual]. Near-human level image recognition performance has been reached with deep convolutional neural networks through innovations in model architectures and training practices [@simonyan2015vgg; @szegedy2015going; @msdeepresidual; @srivastava2014dropout]. These models allow highly nonlinear functions to be learned directly from low-level data with minimal featurization. Instead, they infer a hierarchical structure of features that efficiently solves the training task [@lecun2015deep].
Deep learning has also made significant progress in computational drug discovery. It has been applied both to the generation of molecular fingerprints and the multi-task prediction of cheminformatic properties based on them [@ramsundar:2015; @DuvMacetal15nfp]. Convolutional neural networks trained on atomic grids have successfully learned scoring functions for binding prediction, pose discrimination, and affinity prediction [@ragoza2017cnn; @wallach2015atomnet]. Other work has trained convolutional neural networks to predict binding affinities or quantum mechanical energies and forces without using an atom grid [@gomes2017; @schutt2017]. These approaches instead use radially-pooled convolution filters on each atom. Thus, deep learning for drug discovery has mainly differed in how the chemical data are represented and in the type of scoring task.
Visualization has helped illuminate what deep neural networks learn to look for in their input, and in the process revealed some of their problematic tendencies [@mahendran2015understanding; @simonyan2013deep; @nguyen2015deep; @goodfellow2015]. Activation maximization is an approach to visualization that uses gradient optimization on the input space [@mahendran2015understanding; @simonyan2013deep]. When applied to an image recognition CNN, this generates novel images that emphasize what the model looks for in a particular class or feature it learned to identify. However, generated images do not appear natural unless constraints are imposed during the optimization process [@mahendran2015understanding]. Furthermore, this method allows the creation of adversarial examples–images that lie only slightly outside the training data distribution but nevertheless are incorrectly classified [@goodfellow2015].
A currently unexplored application of deep learning to drug discovery is gradient-based optimization of chemical structures. Activation maximization performed on a neural network scoring function is analogous to local pose optimization, which is fundamental to molecular docking. A convolutional neural network with a differentiable input representation can therefore be used for both the scoring and optimization components of docking [@ragoza2017cnn]. Poses generated in this manner are susceptible to the same pitfalls of activation maximization in the image domain, so constraints are needed to ensure that the optimized poses are physically realistic.
Methods
=======
In order to determine whether a CNN trained to discriminate binding poses could also effectively improve poses by gradient-based optimization, we utilized an iterative procedure involving two rounds of training and pose optimization. First, we trained a CNN to classify correct and incorrect binding poses and used it to optimize a set of randomly initialized poses. Then, we trained a second CNN that includes poses optimized by the first CNN in its training set. We used this iteratively-trained model to optimize the same initial random poses. Finally, we compared the poses optimized with each CNN to poses optimized with AutoDock Vina and assessed the ability of each method to improve randomized poses.
Training set
------------
All datasets were derived from the 2016 version of the PDBbind general set [@Wang2005pdbbind], which contains 13,308 complexes of ligands bound to target proteins from the Protein Data Bank [@Berman2000pdb] with structures determined by X-ray crystallography. Certain complexes were deemed unsuitable due to having unusually high energy or being unusually large. The internal energy of each ligand in the general set was calculated with Open Babel using the default MMFF94 force field. Those with energy greater than 10,000 kJ/mol were removed from the data set. The molecular weight was also calculated using Open Babel and ligands with weight greater than 1200 Da were removed. This resulted in a modified general set containing 12,482 structures. We then generated an initial training set by redocking the crystal structures with AutoDock Vina and taking approximately 20 of the top-ranked poses per target. We additionally included poses that resulted from local optimization of the crystal structure poses with AutoDock Vina, to ensure that each target had at least one correct binding pose in the training set while avoiding training directly on the crystal structures. Poses were labeled based on their root mean squared distance (RMSD) from the crystal pose. Any pose less than 2[Å]{} RMSD from the crystal pose was labeled as a binding pose, and any pose greater than 4[Å]{} RMSD was labeled as a non-binding pose. Poses between 2 and 4[Å]{} RMSD were considered ambiguous, and were not included in the training set. The distribution of poses in the training set can be seen in Figure \[init\_rmsd\_hist\] and Table \[training\_set\].
Random set
----------
In addition to the training set, we created a set of initial poses for optimization. This set consisted of the same 12,482 PDBbind structures as the training set, except that poses were generated by randomly sampling the conformation space of each ligand within a bounding box around the ligand in the crystal pose. We sampled 500 random poses per target, for a total of 6,241,000 poses. The RMSD distribution of these poses can be viewed in Figure \[init\_rmsd\_hist\].
![\[init\_rmsd\_hist\] RMSD distributions of the poses in the training set, which were used to develop CNN scoring functions, and the poses in the random set that served as the initial poses for optimization.](init_rmsd_hist){width="0.7\linewidth"}
per target overall
------------------- ------------ ---------
binding poses 1.98 24,727
non-binding poses 19.56 244,167
total poses 21.54 268,894
: \[training\_set\] Distribution of binding and non-binding poses in the training set.
Model architecture and training
-------------------------------
We adopted the CNN architecture described in the model optimization results of [@ragoza2017cnn], which consisted of a `MolGridData` layer, three modules of max pooling, convolution, and rectified linear activation layers, and finally a fully-connected layer with softmax output. The `MolGridData` layer used a 24 grid centered at the binding site with 0.5 resolution, and the same atom type scheme as in [@ragoza2017cnn] with the addition of a boron atom type. The convolution layers had 32, 64, and 128 filters respectively, and each had kernel size 3x3x3 and stride 1. The max pooling layers had kernel size 2x2x2 and stride 2. The fully-connected layer had 2 output classes, one for binding (low RMSD) and the other for non-binding (high RMSD), and the loss function was logistic loss with L2 regularization (`weight_decay` = 0.001). The CNN was implemented in Caffe [@jia2014caffe] and trained by stochastic gradient descent (SGD) with momentum and an inverse learning rate policy (`base_lr` = 0.01, `momentum` = 0.9, `gamma` = 0.001, `power` = 1). The training data order was shuffled each epoch and the classes were balanced within each batch of 50 poses. Additionally, each protein-ligand pose was rotated by a random amount and translated by a maximum of 2 along each axis prior to computing the atom grid. Models were trained for 100,000 iterations.
Pose optimization
-----------------
In order to optimize poses using the gradient of the trained CNN, we need the partial derivatives of the CNN output (for the binding class) with respect to atomic coordinates. Formally, our CNN scoring function $f$ takes an atomic grid $\bm{G}$ (a vector of 3-dimensional grids of atom density called channels, one for each atom type) as input, and outputs a binding score. The atomic grid is produced from a list of atomic coordinates and atom types representing a pose. For each atom coordinate $\bm{a}$, its partial derivative of the output score is given by the chain rule:
$$\frac{\partial f}{\partial \bm{a}} = \frac{\partial f}{\partial \bm{G}} \frac{\partial \bm{G}}{\partial \bm{a}}$$
Each atom only contributes density to the grid channel corresponding to its atom type, $\bm{G}_a$. The equation can be expanded into a summation over the grid points in that channel:
$$\frac{\partial f}{\partial \bm{a}} = \sum_{g \in \bm{G}_a} \frac{\partial f}{\partial g} \frac{\partial g}{\partial \bm{a}} \\$$
The partial derivative of $f$ with respect to each grid point $g \in \bm{G}_a$ is calculated as part of a backward pass in Caffe, so we need the derivative of the value of a grid point with respect to an atom’s position. The function that computes an atom’s density at a grid point is a function of the distance $d$ to the grid point and the Van der Waals radius $r$ of the atom:
$$g(d, r) =
\begin{cases}
e^{-\frac{2{d}^2}{{r}^2}} & 0 \leq d < r \\
\frac{4}{e^2r^2}{d}^2 - \frac{12}{e^2r}d + \frac{9}{e^2} & r \leq d < 1.5r \\
0 & d \geq 1.5r \\
\end{cases} \\$$
$$\frac{\partial g}{\partial d} =
\begin{cases}
-\frac{4d}{r^2}e^{\frac{-2{d}^2}{{r}^2}} & 0 \leq d \leq r \\
\frac{8}{e^2r^2}d - \frac{12}{e^2r} & r < d < 1.5r \\
0 & d \geq 1.5r \\
\end{cases} \\$$
Therefore, one last application of the chain rule results in the final equation in terms of atomic coordinates by including the derivative of the distance function as an additional factor:
$$\frac{\partial f}{\partial \bm{a}} = \sum_{g \in \bm{G}_a} \frac{\partial f}{\partial g} \frac{\partial g}{\partial d} \frac{\partial d}{\partial \bm{a}} \\$$
Applying this derivation, we computed the partial derivatives $\partial f/\partial \bm{a}$ for each pose in the random set and treated them as atomic forces affecting the ligand’s translational, rotational, and internal degrees of freedom. Then the Broyden-Fletcher-Goldfarb-Shanno algorithm (BFGS) was applied to seek a local maximum of the binding class output in conformation space. An early termination criteria was enforced whenever the improvement from one step of BFGS to the next was less than $1e{-5}$. We assessed the RMSD from the crystal pose before and after optimization to establish whether it successfully improved the pose by bringing it closer to the pose observed in the crystal structure.
Iterative training and pose optimization
----------------------------------------
Since the training set poses were biased by what AutoDock Vina considered plausible, the CNN was not trained on examples of physically unrealistic poses. We expected that it might predict that such poses were favorable conformations and optimize towards them. To compensate for this, after the initial round of training and pose optimization, an extended training set was constructed by augmenting the original training set with the poses generated by optimizing the random set with the CNN. This extended training set contained both Vina-docked poses and CNN-optimized random poses. A second CNN was trained on this extended training set, using the exact same training procedure as the first. Then the random set poses were optimized with the second CNN, again using the exact same optimization procedure as the first round. In the results and discussion, the first CNN is referred to as CNN1 and the iteratively-trained one is referred to as CNN2.
Results
=======
We evaluated the results of pose optimization using CNN1 and CNN2 and compared them with AutoDock Vina. None of the three methods consistently improved the random set poses by a large amount. Both Vina and CNN1 had positive mean change in RMSD ($\Delta$RMSD), while CNN2 had a small negative mean $\Delta$RMSD. The distributions of $\Delta$RMSD for each method had distinct shapes, and there were differences in the joint distributions of $\Delta$RMSD with initial RMSD.
![\[delta\_rmsd\_hist\] Distributions of $\Delta$RMSD from crystal pose after optimizing the random set poses using Vina, CNN1, and CNN2.](delta_rmsd_hist){width="0.7\linewidth"}
Vina CNN1 CNN2
------------------- ------------------- ------------------- ------------------------
all poses 0.902 $\pm$ 0.002 0.774 $\pm$ 0.002 **-0.071 $\pm$ 0.000**
binding poses 0.595 $\pm$ 0.030 2.031 $\pm$ 0.038 **0.103 $\pm$ 0.012**
ambiguous poses 0.925 $\pm$ 0.007 1.497 $\pm$ 0.007 **-0.254 $\pm$ 0.002**
non-binding poses 0.901 $\pm$ 0.002 0.719 $\pm$ 0.002 **-0.059 $\pm$ 0.000**
: \[opt\_results\] Mean $\Delta$RMSD from crystal pose for each of the optimization methods shown with standard error of the mean. Results are shown for all poses of the random set, as well as for subsets of poses based on initial RMSD. Binding poses were initially less than 2[Å]{} RMSD, ambiguous poses were between 2 and 4[Å]{} RMSD, and non-binding poses were greater than 4[Å]{} RMSD.
Optimization of poses with Vina and CNN1 did not tend to decrease the RMSD from the true binding poses. Table \[opt\_results\] shows that both methods increased the RMSD of randomly initialized poses on average, though CNN1 did so to a lesser extent than Vina ($\mu$ = 0.774 for CNN1 and $\mu$ = 0.902 for Vina). CNN2 was the only optimization method that decreased the RMSD of random poses on average ($\mu$ = -0.071). As seen in Figure \[delta\_rmsd\_hist\], the $\Delta$RMSD for all three methods of pose optimization is centered near zero, but the shapes of the distributions vary. The Vina distribution is the most dispersed ($\sigma$ = 3.445) and also the most symmetrical. The distribution of poses optimized with CNN1 has a higher peak around zero, less variance ($\sigma$ = 2.346) and more right skewness. The distribution of $\Delta$RMSD for CNN2 is the most concentrated of any method ($\sigma$ = 0.515), with nearly all poses only slightly increasing or decreasing in RMSD. The CNN2 distribution displays some left skewness as well.
The differences in pose optimization by each method are clarified further by considering the impact of initial RMSD. The poses can be categorized based on the labels used for constructing the training set: binding poses were initially less than 2[Å]{} RMSD, non-binding poses were greater than 4[Å]{} RMSD, and all other poses were ambiguous. As displayed in Table \[opt\_results\], Vina and CNN1 both increased the RMSD on average for all categories of poses, but exhibit opposite trends. Vina had the lowest mean $\Delta$RMSD for binding poses ($\mu$ = 0.595) and was worse at optimizing ambiguous and non-binding poses ($\mu$ = 0.925 for ambiguous and $\mu$ = 0.901 for non-binding). On the other hand, CNN1 performed the worst on binding poses ($\mu$ = 2.031) and comparatively better on ambiguous ($\mu$ = 1.497) and non-binding poses ($\mu$ = 0.719). Despite that CNN1 performed better than Vina overall, the advantage is only for non-binding poses–it did significantly worse than Vina when optimizing binding and ambiguous poses. CNN2 outperformed CNN1 and Vina in every category, and binding poses are the only ones that it did not improve on average ($\mu$ = 0.103). It was best at decreasing the RMSD of ambiguous poses ($\mu$ = -0.254) but it slightly decreased RMSD for non-binding poses as well ($\mu$ = -0.059). It is noteworthy that the overall best-optimized poses were ambiguous ones optimized with CNN2, especially since ambiguous poses were the hardest to optimize for Vina.
The effect of initial RMSD on $\Delta$RMSD is further analyzed in Figure \[delta\_rmsd\_corr\]. None of the methods show strong correlations between the $\Delta$RMSD and the initial RMSD, but the joint distributions have interesting characteristics. Both CNN1 and CNN2 display the expected strong peak at zero $\Delta$RMSD that is absent for Vina, but the peak is not constant with respect to initial RMSD. It appears to fade as the initial RMSD approaches zero for both of these methods, which would correspond with higher variance. This entails higher likelihood of CNN optimization significantly altering a pose if it starts closer to the crystal structure.
![\[delta\_rmsd\_corr\] Correlation of $\Delta$RMSD with initial RMSD for random set poses optimized by Vina, CNN1 and CNN2. ](delta_rmsd_corr){width="\linewidth"}
Discussion
==========
While none of the methods effectively optimized the majority of the random set poses, there is reason to believe that the iterative training procedure solved some of the issues that prevented optimization in CNN1. Pose optimization with a CNN depends on the decision boundary the model learns during training, which in turn depends on the distribution of the training set. The original training set was comprised only of crystal poses redocked with Vina. These poses were biased towards certain physically realizable regions of the conformation space, owing to the physically-inspired form of the Vina scoring function. Therefore, CNN1 was not trained to recognize poses that would be considered physically improbable by Vina, leaving important regions of the conformation space undetermined. This lead to some of the poses moving in physically unrealistic directions when optimized by CNN1, only limited by the fact that we optimized on the ligand degrees of freedom rather than allowing atoms to move completely independently along their gradients. An example of this is seen in Figure \[3hfv\_7\], where the pose optimized by CNN1 overlaps itself as well as the protein. We anticipated these non-physical optimized poses–one of the goals of iterative training was to see if CNN2 would learn to account for important features like steric effects that were lacking in the Vina-docked poses. In Figure \[3hfv\_7\], CNN2 successfully avoids the steric clashes that CNN1 produced, and instead manages to flip the pose to its correct orientation and bring it close to the correct binding conformation.
Iterative training may have helped the CNN to better define the regions of conformation space not covered by the original training set, but this also prevented the model from significantly altering the poses. This is evidenced by the reduction in variance of the distribution of $\Delta$RMSD from CNN1 to CNN2. The score surface of CNN1 was probably rougher in the regions of conformation space where the random poses were found. This would imply that the random poses had larger gradients for CNN1, which lead to larger magnitude changes in RMSD. Since CNN2 was trained on these poses, it predicted them with higher confidence, leading to a smoother, flatter score surface in the vicinity of the non-ambiguous random poses. This explanation is consistent with the theoretical characteristics of the training task. The CNNs were trained using a softmax logistic loss in which the only region of conformation space that does not induce an extrema in the softmax logistic loss layer is between 2 and 4[Å]{} RMSD. The more generally accurate the score predictions of such a model, the sharper the decision boundary, and the closer the gradients are to zero for any pose not close to the decision boundary. This hypothesis is supported by data in Table \[opt\_results\] showing that the poses that were optimized best by CNN2 were the ambiguous ones. The peak around zero $\Delta$RMSD by CNN1 and CNN2 for high initial RMSD poses observed in Figure \[delta\_rmsd\_corr\] can be explained by this theory as well, since these poses would be far away from the decision boundary and therefore have small gradients. It seems that the scoring and optimization tasks as we defined them are mutually incompatible for the broadest class of poses.
![A randomized pose of target 3HFV optimized with Vina (left), CNN1 (middle), and CNN2 (right). The crystal pose is shown in green, the initial pose is shown in magenta, and the optimized poses are blue.[]{data-label="3hfv_7"}](3hfv_7_vinamin "fig:"){width=".33\textwidth"}![A randomized pose of target 3HFV optimized with Vina (left), CNN1 (middle), and CNN2 (right). The crystal pose is shown in green, the initial pose is shown in magenta, and the optimized poses are blue.[]{data-label="3hfv_7"}](3hfv_7_cnnmin "fig:"){width=".33\textwidth"}![A randomized pose of target 3HFV optimized with Vina (left), CNN1 (middle), and CNN2 (right). The crystal pose is shown in green, the initial pose is shown in magenta, and the optimized poses are blue.[]{data-label="3hfv_7"}](3hfv_7_cnnmin2 "fig:"){width=".33\textwidth"}
In order to improve pose optimization with a CNN scoring function, a different training task for classifying poses would be beneficial. For example, a network could be trained to predict the RMSD directly, a different loss function could be used, or the binary classification could otherwise be modified to incorporate some notion of the energy landscape. The resulting scoring function would ideally be less prone to vanishing gradients, and potentially better at optimizing poses greater than 4[Å]{} RMSD from the crystal structure. Another important point to remember regarding our method is the insight from [@nguyen2015deep] that the iterative training approach is not enough to eliminate adversarial examples. Though CNN2 may have successfully smoothed the regions of conformation space that were indeterminate for CNN1, it is feasible that CNN2 would not generalize to a different set of randomized poses, or a set of poses generated by some other sampling method. Rather than continuously extending the training set with optimized examples, the solution put forth in computer vision is to incorporate the generation of novel training examples into the architecture of the model itself. This is accomplished by simultaneously learning a discriminative model and a generative model in what is known as a generative adversarial network (GAN) [@goodfellow2014gan]. A future direction for this work is to apply a GAN to pose prediction. Such a model could potentially learn not only to discriminate binding poses, but to generate realistic atom grids from scratch. This could be a new way of sampling poses, but it could also go beyond that to the *de novo* design of ligands that optimally activate the scoring function.
This work represents a first attempt at generating optimal ligand binding poses using the gradient of a convolutional neural network scoring function. Though the results imply that changes to the training procedure are needed before these models can be effectively incorporated into off-the-shelf docking software, there is enormous potential for further exploration and improvement. We plan to continue the investigation of deep learning for computational drug discovery, and in the hopes that others do as well we include all of our code and models as part of gnina, our open-source docking software, available at <https://github.com/gnina>.
Acknowledgements {#acknowledgements .unnumbered}
================
This work is supported by R01GM108340 from the National Institute of General Medical Sciences and by a GPU donation from the NVIDIA corporation.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'One of the main scientific objectives of the ongoing [[*Fermi*]{}]{} mission is unveiling the nature of the unidentified $\gamma$-ray sources (UGSs). Despite the large improvements of [[*Fermi*]{}]{} in the localization of $\gamma$-ray sources with respect to the past $\gamma$-ray missions, about one third of the [[*Fermi*]{}]{}-detected objects are still not associated to low energy counterparts. Recently, using the Wide-field Infrared Survey Explorer ([[*WISE*]{}]{}) survey, we discovered that blazars, the rarest class of Active Galactic Nuclei and the largest population of $\gamma$-ray sources, can be recognized and separated from other extragalactic sources on the basis of their infrared (IR) colors. Based on this result, we designed an association method for the $\gamma$-ray sources to recognize if there is a blazar candidate within the positional uncertainty region of a generic $\gamma$-ray source. With this new IR diagnostic tool, we searched for $\gamma$-ray blazar candidates associated to the UGS sample of the second [[*Fermi*]{}]{} $\gamma$-ray catalog (2FGL). We found that our method associates at least one $\gamma$-ray blazar candidate as a counterpart each of 156 out of 313 UGSs analyzed. These new low-energy candidates have the same IR properties as the blazars associated to $\gamma$-ray sources in the 2FGL catalog.'
author:
- 'F. Massaro, R. D’Abrusco, G. Tosti, M. Ajello, A. Paggi, D. Gasparrini.'
title: 'Unidentified gamma-ray sources: hunting $\gamma$-ray blazars'
---
Introduction {#sec:intro}
============
More than half of the $\gamma$-ray sources detected by [*Compton*]{} Gamma-Ray Observatory (CGRO), and present in the third EGRET (3EG) catalog were not associated with known counterparts seen at low energies [@hartman99]. Whatever the nature of the unidentified $\gamma$-ray sources (UGSs), these objects could provide a significant contribution to the isotropic gamma-ray background (IGRB) [e.g., @abdo10a]. Solving the puzzle of the origin of the UGSs, together with a better knowledge of other IGRB contributions estimated from known sources, is crucial also to constrain exotic high-energy physics phenomena, such as dark matter signatures, or new classes of sources.
With the advent of the [[*Fermi*]{}]{} mission the localization of $\gamma$-ray sources has significantly improved with respect to the past $\gamma$-ray missions, thus simplifying the task of finding statistically probably counterparts at lower energies. New association methods also have been developed and applied, so that the number of UGSs has significantly decreased with respect to the 3EG catalog [@hartman99]; however, according to the second [[*Fermi*]{}]{} $\gamma$-ray catalog (2FGL), about one third of detected gamma-ray sources in the energy range above 100 MeV is still unassociated [@abdo11]. It is worth noting that the most commonly detected sources in the $\gamma$-ray sky, since the epoch of CGRO, are blazars, one of the most enigmatic classes of Active Galactic Nuclei (AGNs) [e.g., @hartman99]. Within the 2FGL, there are 576 UGSs out of a total number of 1873 sources detected, while among the 1297 associated sources, $\sim$ 1000 have been associated with AGNs [@abdo11; @ackermann11a].
Blazar emission extends over the whole electromagnetic spectrum and is generally interpreted as non-thermal radiation arising from particles accelerated in relativistic jets closely aligned to the line of sight [@blandford78]. They come in two flavors: the BL Lac objects, with featureless optical spectra or only with absorption lines of galactic origin and weak and narrower emission lines, and the Flat Spectrum Radio Quasars, with a optical spectra showing broad emission lines. In the following, we indicate the former as BZBs and the latter as BZQs, respectively, according to the ROMA-BZCAT[^1] nomenclature [@massaro09; @massaro10; @massaro11a].
The first step to improve our knowledge on the origin of the UGSs and of their associations with low-energy counterparts, is to recognize those that could have a blazar within their $\gamma$-ray positional uncertainty regions.
Recently, we developed a procedure to identify blazars using their infrared (IR) colors within the preliminary data release of the Wide-field Infrared Survey Explorer ([[*WISE*]{}]{}) survey [@wright10] [^2]. In particular, we discovered that the IR color space distribution of the extragalactic sources dominated by non-thermal emission, as blazars, can be used to distinguish such sources from other classes of galaxies and/or AGNs and/or galactic sources [@massaro11b hereinafter Paper I]. We also found that $\gamma$-ray emitting blazar delineate a narrow, distinct region of the IR color-color plots, denominated as the [[*WISE*]{}]{} Gamma-ray blazar Strip ([[*WGS*]{}]{}) [@dabrusco12 hereinafter Paper II]. There is a peculiar correspondence between the IR and $\gamma$-ray spectral properties of the blazars detected in the 2FGL (Paper II). Then, on the basis of our previous investigation of these IR-$\gamma$-ray properties of blazars, we built a parametrization of the [[*WGS*]{}]{} to evaluate how many AGNs of Uncertain type (AGUs) have a counterpart associated with a $\gamma$-ray blazar candidate in the 2FGL [@massaro12a hereinafter Paper III].
In this paper, we present a new association method based on the IR colors of the $\gamma$-ray emitting blazars and the [[*WGS*]{}]{} parametrization. Then we apply this new association procedure to search for $\gamma$-ray blazar candidates within the $\gamma$-ray positional error regions of the UGSs. One of the main advantages of our method is that it reduces the number of potential counterparts for the UGSs and provides their positions with arcsec resolution, thus restricting the search regions for future followup observations necessary to confirm their blazar nature. Unfortunately, only a restricted number of UGSs falls within the portion of the sky currently covered by the IR observations of the [[*WISE*]{}]{} Preliminary Data Release corresponding to $\sim$ 57% of the whole sky. Then, when the [[*WISE*]{}]{} survey will be completely released in March 2012[^3], it will be possible to apply the method to the whole sky, even in regions not covered at radio, optical and X-ray frequencies, where the other methods for establishing counterpart associations for the 2FGL cannot be used.
This paper is organized as follows: in Section \[sec:sample\] we describe the samples used in our investigation; in Section \[sec:method\] we illustrate the new association method; then, in Section \[sec:ugs\] we apply the new association technique to the UGSs and describe the subset of sources that has been associated with $\gamma$-ray blazar candidates. In Section \[sec:comparison\], we also compare our results with those found adopting different statistical approaches for a subsample of UGSs. Finally, conclusions are presented in Section \[sec:summary\].
The sample selection {#sec:sample}
====================
To build our association procedure we considered a sample of blazars selected from the combination of the ROMA-BZCAT [@massaro09; @massaro10] and the 2FGL [@abdo11], as described and used in Paper II and used in Paper III to parametrize the [[*WGS*]{}]{}, denoted the 2FB sample. It contains 284 $\gamma$-ray blazars (135 BZBs and 149 BZQs) that have optical and radio counterparts as reported in the ROMA-BZCAT, and also having a [[*WISE*]{}]{} counterpart within 2.4 $^{\prime\prime}$ radius (see Paper I and III). The blazars in the 2FB sample are detected by [[*WISE*]{}]{} with a signal to noise ratio higher than 7 in at least one band and do not have any upper limits in all the [[*WISE*]{}]{} bands. We excluded from our analysis all the blazars with a [[*Fermi*]{}]{} analysis flag, according to the 2FGL and the 2LAC [@abdo11; @ackermann11a]. The blazars of uncertain type (BZUs) have been excluded from our analysis, while the BL Lac candidates have been considered as BZBs. More details on the 2FB sample and the source selections are given in Papers II and III.
Then, we applied our association procedure to the sample of the UGS defined as follows. The number of UGSs in the 2FGL is 576, but only 410 of these $\gamma$-ray sources lie in the region of the sky available in the [[*WISE*]{}]{} Preliminary Data Release. These sources can be analyzed according to our method based on the IR [[*WISE*]{}]{} colors. We adopted a more conservative selection restricting our sample to 313 UGSs out of 410, excluding sources with a [[*Fermi*]{}]{} analysis flag, since these sources might not be real and/or could be affected by analysis artifacts [see e.g. @abdo11 for more details].
The [[*WGS*]{}]{} association method {#sec:method}
====================================
In Paper III, working on the AGUs, we built the [[*WGS*]{}]{} parametrization to verify if the low-energy counterparts of the AGUs, associated in 2FGL, is consistent with the [[*WGS*]{}]{}, so being a $\gamma$-ray blazar candidate. With respect to the previous analysis, the following proposed association procedure aims at providing new $\gamma$-ray blazar candidates, possible counterparts of the UGSs, that lie within their $\gamma$-ray positional uncertainty regions, on the basis of our previous results on the IR-$\gamma$-ray blazar properties. In this Section, we report the basic details of our [[*WGS*]{}]{} parametrization together with the definition of different classes of $\gamma$-ray blazar candidates. Then we describe our new association procedure.
The [[*WGS*]{}]{} parametrization {#sec:parameter}
---------------------------------
In Paper II, we found that $\gamma$-ray emitting blazars (i.e., those in the 2FB sample) cover a narrow region in the 3D color space built with the [[*WISE*]{}]{} magnitudes delineating the so-called [[*WISE*]{}]{} Gamma-ray blazar Strip ([[*WGS*]{}]{}).
In Paper III, using the 2FB sample, we presented the parametrization of the [[*WGS*]{}]{} based on the [*strip parameter*]{} $s$. This parameter, ranging between 0 and 1, provides a measure of the distance between the [[*WGS*]{}]{} and the location of a [[*WISE*]{}]{} source in the three dimensional IR color parameter space. For example, sources with high values of $s$ (e.g., $\geq$ 0.50) are consistent with the [[*WGS*]{}]{}. We also distinguished between [[*WISE*]{}]{} sources that lie in the subregion of the [[*WGS*]{}]{}occupied by the BZBs and BZQs using the $s_b$ and $s_q$ parameters separately (Paper III).
The IR color space has been built using the archival data available in the 2011 [[*WISE*]{}]{} Preliminary Data Release, in four different bands centered at 3.4, 4.6, 12, and 22 $\mu$m with an angular resolution of 6.1, 6.4, 6.5 & 12.0$^{\prime\prime}$, respectively and achieving 5$\sigma$ point source sensitivities of 0.08, 0.11, 1 and 6 mJy. In addition, the absolute (radial) differences between [[*WISE*]{}]{} source-peaks and “true" astrometric positions anywhere on the sky are no larger than $\sim$ 0.50, 0.26, 0.26, and 1.4$^{\prime\prime}$ in the four [[*WISE*]{}]{} bands, respectively [@cutri11][^4].
$\gamma$-ray blazar candidate definition {#sec:association}
----------------------------------------
Based on the $s_b$ and $s_q$ distributions of all [[*WISE*]{}]{} sources in different random regions of the sky, at both high and low Galactic latitudes (Paper III), the critical threshold of the $s$ parameters, used to define the above classes, have been arbitrarily determined on the basis of the following considerations:
- [class A: [[*WISE*]{}]{} sources with 0.24 $<s_b<$ 1.00 and 0.38 $<s_q<$ 1.00;]{}
- [class B: [[*WISE*]{}]{} sources with 0.24 $<s_b<$ 1.00 or 0.38 $<s_q<$ 1.00;]{}
- [class C: [[*WISE*]{}]{} sources with 0.10 $<s_b<$ 0.24 and 0.14 $<s_q<$ 0.38.]{}
All the [[*WISE*]{}]{} sources with $s_b<$0.10 or $s_q<$0.14 are considered [*outliers*]{} of the [[*WGS*]{}]{} and, for this reason, discarded. All the above thresholds are then used to select the [[*WISE*]{}]{} sources that are associated to the UGSs and that can be considered potential $\gamma$-ray blazar candidates.
The above choice of threshold have been adopted for the analysis of the $\gamma$-ray blazar content within the AGUs (Paper III). From the distributions of the $s_b$ and $s_q$ parameters for the generic IR [[*WISE*]{}]{} sources, we note that 99.9% of them have $s_b<$0.24 and $s_q<$0.38. Then, for the BZBs in the 2FB sample only 6 sources out of 135 have $s_b<$ 0.24, and in the case of the BZQs only 33 sources out of 149 show $s_q$ values lower than 0.38. We also note that 99.0% of the generic IR [[*WISE*]{}]{} sources have $s_b<$0.10 and only 2 BZBs are below this value, while 97.2% of the generic IR [[*WISE*]{}]{} sources together with only 5 BZQs out of 149 have $s_q<$0.14.
The [[*WISE*]{}]{} objects of class A are the most probable blazar counterpart of the unidentified $\gamma$-ray sources, because their WISE colors are more consistent with the [[*WGS*]{}]{} in both the BZBs and BZQs subregions than the colors of sources of class B or C. Based on the distributions of the $s_b$ and $s_q$ parameters for [[*WISE*]{}]{} sources in random region of the sky, the sources of class A are, as expected, rarer than the sources belonging to the other two classes (see Section \[sec:ugs\] for more details).
The association procedure {#sec:procedure}
-------------------------
![The position of the region of comparison (ROC) for a generic [[*Fermi*]{}]{} source, with respect to the searching region (SR) centered on the position reported in the 2FGL catalog. The radius of both regions is $R=\theta_{999}$ and they are separated by 2.5$\sqrt{2}$ deg of distance.[]{data-label="fig:roi"}](./roi.pdf){height="6.8cm" width="9.5cm"}
For each unidentified $\gamma$-ray source we defined the [*searching region*]{} (SR) corresponding to a circular region of radius $R$=$\theta_{999}$, centered on the position given in the 2FGL, where $\theta_{999}$ is the major axis of the elliptical source location region corresponding to the 99.9% level of confidence. In addition, we also considered a [*region of comparison*]{} (ROC) defined as a circular region of the same radius $R$, but lying at 2.5$\sqrt{2}$ deg angular distance from the 2FGL position. A schematic view of the locations of the SR and the ROC is shown in Figure \[fig:roi\].
Successively, for every unassociated gamma-ray source in the 2FGL catalog, we ranked all the [[*WISE*]{}]{} sources within its SR on the basis of the classification described above and we selected as $\gamma$-ray blazar candidates the positionally closest sources with the highest class. In our analysis we considered only sources of the [[*WISE*]{}]{} preliminary catalog detected in all the four [[*WISE*]{}]{} bands, without any upper limit.
The ROCs are used to assess the association confidence that a [[*WISE*]{}]{} source in a random region in the sky, where no $\gamma$-ray source is located, has IR colors compatible with the WGS. To provide an estimate of the association confidence, we considered the distribution of the strip parameters $s_b$ and $s_q$ for all the [[*WISE*]{}]{} sources within each ROC associated to an UGS. For these [[*WISE*]{}]{} sources we estimated the confidence $\pi$ that a generic [[*WISE*]{}]{} source belongs to the same class as the $\gamma$-ray blazar candidate selected within the SR. Thus the $\pi$ value will be expressed as the ratio between the number of [[*WISE*]{}]{} sources of a particular class and the total number of [[*WISE*]{}]{} sources that lie in the ROC.
Testing the association method with blazars {#sec:test}
-------------------------------------------
We performed a test to evaluate the completeness of our association method searching for the $\gamma$-ray blazar candidates that are potential counterparts of the 2FB sample, and verifying whether our procedure correctly finds the same associations as in the 2FB sample.
Assuming that the 284 blazars in the 2FB sample have been associated to the real low-energy counterparts, we run our association procedure considering the IR colors for all the [[*WISE*]{}]{} sources within the SRs for all these sources. We found that for the population of BZBs, consisting of 135 BL Lacs, our association procedure is able to recognize 123 sources as the 2FGL, 62 of class A, and 61 of class B. Within the remaining 12 BZBs, 3 objects are associated to WISE sources of higher class than the original 2FGL associated sources, while for 9 sources we only found outliers of the [[*WGS*]{}]{} within their SRs.
For the BZQs, our method finds the same associations as in the 2FGL catalog for 124 of the sources, with 85 sources classified as class A, 32 classified as class B and 7 as class C. For the remaining 25 sources, we found 11 outliers and 14 $\gamma$-ray sources associated to a [[*WISE*]{}]{} source with higher classes.
Our procedure re-associates 247 out of 284 $\gamma$-ray blazars of the 2FB sample in agreement with the 2FGL analysis, with a completeness of 87.0% (91.0% for the BZBs and 83.0% for the BZQs). We found that 7.1% are outliers of the [[*WGS*]{}]{}, but this number can be expected because the [[*WGS*]{}]{} parametrization was built to require at least 90% of the 2FB sources inside each 2-dimensional [[*WGS*]{}]{} projection (see Paper III for more details).
It is interesting to note that 17 out of 284 $\gamma$-ray sources in the 2FGL have a “better", on the basis of our method, $\gamma$-ray blazar candidate within the SR. These associations need to be verified with followup observations, as for example in the X-rays, and a deeper analysis to check their reliability relative to the 2FGL association method will be performed in a forthcoming paper[@massaro12b].
Results {#sec:ugs}
=======
The application of our association procedure to the 313 UGSs selected from the 2FGL (see Section \[sec:sample\] for more details), led to the associations of 156 UGSs with a low-energy candidate $\gamma$-ray blazar counterpart within their SRs. According to our criteria (see Section \[sec:association\]), these 156 new associations consist of 44 sources of class A, 74 of class B and 38 of class C. Thus our procedure finds associations with likely $\gamma$-ray blazar candidates for 49.8% of the UGSs analyzed. We also list of all the $\gamma$-ray blazar candidates with lower class for each UGSs, if more than one is present within the SRs. Among these 156 new associations, for 86 sources, 12 of class A, 43 of class B and 31 of class C, have only a single $\gamma$-ray blazar candidate within the SR. In Figure \[fig:strip\_pln1\] we show the [[*WISE*]{}]{} colors of the 156 $\gamma$-ray blazar candidates in comparison with those of the blazars in the 2FB sample for the \[3.4\]-\[4.6\]-\[12\] $\mu$m 2D projection of the [[*WGS*]{}]{}.
![The \[3.4\]-\[4.6\]-\[12\] $\mu$m 2D projection of the [[*WGS*]{}]{} is shown. Red dashed lines show the boundaries of the [[*WGS*]{}]{} used in our analysis (see Paper III for more details). The orange background filled circles are the blazars associated with the 2FGL constituting the 2FB sample while the balck filled circles indicate the 156 $\gamma$-ray blazars that have been associated by our procedure.[]{data-label="fig:strip_pln1"}](./strip_pln1.pdf){height="6.0cm" width="9.7cm"}
By restricting our sample of UGSs only to those at high Galactic latitudes, i.e. $|b|>$15$^\circ$, we found a $\gamma$-ray blazar candidate for 72 UGSs, 16 of class A, 29 of class B and 27 of class C; where for 34 out of these 74, the low energy counterpart associated with our method is univocal.
![The distribution of the Galactic latitude for all the UGSs analyzed in comparison with that for the 156 associated by our procedure.[]{data-label="fig:glat_distrib"}](./glat_distrib.pdf){height="6.0cm" width="9.7cm"}
In Figure \[fig:glat\_distrib\], we shown the distribution of the Galactic latitude (i.e., sin $b$ ) for all the UGSs analyzed in comparison with those 156 associated by our method. At high Galactic latitude, the method seems to be less efficient given the ratio between the number of UGSs analyzed and those associated. This could be due to the non uniform exposure of the archival [[*WISE*]{}]{} observations in the [[*WISE*]{}]{} Preliminary Data Release[^5], and will be re-analyzed once the whole [[*WISE*]{}]{} archive will be available. In addition, we note that our association method could be more efficient at low Galactic latitudes where the blazar catalogs, as the ROMA-BZCAT, are less complete [@massaro09].
We also remark that within the 313 regions of comparison chosen for the UGSs there are 55195 [[*WISE*]{}]{} sources, but only 49 of class A, 213 of class B and 129 of class C, all of them detected in all four [[*WISE*]{}]{} bands and with a signal to noise ratio higher than seven in at least one band, as the blazars in the 2FB sample. The distributions of the $s_b$ and $s_q$ parameters for all the 55195 [[*WISE*]{}]{} sources within the 313 ROCs are shown in Figure \[fig:histogram\]. A blind search of all the possible $\gamma$-ray blazar candidates in the [[*WISE*]{}]{} archive on the basis of the [[*WGS*]{}]{} properties will be performed once it will be completely available [@massaro12b]. However, the $s_b$ and $s_q$ distributions reported in Figure \[fig:histogram\] strongly suggest that the density of [[*WISE*]{}]{} blazar candidates is low over the sky.
![The distribution of the $s_b$ (black) and $s_q$ (red) parameters for all the 55195 [[*WISE*]{}]{} source within all the ROCs defined for the 313 UGSs analyzed. The vertical lines corresponds to the thresholds for the $s_b$ and $s_q$ parameters to determine the blazar classes (see Section \[sec:association\]).[]{data-label="fig:histogram"}](./histogram.pdf){height="6.0cm" width="9.7cm"}
In Table \[tab:example\] we show three cases of [[*WISE*]{}]{} sources that have been associated with our procedure to three UGSs. We report both the $s_b$ and $s_q$ values, the [[*WGS*]{}]{} class and the association confidence $\pi$. In this example, the source 2FGL J0038.8+6259 is associated to one [[*WISE*]{}]{} source of a class A, J003818.70+630605.0, that has been selected as a single $\gamma$-ray blazar candidate out of 791 [[*WISE*]{}]{} sources within its SR. The corresponding association confidence $\pi$, expressed in terms of number of sources with an higher $s_b$ or $s_q$ values than J003818.70+630605.0 within the region of comparison and estimated considering 830 [[*WISE*]{}]{} sources, is 2/830.
Similarly, the source 2FGL J0616.6+2425 has been associated to the [[*WISE*]{}]{} source J061609.79+241911.0, that belongs to class B with a low association confidence estimated on 5465 [[*WISE*]{}]{} sources in the region of comparison. The 2FGL source 2FGL JJ0312.8+2013 has a [[*WISE*]{}]{} class C source associated following our procedure, with a lower confidence of finding a similar source in a region of comparison where there are 512 [[*WISE*]{}]{} sources.
Within the 313 UGS analyzed there are 14 sources that have a variability index [@abdo11] higher than the value of 41.6 corresponding to the 99% of confidence that the source is variable. It is worth noting that 13 out of these 14 variable UGSs have been successfully associated here with a $\gamma$-ray blazar candidate, strongly supporting the blazar nature.
[|lrlcccc|]{} 2FGL & Sources & [[*WISE*]{}]{} & $s_b$ & $s_q$ & class & $\pi$\
name & in SR & name & & &\
J0038.8+6259 & 791 & J003818.70+630605.2 & 0.89 & 0.99 & A & 2/830\
J0616.6+2425 & 6021 & J061623.95+241809.2 & — & 0.57 & B & 1/5465\
J0312.8+2013 & 453 & J031223.00+200749.5 & 0.19 & 0.15 & C & 1/512\
\[tab:example\]
The entire list of the UGSs analyzed can be found in Table 2. For each UGS, we report all the $\gamma$-ray blazar candidates with their IR colors (i.e., $c_{12}$ = \[3.4\]-\[4.6\] $\mu$m, $c_{23}$ = \[4.6\]-\[12\] $\mu$m and $c_{34}$ = \[12\]-\[22\] $\mu$m, together with their errors, $\sigma_{12}$, $\sigma_{23}$, $\sigma_{34}$, respectively), the distances in arc seconds between the $\gamma$-ray position and the selected [[*WISE*]{}]{} source, the $s_b$ and $s_q$ values, the class and the association confidence $\pi$ that there is a [[*WISE*]{}]{} source of the same class within the ROC (see Section \[sec:association\]).
In addition, we found that there are 157 unidentified $\gamma$-ray sources that do not have clear $\gamma$-ray blazar counterpart within their SRs and are classified as outliers of the [[*WGS*]{}]{}. The lack of association for these sources could be due to a lower accuracy of the $\gamma$-ray position that might occur close to the Galactic plane or to the systematic uncertainties of the diffuse emission model used in the 2FGL analysis. The whole UGS sample will be reconsidered for associations with $\gamma$-ray blazar candidates when the all-sky [[*WISE*]{}]{} survey will be available.
Assuming that all the 2FB blazar associations are correct, on the basis of our test (see Section \[sec:test\]), we can argue that within our sample we would expect about 41 ($\sim$ 13.0%) not recognized low-energy counterparts, for a total of 197 $\gamma$-ray blazar candidates within the 313 UGSs analyzed.
Finally, it is worth stressing that our association procedure provides also interesting information on the sources that do not have a $\gamma$-ray blazar candidates in the SR. The absence of $\gamma$-ray blazar candidates selected according to our association procedure could direct to better use the follow-up resources for identifying other $\gamma$-ray source candidates. For example in the case of the unidentified $\gamma$-ray source: 2FGL J1446.8$-$4701 within the 1604 [[*WISE*]{}]{} sources that lie in its SR, we did not find any $\gamma$-ray blazar candidates. This source has been recently identified with the pulsar PSR 1446-4701 (see Public List of LAT-Detected Gamma-Ray Pulsars) [^6].
Comparison with other methods {#sec:comparison}
=============================
We note that among the 313 UGSs analyzed, there are 70 sources that were also unidentified according to the investigation performed in the first Fermi $\gamma$-ray catalog (1FGL), and 48 of them have been associated with a $\gamma$-ray blazar candidates in our analysis. In particular, a recent analysis of the 1FGL unidentified $\gamma$-ray sources has been carried out using two different statistical approaches: the Classification Tree and the Logistic regression analyses [see @ackermann11b and references therein].
For 44 out of the 48 UGSs, that have been analyzed on the basis of the above statistical methods, it is also possible to perform a comparison with our results to verify if the 2FGL sources that we associated to a $\gamma$-ray blazar candidates have been also classified as AGNs following the Ackermann et al. (2011b) procedures. By comparing the results of our association method with those in Ackermann et al. (2011b), we found that 27 out of 44 UGSs that we associate to a $\gamma$-ray blazar candidate are also classified as AGNs, all of them with a probability higher than 71% and 18 of them higher than 80%. Among the remaining 17 out of 44 sources, 7 have been classified as pulsars, with a very low probability with respect to the whole sample; in particular, 3 of these pulsar candidates are classified with a probability lower than 41% and all of them lower than 71%, making these classifications less reliable than those of the AGNs. The last 10 UGSs did not have a classification in Ackermann et al. (2011b). Consequently, we emphasize that our results are in good agreement with the classification suggested previously by Ackermann et al. (2011b) consistent with the $\gamma$-ray blazar nature of the [[*WISE*]{}]{} candidates proposed in our analysis.
Summary and Conclusions {#sec:summary}
=======================
Recently, we discovered that blazars have peculiar mid-IR colors with respect to other galactic sources or different classes of AGNs. In particular, we found that within the 3-dimensional IR parameter space they delineate a distinct, well-defined, region known as [[*WISE*]{}]{} Blazar Strip (Paper I). Moreover, this distinction, mostly due to the non-thermal emission that dominates the IR radiation of blazars, appears to be more evident when considering those blazars selected on the basis of their $\gamma$-ray properties (Paper II) so defining the [[*WISE*]{}]{} Gamma-ray blazar Strip ([[*WGS*]{}]{}). Then, in Paper III, we built the [[*WGS*]{}]{} parametrization to test the consistency of the low energy counterpart of the AGUs, associated in 2FGL with the [[*WGS*]{}]{}.
On the basis of these results, in the present work, we developed a new association method to search for blazar counterparts of $\gamma$-ray sources and we applied this method to the blazars of the 2FGL sample. We also provide new $\gamma$-ray blazar candidates, potential counterparts of the UGSs, that lie within their $\gamma$-ray positional error region, having the same mid-IR colors as the $\gamma$-ray blazars already associated. We also tested our new procedure [*a posteriori*]{} trying to re-associate all the blazars in the 2FB sample and we found that our results are in good agreement with different association procedures.
The application of our association procedure to the UGSs has led to the selection of possible blazar counterparts for 156 of 313 UGSs analyzed.
As also noted in Section \[sec:ugs\], our association procedure provides also interesting information on the sources that do not have a $\gamma$-ray blazar candidates in the SRs as the case of the unidentified $\gamma$-ray source: 2FGL J1446.8$-$4701, recently identified with the pulsar PSR 1446-4701.
Several developments will be considered to improve our association procedure, such as taking into account not only the IR colors, correspondent to flux ratios, but also the IR fluxes as well as the IR-$\gamma$-ray spectral index correlation (Paper II) and the sky distribution of the $\gamma$-ray blazar candidates, once the whole [[*WISE*]{}]{} data archive will be released. Then, it will be also possible to calibrate our association procedure choosing the different thresholds for the $s$ parameters at different Galactic latitudes to take into account of the [[*WISE*]{}]{} background.
Moreover, our association method is complementary to those adopted in the 2FGL catalog analysis, because it is based on different multifrequency information. For this reason, these methods could be in principle combined to increase the fraction of associated UGSs and the efficiency of the association. Further developments of this new association method will be investigated in a forthcoming paper [@massaro12b].
We thank the anonymous referee for the his/her comments. F. Massaro is grateful S. Digel for their fruitful discussions for all the comments helpful toward improving our presentation. We also thank to A. Cavaliere, D. Harris, J. Grindlay, J. Knodlseder, P. Giommi, N. Omodei, H.Smith and D. Thompson for their suggestions. The work at SAO and at Stanford University is supported in part by the NASA grant NNX10AD50G, NNH09ZDA001N and NNX10AD68G. R. D’Abrusco gratefully acknowledges the financial support of the US Virtual Astronomical Observatory, which is sponsored by the National Science Foundation and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. F. Massaro acknowledges the Fondazione Angelo Della Riccia for the grant awarded him to support his research at SAO during 2011 and the Foundation BLANCEFLOR Boncompagni-Ludovisi, n’ee Bildt for the grant awarded him in 2010 to support his research. TOPCAT[^7] [@taylor2005] was used extensively in this work for the preparation and manipulation of the tabular data. Part of this work is based on archival data, software or on-line services provided by the ASI Science Data Center. This publication makes use of data products from the Wide-field Infrared Survey Explorer, which is a joint project of the University of California, Los Angeles, and the Jet Propulsion Laboratory/California Institute of Technology, funded by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration.
Abdo, A. A. et al. 2010a ApJ, 720, 435 Abdo, A. A. et al. 2010b ApJS 188 405 Abdo, A. A. et al. ApJS submitted http://arxiv.org/abs/1108.1435 Ackermann, M. et al. 2011a ApJ, 743, 171 Ackermann, M. et al. 2011b ApJ submitted http://arxiv.org/abs/1108.1202 Blandford, R. D. & Rees, M. J., 1978, Proc. “Pittsburgh Conference on BL Lac objects", 328 Cutri, R. M. 2011, wise.rept, 1 D’Abrusco, R., Massaro, F., Ajello, M., Grindlay, J. E., Smith, Howard A. & Tosti, G. 2012 ApJ accepted Hartman, R.C. et al., 1999 ApJS 123 Laurino, O. & D’Abrusco 2011 MNRAS in press Massaro, E., Giommi, P., Leto, C., Marchegiani, P., Maselli, A., Perri, M., Piranomonte, S., Sclavi, S. 2009 A&A, 495, 691 Massaro, E., Giommi, P., Leto, C., Marchegiani, P., Maselli, A., Perri, M., Piranomonte, S., Sclavi, S. 2010 [http://arxiv.org/abs/1006.0922]{} Massaro, E., Giommi, P., Leto, C., Marchegiani, P., Maselli, A., Perri, M., Piranomonte, S., “Multifrequency Catalogue of Blazars (3rd Edition)", ARACNE Editrice, Rome, Italy Massaro, F., D’Abrusco, R., Ajello, M., Grindlay, J. E. & Smith, H. A. 2011 ApJ, 740L, 48 Massaro, F., D’Abrusco, R., Ajello, Gasparrini, d., Tosti, G., M., Grindlay, J. E. & Smith, H. A. 2012 ApJ submitted Massaro, F., D’Abrusco, R., Tosti, G. & Ajello, M. 2012b in preparation Taylor, M. B. 2005, ASP Conf. Ser., 347, 29 Wright, E. L., et al. 2010 AJ, 140, 1868
[|lccccccccccc|]{} Name & distance (arcsec) & $c_{12}$ & $\sigma_{12}$ & $c_{23}$ & $\sigma_{23}$ & $c_{34}$ & $\sigma_{34}$ & $s_b$ & $s_q$ & $class$ & $\pi$\
2FGL J0038.8+6259 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J003818.70+630605.2 & 443.08 & 1.15 & 0.03 & 2.59 & 0.03 & 2.52 & 0.03 & 0.89 & 0.99 & A & 2/830\
J003756.80+630459.2 & 492.33 & 0.67 & 0.04 & 2.09 & 0.06 & 2.36 & 0.12 & 0.40 & 0.00 & B & 3/830\
J003834.17+630621.7 & 413.68 & 0.95 & 0.06 & 2.55 & 0.09 & 2.69 & 0.16 & 0.22 & 0.19 & C & 0/830\
2FGL J0158.6+8558 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J014847.32+860345.3 & 707.33 & 1.21 & 0.03 & 3.10 & 0.03 & 2.66 & 0.05 & 0.29 & 0.73 & A & 1/2439\
J015619.63+855634.6 & 173.64 & 1.11 & 0.04 & 3.49 & 0.04 & 2.71 & 0.05 & 0.00 & 0.70 & B & 0/2439\
J014935.28+860115.3 & 603.41 & 0.73 & 0.03 & 2.34 & 0.05 & 2.06 & 0.16 & 0.44 & 0.21 & B & 0/2439\
J015550.14+854745.1 & 644.48 & 1.15 & 0.04 & 2.51 & 0.06 & 2.20 & 0.19 & 0.26 & 0.37 & B & 0/2439\
J015248.81+855703.5 & 376.98 & 1.11 & 0.05 & 2.96 & 0.08 & 1.87 & 0.29 & 0.21 & 0.22 & C & 0/2439\
2FGL J0222.7+6820 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J022151.83+682414.0 & 375.72 & 0.45 & 0.03 & 2.0 & 0.04 & 2.17 & 0.07 & 0.61 & 0.00 & B & 0/642\
2FGL J0226.1+0943 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J022634.26+093844.4 & 445.67 & 1.1 & 0.06 & 2.78 & 0.12 & 2.24 & 0.37 & 0.18 & 0.21 & C & 0/529\
2FGL J0227.7+2249 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J022744.34+224834.3 & 73.27 & 0.98 & 0.04 & 2.53 & 0.05 & 1.91 & 0.13 & 0.47 & 0.26 & B & 0/621\
2FGL J0237.9+5238 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J023749.24+523932.8 & 118.26 & 1.0 & 0.15 & 3.0 & 0.15 & 2.35 & 0.28 & 0.12 & 0.15 & C & 0/1330\
2FGL J0251.0+2557 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J025144.37+255233.4 & 648.24 & 1.11 & 0.06 & 3.19 & 0.09 & 2.43 & 0.24 & 0.16 & 0.27 & C & 1/1587\
2FGL J0307.4+4915 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J030727.22+491510.3 & 13.52 & 0.41 & 0.03 & 2.0 & 0.06 & 2.26 & 0.15 & 0.35 & 0.00 & B & 0/593\
2FGL J0308.7+5954 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J030939.63+594254.9 & 838.69 & 1.1 & 0.04 & 2.67 & 0.06 & 2.18 & 0.14 & 0.39 & 0.39 & A & 0/4242\
J030904.80+595515.7 & 163.43 & 0.72 & 0.04 & 2.04 & 0.06 & 2.08 & 0.11 & 0.46 & 0.00 & B & 0/4242\
J030949.27+595443.4 & 497.05 & 1.27 & 0.04 & 3.45 & 0.05 & 2.54 & 0.07 & 0.00 & 0.56 & B & 0/4242\
2FGL J0312.5$-$0914 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J031210.66$-$090902.3 & 494.53 & 1.1 & 0.06 & 2.84 & 0.12 & 2.85 & 0.25 & 0.12 & 0.2 & C & 2/898\
J031152.05$-$092132.6 & 731.58 & 1.07 & 0.05 & 2.48 & 0.14 & 2.17 & 0.45 & 0.17 & 0.16 & C & 2/898\
2FGL J0312.8+2013 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J031223.00+200749.5 & 505.2 & 1.01 & 0.05 & 2.43 & 0.14 & 2.29 & 0.4 & 0.19 & 0.15 & C & 1/512\
2FGL J0318.0+0255 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J031820.31+025909.9 & 348.38 & 1.02 & 0.07 & 2.97 & 0.15 & 2.54 & 0.38 & 0.12 & 0.17 & C & 0/734\
2FGL J0332.1+6309 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J033153.90+630814.1 & 114.51 & 0.98 & 0.04 & 2.4 & 0.05 & 1.85 & 0.15 & 0.39 & 0.18 & B & 0/1034\
2FGL J0340.5+5307 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J034004.71+530127.6 & 476.7 & 1.13 & 0.05 & 2.75 & 0.07 & 2.34 & 0.17 & 0.34 & 0.34 & B & 0/2365\
2FGL J0345.2$-$2356 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J034448.74$-$235653.1 & 373.57 & 1.18 & 0.07 & 3.16 & 0.11 & 2.24 & 0.37 & 0.11 & 0.19 & C & 0/622\
2FGL J0404.0+3843 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J040520.96+384721.5 & 923.5 & 1.01 & 0.05 & 2.84 & 0.07 & 2.26 & 0.18 & 0.34 & 0.34 & B & 0/4315\
2FGL J0404.6+5822 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J040400.59+582317.1 & 333.46 & 0.47 & 0.04 & 1.92 & 0.06 & 2.09 & 0.21 & 0.34 & 0.00 & B & 1/3481\
J040628.51+582709.4 & 892.88 & 0.57 & 0.03 & 2.07 & 0.04 & 2.27 & 0.08 & 0.55 & 0.14 & B & 1/3481\
2FGL J0409.8-0357 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J040946.57-040003.5 & 144.21 & 0.9 & 0.03 & 2.42 & 0.04 & 1.88 & 0.12 & 0.52 & 0.22 & B & 0/549\
J041011.21-040000.0 & 319.59 & 0.99 & 0.06 & 2.91 & 0.13 & 2.31 & 0.37 & 0.14 & 0.19 & C & 1/549\
2FGL J0414.9-0855 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J041457.01-085651.9 & 99.2 & 0.99 & 0.04 & 2.66 & 0.08 & 2.39 & 0.21 & 0.31 & 0.32 & B & 0/1182\
\[tab:main\]
[|lccccccccccc|]{} Name & distance (arcsec) & $c_{12}$ & $\sigma_{12}$ & $c_{23}$ & $\sigma_{23}$ & $c_{34}$ & $\sigma_{34}$ & $s_b$ & $s_q$ & $class$ & $\pi$\
2FGL J0416.0$-$4355 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J041605.81$-$435514.6 & 47.18 & 1.13 & 0.04 & 2.94 & 0.04 & 2.37 & 0.08 & 0.58 & 0.58 & A & 0/2603\
J041442.89$-$434935.4 & 943.62 & 1.03 & 0.04 & 2.9 & 0.07 & 2.43 & 0.2 & 0.32 & 0.34 & B & 2/2603\
J041506.36$-$440958.9 & 1045.16 & 1.08 & 0.04 & 2.74 & 0.06 & 2.14 & 0.18 & 0.36 & 0.38 & B & 2/2603\
J041538.31$-$440412.8 & 568.43 & 1.01 & 0.05 & 2.6 & 0.1 & 2.49 & 0.3 & 0.21 & 0.23 & C & 1/2603\
J041709.78$-$435922.4 & 751.76 & 1.04 & 0.08 & 2.94 & 0.16 & 2.5 & 0.45 & 0.11 & 0.15 & C & 1/2603\
2FGL J0420.9$-$3743 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J042025.09$-$374444.5 & 368.83 & 0.82 & 0.04 & 2.5 & 0.09 & 2.41 & 0.28 & 0.25 & 0.17 & B & 1/1249\
2FGL J0428.0$-$3845 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J042721.64$-$390100.6 & 1039.57 & 1.09 & 0.04 & 2.76 & 0.05 & 2.62 & 0.11 & 0.42 & 0.48 & A & 0/2563\
2FGL J0458.4+0654 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J045911.96+065932.7 & 775.68 & 1.14 & 0.06 & 3.02 & 0.12 & 2.6 & 0.28 & 0.16 & 0.23 & C & 0/1476\
2FGL J0515.0$-$4411 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J051322.89$-$441947.8 & 1153.62 & 1.01 & 0.04 & 3.02 & 0.05 & 2.38 & 0.13 & 0.35 & 0.46 & A & 1/3932\
J051439.26$-$441348.7 & 258.38 & 1.11 & 0.06 & 3.28 & 0.09 & 2.48 & 0.21 & 0.16 & 0.28 & C & 3/3932\
J051524.23$-$441457.2 & 308.78 & 1.15 & 0.06 & 2.85 & 0.11 & 2.28 & 0.38 & 0.14 & 0.22 & C & 3/3932\
J051525.83$-$435632.7 & 962.23 & 1.02 & 0.06 & 2.96 & 0.1 & 2.23 & 0.32 & 0.21 & 0.22 & C & 3/3932\
J051432.40$-$435214.3 & 1221.78 & 1.16 & 0.06 & 3.09 & 0.12 & 2.74 & 0.29 & 0.11 & 0.21 & C & 3/3932\
2FGL J0529.3+3821 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J053006.26+382649.0 & 604.83 & 0.98 & 0.03 & 2.92 & 0.03 & 2.74 & 0.04 & 0.56 & 0.7 & A & 0/1574\
J052939.38+382327.1 & 230.39 & 1.02 & 0.05 & 2.67 & 0.1 & 2.45 & 0.17 & 0.3 & 0.31 & B & 0/1574\
J052943.26+382049.3 & 231.47 & 1.1 & 0.05 & 2.84 & 0.07 & 2.14 & 0.19 & 0.31 & 0.34 & B & 0/1574\
J052941.52+382442.2 & 298.7 & 0.69 & 0.03 & 2.43 & 0.05 & 2.18 & 0.1 & 0.53 & 0.25 & B & 0/1574\
J053006.35+382532.8 & 566.64 & 0.89 & 0.05 & 2.29 & 0.09 & 2.2 & 0.28 & 0.27 & 0.15 & B & 0/1574\
J053018.78+382231.9 & 653.47 & 1.01 & 0.05 & 2.62 & 0.07 & 2.37 & 0.21 & 0.3 & 0.29 & B & 0/1574\
2FGL J0540.1$-$7554 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J054003.36$-$754157.9 & 736.81 & 1.06 & 0.04 & 2.76 & 0.04 & 2.49 & 0.1 & 0.51 & 0.52 & A & 0/3412\
J054231.99$-$760139.4 & 677.11 & 1.0 & 0.04 & 2.84 & 0.08 & 2.42 & 0.23 & 0.29 & 0.31 & B & 1/3412\
J053926.22$-$760648.6 & 772.37 & 0.91 & 0.05 & 2.71 & 0.08 & 2.64 & 0.21 & 0.24 & 0.24 & B & 1/3412\
J054111.58$-$760247.1 & 557.16 & 1.06 & 0.05 & 2.82 & 0.08 & 2.81 & 0.2 & 0.18 & 0.26 & C & 0/3412\
2FGL J0545.6+6018 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J054610.69+602331.6 & 368.05 & 1.11 & 0.05 & 2.85 & 0.07 & 2.5 & 0.16 & 0.32 & 0.35 & B & 0/449\
2FGL J0555.9$-$4348 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J055601.91$-$433947.3 & 513.92 & 1.07 & 0.04 & 2.55 & 0.06 & 2.35 & 0.18 & 0.38 & 0.38 & A & 0/2668\
J055618.73$-$435146.1 & 338.08 & 0.93 & 0.04 & 2.51 & 0.05 & 2.13 & 0.14 & 0.46 & 0.33 & B & 0/2668\
J055432.27$-$435241.2 & 927.17 & 0.89 & 0.04 & 2.68 & 0.07 & 2.12 & 0.26 & 0.32 & 0.21 & B & 0/2668\
J055531.86$-$435706.1 & 584.44 & 0.94 & 0.05 & 2.9 & 0.1 & 2.32 & 0.3 & 0.18 & 0.23 & C & 2/2668\
2FGL J0600.8$-$1949 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J060120.34$-$200725.5 & 1130.75 & 1.03 & 0.03 & 2.64 & 0.04 & 2.09 & 0.08 & 0.62 & 0.63 & A & 0/4104\
J055931.95$-$195135.0 & 1131.41 & 1.13 & 0.06 & 3.1 & 0.1 & 2.22 & 0.35 & 0.16 & 0.21 & C & 1/4104\
2FGL J0600.9+3839 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J060102.86+383829.6 & 68.68 & 0.97 & 0.04 & 2.54 & 0.08 & 2.38 & 0.19 & 0.33 & 0.28 & B & 0/613\
2FGL J0602.7$-$4011 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J060237.09$-$401453.5 & 239.84 & 0.97 & 0.03 & 2.48 & 0.04 & 2.3 & 0.07 & 0.63 & 0.51 & A & 0/1127\
J060251.28$-$401845.1 & 472.64 & 0.88 & 0.04 & 2.44 & 0.04 & 1.82 & 0.11 & 0.53 & 0.22 & B & 0/1127\
J060254.77$-$402035.2 & 588.88 & 1.12 & 0.06 & 2.95 & 0.12 & 2.49 & 0.32 & 0.18 & 0.22 & C & 2/1127\
\[tab:main\]
[|lccccccccccc|]{} Name & distance (arcsec) & $c_{12}$ & $\sigma_{12}$ & $c_{23}$ & $\sigma_{23}$ & $c_{34}$ & $\sigma_{34}$ & $s_b$ & $s_q$ & $class$ & $\pi$\
2FGL J0608.3+2037 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J060835.36+203604.1 & 237.43 & 1.03 & 0.03 & 2.83 & 0.03 & 2.22 & 0.05 & 0.76 & 0.77 & A & 0/1130\
J060831.76+203141.8 & 405.85 & 1.03 & 0.03 & 2.47 & 0.03 & 2.32 & 0.03 & 0.91 & 0.88 & A & 0/1130\
J060740.08+203959.2 & 579.55 & 1.11 & 0.04 & 2.86 & 0.04 & 2.37 & 0.09 & 0.57 & 0.58 & A & 0/1130\
J060803.38+204111.0 & 309.04 & 1.24 & 0.03 & 2.55 & 0.03 & 2.56 & 0.03 & 0.00 & 0.7 & B & 2/1130\
J060831.63+204122.5 & 260.5 & 1.19 & 0.04 & 2.82 & 0.09 & 2.74 & 0.12 & 0.18 & 0.32 & C & 0/1130\
2FGL J0616.6+2425 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J061623.95+241809.2 & 458.21 & 0.98 & 0.03 & 3.38 & 0.04 & 2.8 & 0.04 & 0.00 & 0.56 & B & 1/5456\
J061609.79+241911.1 & 513.16 & 0.66 & 0.03 & 2.37 & 0.03 & 1.72 & 0.08 & 0.63 & 0.21 & B & 1/5456\
J061705.49+240850.4 & 1063.29 & 0.53 & 0.04 & 2.17 & 0.07 & 1.87 & 0.24 & 0.34 & 0.00 & B & 1/5456\
J061611.60+241917.2 & 491.67 & 0.94 & 0.04 & 2.15 & 0.06 & 2.8 & 0.12 & 0.23 & 0.2 & C & 1/5456\
J061600.61+242253.6 & 506.98 & 0.84 & 0.06 & 2.78 & 0.11 & 2.44 & 0.28 & 0.17 & 0.14 & C & 1/5456\
J061640.77+241151.1 & 806.78 & 0.98 & 0.06 & 2.78 & 0.09 & 1.84 & 0.41 & 0.18 & 0.16 & C & 1/5456\
J061650.09+244221.1 & 1042.8 & 1.2 & 0.08 & 3.03 & 0.1 & 2.44 & 0.24 & 0.11 & 0.23 & C & 1/5456\
2FGL J0620.8$-$2556 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J062108.67$-$255758.1 & 222.84 & 0.96 & 0.05 & 2.7 & 0.09 & 2.08 & 0.35 & 0.23 & 0.21 & C & 1/3508\
2FGL J0631.7+0428 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J063151.53+041903.3 & 581.96 & 0.93 & 0.03 & 2.76 & 0.03 & 2.46 & 0.06 & 0.69 & 0.67 & A & 1/9083\
J063155.40+041844.1 & 612.84 & 1.09 & 0.04 & 2.95 & 0.09 & 2.72 & 0.12 & 0.27 & 0.38 & A & 1/9083\
J063103.52+042739.6 & 624.47 & 0.71 & 0.04 & 2.36 & 0.07 & 1.88 & 0.38 & 0.28 & 0.14 & B & 1/9083\
J063239.59+043629.4 & 941.7 & 0.81 & 0.04 & 2.53 & 0.09 & 1.71 & 0.32 & 0.26 & 0.14 & B & 1/9083\
J063048.95+043714.4 & 986.14 & 0.7 & 0.03 & 1.99 & 0.09 & 2.02 & 0.3 & 0.3 & 0.00 & B & 1/9083\
J063147.96+045049.0 & 1332.46 & 0.62 & 0.04 & 2.26 & 0.08 & 2.35 & 0.14 & 0.35 & 0.00 & B & 1/9083\
J063314.27+042905.5 & 1333.84 & 0.6 & 0.03 & 2.1 & 0.12 & 1.83 & 0.31 & 0.26 & 0.07 & B & 1/9083\
2FGL J0644.6+6034 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J064459.38+603132.1 & 223.54 & 1.01 & 0.04 & 2.69 & 0.06 & 2.52 & 0.15 & 0.38 & 0.4 & A & 0/877\
J064417.82+603932.2 & 347.48 & 1.2 & 0.06 & 3.19 & 0.1 & 2.74 & 0.22 & 0.1 & 0.26 & C & 0/877\
2FGL J0647.7+0032 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J064712.98+003702.8 & 545.46 & 1.12 & 0.04 & 3.07 & 0.05 & 2.19 & 0.08 & 0.51 & 0.51 & A & 0/2093\
J064718.24+003250.6 & 384.38 & 0.81 & 0.04 & 2.59 & 0.11 & 2.31 & 0.2 & 0.29 & 0.21 & B & 0/2093\
2FGL J0713.5$-$0952 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J071337.47$-$101207.9 & 1182.86 & 0.98 & 0.04 & 2.82 & 0.05 & 2.23 & 0.1 & 0.49 & 0.49 & A & 1/11990\
J071400.29$-$095518.9 & 429.54 & 1.14 & 0.07 & 2.93 & 0.08 & 2.72 & 0.14 & 0.19 & 0.31 & C & 2/11990\
2FGL J0723.9+2901 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J072354.83+285929.9 & 153.39 & 1.15 & 0.05 & 2.93 & 0.05 & 2.3 & 0.12 & 0.38 & 0.43 & A & 0/1215\
2FGL J0725.8$-$0549 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J072536.62$-$055807.3 & 558.18 & 1.06 & 0.04 & 2.74 & 0.04 & 2.14 & 0.09 & 0.55 & 0.56 & A & 0/1094\
2FGL J0737.1$-$3235 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J073738.91$-$323256.6 & 385.01 & 1.13 & 0.06 & 3.27 & 0.05 & 2.55 & 0.08 & 0.22 & 0.49 & B & 1/1985\
J073646.70$-$324215.2 & 516.85 & 0.63 & 0.04 & 2.28 & 0.07 & 1.72 & 0.31 & 0.27 & 0.1 & B & 1/1985\
2FGL J0737.5$-$8246 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J073713.75$-$824812.8 & 111.61 & 1.02 & 0.06 & 3.08 & 0.11 & 2.24 & 0.36 & 0.16 & 0.2 & C & 0/916\
J073715.07$-$825511.4 & 525.59 & 0.89 & 0.05 & 2.89 & 0.07 & 2.0 & 0.23 & 0.23 & 0.24 & C & 0/916\
\[tab:main\]
[|lccccccccccc|]{} Name & distance (arcsec) & $c_{12}$ & $\sigma_{12}$ & $c_{23}$ & $\sigma_{23}$ & $c_{34}$ & $\sigma_{34}$ & $s_b$ & $s_q$ & $class$ & $\pi$\
2FGL J0742.7$-$3113 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J074226.42$-$305720.1 & 990.78 & 1.09 & 0.03 & 2.73 & 0.03 & 2.22 & 0.03 & 0.9 & 0.91 & A & 1/3499\
J074345.64$-$310758.0 & 873.05 & 1.02 & 0.05 & 2.29 & 0.05 & 2.16 & 0.15 & 0.31 & 0.25 & B & 1/3499\
J074303.55$-$312057.4 & 522.58 & 1.2 & 0.1 & 2.78 & 0.08 & 2.0 & 0.29 & 0.1 & 0.18 & C & 2/3499\
2FGL J0744.1$-$2523 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J074406.14$-$252154.1 & 142.98 & 1.27 & 0.03 & 2.55 & 0.03 & 1.98 & 0.05 & 0.00 & 0.44 & B & 0/630\
J074401.10$-$252203.9 & 180.53 & 1.26 & 0.06 & 2.77 & 0.04 & 2.66 & 0.08 & 0.00 & 0.5 & B & 0/630\
J074359.96$-$252220.6 & 183.53 & 0.93 & 0.05 & 2.86 & 0.06 & 2.53 & 0.18 & 0.27 & 0.33 & B & 0/630\
J074356.53$-$251909.8 & 351.78 & 1.1 & 0.09 & 2.87 & 0.1 & 2.69 & 0.21 & 0.14 & 0.22 & C & 0/630\
2FGL J0745.5+7910 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J074502.17+791110.5 & 98.65 & 1.04 & 0.07 & 2.83 & 0.14 & 2.39 & 0.43 & 0.16 & 0.18 & C & 0/1343\
J074659.63+790356.7 & 469.93 & 1.14 & 0.05 & 2.67 & 0.1 & 2.72 & 0.23 & 0.17 & 0.24 & C & 0/1343\
2FGL J0746.0$-$0222 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J074627.02$-$022549.4 & 391.79 & 0.65 & 0.04 & 2.08 & 0.07 & 2.18 & 0.27 & 0.29 & 0.00 & B & 1/1597\
J074534.78$-$021534.7 & 604.93 & 1.13 & 0.04 & 2.9 & 0.06 & 2.42 & 0.18 & 0.34 & 0.36 & B & 1/1597\
2FGL J0748.5$-$2204 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J074726.63$-$220630.9 & 935.48 & 1.0 & 0.04 & 2.89 & 0.03 & 2.29 & 0.07 & 0.65 & 0.66 & A & 0/4863\
2FGL J0753.2+1937 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J075217.84+193542.3 & 839.58 & 1.16 & 0.03 & 2.97 & 0.03 & 2.65 & 0.03 & 0.53 & 0.93 & A & 0/1565\
2FGL J0753.2$-$1634 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J075313.37$-$160833.2 & 1560.13 & 1.29 & 0.05 & 2.99 & 0.06 & 2.59 & 0.13 & 0.00 & 0.39 & B & 6/15814\
J075249.51$-$160820.5 & 1618.57 & 0.92 & 0.04 & 2.95 & 0.05 & 2.64 & 0.09 & 0.23 & 0.45 & B & 6/15814\
J075213.04$-$160415.1 & 2032.41 & 1.11 & 0.06 & 2.75 & 0.11 & 2.86 & 0.25 & 0.13 & 0.2 & C & 0/15814\
2FGL J0900.9+6736 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J090121.65+673955.5 & 228.51 & 0.9 & 0.05 & 2.67 & 0.11 & 2.34 & 0.31 & 0.23 & 0.21 & C & 2/1220\
2FGL J1032.9$-$8401 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J103015.41$-$840308.2 & 274.15 & 0.95 & 0.04 & 2.6 & 0.05 & 2.04 & 0.16 & 0.41 & 0.32 & B & 0/1438\
2FGL J1058.7$-$6621 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J105854.76$-$663412.8 & 736.6 & 0.93 & 0.07 & 2.62 & 0.07 & 2.54 & 0.17 & 0.27 & 0.25 & B & 1/1609\
2FGL J1104.7$-$6036 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J110500.45$-$603559.0 & 117.21 & 0.76 & 0.08 & 2.04 & 0.08 & 1.85 & 0.22 & 0.25 & 0.11 & B & 0/235\
2FGL J1105.4$-$7622 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J110409.06$-$762719.3 & 413.02 & 0.78 & 0.02 & 2.59 & 0.02 & 2.07 & 0.03 & 1.21 & 0.73 & A & 0/1918\
J110632.74$-$762521.1 & 293.54 & 0.56 & 0.03 & 1.79 & 0.06 & 1.97 & 0.22 & 0.38 & 0.00 & B & 1/1918\
J110746.55$-$761517.6 & 644.16 & 0.65 & 0.03 & 1.75 & 0.04 & 2.25 & 0.07 & 0.46 & 0.00 & B & 1/1918\
2FGL J1105.6$-$6114 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J110641.59$-$611126.7 & 486.49 & 1.13 & 0.1 & 2.9 & 0.14 & 2.69 & 0.25 & 0.11 & 0.18 & C & 0/1650\
J110709.52$-$611247.7 & 664.92 & 1.15 & 0.06 & 2.87 & 0.14 & 2.51 & 0.2 & 0.19 & 0.25 & C & 0/1650\
2FGL J1207.3$-$5055 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J120715.61$-$504558.3 & 595.37 & 0.99 & 0.04 & 2.98 & 0.04 & 2.19 & 0.1 & 0.4 & 0.51 & A & 0/2542\
J120750.50$-$510314.6 & 523.02 & 1.12 & 0.07 & 2.8 & 0.12 & 2.72 & 0.25 & 0.15 & 0.18 & C & 2/2542\
2FGL J1214.1$-$4410 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J121305.50$-$440807.3 & 667.39 & 0.85 & 0.03 & 2.63 & 0.03 & 2.46 & 0.04 & 0.82 & 0.66 & A & 0/1816\
J121442.80$-$441338.0 & 445.13 & 1.09 & 0.05 & 2.88 & 0.09 & 2.84 & 0.2 & 0.17 & 0.25 & C & 0/1816\
2FGL J1236.1$-$6155 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J123550.23$-$614507.5 & 629.83 & 0.93 & 0.04 & 2.43 & 0.05 & 2.41 & 0.1 & 0.48 & 0.34 & B & 0/1868\
J123452.66$-$614702.4 & 739.59 & 0.9 & 0.04 & 2.29 & 0.03 & 2.1 & 0.03 & 0.87 & 0.36 & B & 0/1868\
J123500.79$-$615611.1 & 489.18 & 0.96 & 0.06 & 2.98 & 0.09 & 2.12 & 0.21 & 0.21 & 0.25 & C & 1/1868\
J123551.88$-$614523.2 & 611.92 & 1.18 & 0.04 & 2.55 & 0.09 & 2.07 & 0.22 & 0.16 & 0.28 & C & 1/1868\
\[tab:main\]
[|lccccccccccc|]{} Name & distance (arcsec) & $c_{12}$ & $\sigma_{12}$ & $c_{23}$ & $\sigma_{23}$ & $c_{34}$ & $\sigma_{34}$ & $s_b$ & $s_q$ & $class$ & $\pi$\
2FGL J1243.9$-$6232 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J124252.40$-$623214.0 & 437.79 & 1.13 & 0.04 & 2.52 & 0.04 & 2.52 & 0.04 & 0.63 & 0.64 & A & 0/854\
J124322.29$-$623912.7 & 466.0 & 0.7 & 0.08 & 2.41 & 0.07 & 2.29 & 0.15 & 0.3 & 0.09 & B & 0/854\
J124438.34$-$623425.2 & 317.58 & 0.85 & 0.06 & 2.3 & 0.11 & 2.6 & 0.15 & 0.24 & 0.14 & C & 0/854\
2FGL J1248.6$-$5510 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J124946.06$-$550758.3 & 602.9 & 1.03 & 0.05 & 2.7 & 0.07 & 2.45 & 0.15 & 0.36 & 0.36 & B & 2/4244\
2FGL J1255.8$-$5828 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J125459.46$-$582009.4 & 636.52 & 1.32 & 0.05 & 2.82 & 0.04 & 2.19 & 0.06 & 0.00 & 0.53 & B & 0/12152\
J125357.08$-$583322.2 & 945.84 & 0.65 & 0.04 & 2.22 & 0.03 & 1.49 & 0.03 & 0.9 & 0.34 & B & 0/12152\
J125448.95$-$585010.1 & 1399.83 & 1.06 & 0.1 & 2.84 & 0.06 & 2.34 & 0.11 & 0.33 & 0.33 & B & 0/12152\
J125646.35$-$581306.0 & 1009.28 & 1.13 & 0.11 & 2.45 & 0.09 & 2.48 & 0.2 & 0.12 & 0.17 & C & 2/12152\
2FGL J1317.2$-$6304 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J131818.06$-$630215.1 & 456.0 & 0.87 & 0.09 & 2.85 & 0.1 & 2.03 & 0.24 & 0.16 & 0.14 & C & 0/1382\
2FGL J1320.1$-$5756 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J131938.49$-$575738.1 & 271.56 & 1.13 & 0.12 & 2.45 & 0.11 & 2.36 & 0.25 & 0.1 & 0.16 & C & 0/1294\
2FGL J1324.4$-$5411 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J132530.49$-$542548.7 & 999.54 & 1.13 & 0.09 & 2.77 & 0.09 & 2.34 & 0.26 & 0.18 & 0.22 & C & 0/3899\
2FGL J1339.2$-$2348 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J133901.75$-$240113.9 & 762.96 & 1.09 & 0.04 & 2.94 & 0.04 & 2.26 & 0.07 & 0.61 & 0.61 & A & 0/1337\
J133825.70$-$235150.2 & 678.03 & 1.09 & 0.04 & 3.19 & 0.06 & 2.98 & 0.09 & 0.00 & 0.38 & B & 0/1337\
2FGL J1345.8$-$3356 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J134543.05$-$335643.3 & 94.27 & 0.85 & 0.04 & 2.35 & 0.08 & 2.02 & 0.3 & 0.28 & 0.13 & B & 0/2098\
J134515.46$-$334917.7 & 612.18 & 0.91 & 0.06 & 2.81 & 0.14 & 2.56 & 0.34 & 0.13 & 0.16 & C & 1/2098\
2FGL J1347.0$-$2956 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J134706.88$-$295842.4 & 134.22 & 0.78 & 0.04 & 2.19 & 0.1 & 2.05 & 0.32 & 0.26 & 0.11 & B & 0/729\
J134742.26$-$300046.8 & 576.17 & 1.19 & 0.05 & 3.07 & 0.07 & 2.44 & 0.18 & 0.17 & 0.33 & C & 0/729\
2FGL J1407.4$-$2948 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J140657.64$-$301718.0 & 1737.44 & 1.15 & 0.07 & 2.69 & 0.15 & 2.45 & 0.43 & 0.12 & 0.17 & C & 4/7776\
2FGL J1414.1$-$5450 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J141236.97$-$543952.4 & 1009.62 & 0.99 & 0.04 & 2.32 & 0.05 & 2.32 & 0.1 & 0.46 & 0.35 & B & 1/4045\
J141349.58$-$544243.4 & 475.18 & 0.99 & 0.1 & 2.93 & 0.11 & 2.53 & 0.23 & 0.15 & 0.21 & C & 1/4045\
J141337.01$-$550126.7 & 736.43 & 0.93 & 0.08 & 2.4 & 0.11 & 2.42 & 0.21 & 0.22 & 0.16 & C & 1/4045\
2FGL J1417.5$-$4404 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J141721.43$-$435342.9 & 668.44 & 1.02 & 0.07 & 2.88 & 0.09 & 2.48 & 0.22 & 0.23 & 0.26 & C & 1/2016\
2FGL J1422.3$-$6841 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J142409.23$-$683715.6 & 660.57 & 0.68 & 0.04 & 2.1 & 0.04 & 1.83 & 0.1 & 0.53 & 0.22 & B & 0/1482\
2FGL J1423.9$-$7842 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J142343.58$-$782934.3 & 801.85 & 1.04 & 0.06 & 2.82 & 0.12 & 2.91 & 0.24 & 0.11 & 0.19 & C & 2/2721\
\[tab:main\]
[|lccccccccccc|]{} Name & distance (arcsec) & $c_{12}$ & $\sigma_{12}$ & $c_{23}$ & $\sigma_{23}$ & $c_{34}$ & $\sigma_{34}$ & $s_b$ & $s_q$ & $class$ & $\pi$\
2FGL J1517.2+3645 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J151649.27+365022.9 & 420.93 & 1.05 & 0.05 & 2.63 & 0.09 & 2.48 & 0.24 & 0.27 & 0.27 & B & 0/1352\
J151752.13+364125.5 & 508.82 & 1.04 & 0.04 & 3.01 & 0.06 & 2.19 & 0.19 & 0.34 & 0.36 & B & 0/1352\
2FGL J1518.4$-$5233 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J151807.33$-$523431.0 & 184.75 & 0.66 & 0.07 & 2.31 & 0.05 & 1.41 & 0.17 & 0.26 & 0.13 & B & 0/979\
2FGL J1543.7$-$0241 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J154315.19$-$022531.4 & 1052.36 & 1.06 & 0.08 & 2.85 & 0.18 & 2.58 & 0.43 & 0.11 & 0.14 & C & 0/3462\
2FGL J1552.8$-$4824 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J155237.30$-$484152.9 & 1044.56 & 0.98 & 0.05 & 2.7 & 0.04 & 2.45 & 0.06 & 0.54 & 0.53 & A & 0/5499\
2FGL J1553.5$-$0324 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J155341.52$-$031231.4 & 698.12 & 1.35 & 0.04 & 2.68 & 0.05 & 2.37 & 0.11 & 0.00 & 0.42 & B & 0/2108\
J155314.95$-$031204.8 & 778.98 & 0.95 & 0.05 & 2.59 & 0.09 & 2.21 & 0.24 & 0.27 & 0.24 & B & 0/2108\
J155306.36$-$032317.7 & 432.95 & 0.92 & 0.05 & 2.36 & 0.11 & 2.5 & 0.28 & 0.24 & 0.16 & C & 1/2108\
2FGL J1612.0+1403 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J161148.58+135716.8 & 426.68 & 1.07 & 0.05 & 3.09 & 0.09 & 2.16 & 0.33 & 0.16 & 0.22 & C & 0/2763\
J161118.10+140328.9 & 616.83 & 1.12 & 0.06 & 3.14 & 0.09 & 2.59 & 0.21 & 0.17 & 0.28 & C & 0/2763\
2FGL J1614.8+4703 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J161434.68+470420.3 & 178.15 & 1.09 & 0.03 & 3.15 & 0.03 & 2.1 & 0.04 & 0.51 & 0.82 & A & 0/3922\
J161541.22+471111.8 & 701.47 & 0.75 & 0.04 & 2.27 & 0.05 & 2.26 & 0.13 & 0.48 & 0.23 & B & 3/3922\
J161450.96+465954.1 & 200.29 & 1.18 & 0.05 & 2.8 & 0.09 & 2.45 & 0.24 & 0.21 & 0.28 & C & 1/3922\
J161513.04+471356.0 & 680.29 & 1.06 & 0.06 & 2.95 & 0.13 & 2.34 & 0.42 & 0.17 & 0.19 & C & 1/3922\
J161536.97+471711.1 & 959.75 & 1.24 & 0.06 & 2.83 & 0.11 & 2.28 & 0.36 & 0.1 & 0.21 & C & 1/3922\
2FGL J1617.6$-$4219 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J161955.00$-$422815.1 & 1557.87 & 1.05 & 0.05 & 2.85 & 0.04 & 2.58 & 0.06 & 0.52 & 0.58 & A & 0/7942\
J161804.21$-$421209.0 & 524.8 & 0.97 & 0.05 & 2.22 & 0.05 & 2.23 & 0.09 & 0.38 & 0.27 & B & 0/7942\
2FGL J1619.0$-$4650 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J161922.19$-$464331.6 & 472.97 & 0.66 & 0.04 & 2.14 & 0.04 & 1.88 & 0.05 & 0.69 & 0.29 & B & 5/17602\
J161926.88$-$463511.1 & 964.94 & 1.01 & 0.04 & 2.48 & 0.04 & 1.92 & 0.07 & 0.62 & 0.35 & B & 5/17602\
J161929.08$-$463501.3 & 980.05 & 0.54 & 0.04 & 2.35 & 0.05 & 2.02 & 0.09 & 0.32 & 0.00 & B & 5/17602\
2FGL J1619.6$-$4509 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J161944.64$-$451147.4 & 145.23 & 0.6 & 0.07 & 2.24 & 0.06 & 2.25 & 0.12 & 0.35 & 0.07 & B & 1/2541\
2FGL J1622.8$-$0314 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J162225.36$-$031439.0 & 414.55 & 1.18 & 0.06 & 3.18 & 0.1 & 2.66 & 0.2 & 0.11 & 0.27 & C & 0/1577\
\[tab:main\]
[|lccccccccccc|]{} Name & distance (arcsec) & $c_{12}$ & $\sigma_{12}$ & $c_{23}$ & $\sigma_{23}$ & $c_{34}$ & $\sigma_{34}$ & $s_b$ & $s_q$ & $class$ & $\pi$\
2FGL J1623.2+4328 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J162324.12+432533.8 & 183.07 & 0.91 & 0.04 & 2.64 & 0.06 & 2.47 & 0.14 & 0.41 & 0.35 & B & 0/1983\
J162237.62+433801.8 & 720.08 & 1.13 & 0.05 & 2.92 & 0.08 & 2.25 & 0.24 & 0.29 & 0.3 & B & 0/1983\
2FGL J1624.2$-$2124 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J162608.57$-$211709.1 & 1617.78 & 1.38 & 0.04 & 2.79 & 0.06 & 2.57 & 0.12 & 0.00 & 0.4 & B & 0/17861\
2FGL J1627.8+3219 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J162800.41+322414.9 & 319.07 & 1.12 & 0.05 & 2.89 & 0.09 & 2.52 & 0.27 & 0.21 & 0.26 & C & 1/1045\
2FGL J1630.2$-$4752 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J162957.80$-$475327.5 & 189.16 & 0.73 & 0.05 & 1.88 & 0.05 & 1.44 & 0.22 & 0.25 & 0.15 & B & 0/539\
2FGL J1631.0$-$1050 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J163204.19$-$104411.5 & 1008.36 & 0.89 & 0.04 & 2.56 & 0.06 & 1.89 & 0.19 & 0.38 & 0.18 & B & 0/3687\
2FGL J1641.8$-$5319 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J164059.69$-$532258.6 & 509.89 & 0.97 & 0.19 & 2.57 & 0.11 & 2.55 & 0.15 & 0.17 & 0.15 & C & 0/2000\
2FGL J1643.3$-$4928 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J164153.54$-$491752.0 & 1067.61 & 0.7 & 0.03 & 2.29 & 0.03 & 2.1 & 0.02 & 1.01 & 0.42 & A & 1/3888\
2FGL J1647.0+4351 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J164652.47+435821.7 & 434.78 & 0.97 & 0.04 & 2.86 & 0.07 & 2.58 & 0.16 & 0.31 & 0.36 & B & 0/2415\
J164720.15+434438.6 & 441.88 & 0.86 & 0.05 & 2.69 & 0.09 & 2.54 & 0.23 & 0.27 & 0.2 & B & 0/2415\
J164808.75+435530.4 & 734.82 & 0.86 & 0.05 & 2.73 & 0.1 & 2.23 & 0.34 & 0.19 & 0.17 & C & 3/2415\
2FGL J1653.6$-$0159 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J165315.62$-$015822.3 & 324.68 & 1.02 & 0.04 & 2.37 & 0.04 & 1.84 & 0.12 & 0.45 & 0.25 & B & 0/335\
2FGL J1656.4$-$0738 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J165639.14$-$073821.1 & 142.99 & 1.21 & 0.04 & 2.85 & 0.05 & 2.36 & 0.11 & 0.22 & 0.45 & B & 0/1591\
2FGL J1657.5$-$4652 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J165708.90$-$464752.2 & 377.56 & 0.82 & 0.02 & 2.09 & 0.03 & 1.58 & 0.03 & 1.13 & 0.47 & A & 0/1009\
J165744.80$-$464635.7 & 370.78 & 0.59 & 0.05 & 1.72 & 0.09 & 1.91 & 0.18 & 0.26 & 0.00 & B & 0/1009\
2FGL J1704.3+1235 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J170409.58+123422.0 & 170.99 & 0.74 & 0.04 & 2.12 & 0.07 & 1.57 & 0.41 & 0.24 & 0.12 & B & 0/1044\
J170418.39+123057.4 & 293.74 & 1.13 & 0.04 & 2.71 & 0.08 & 2.18 & 0.26 & 0.26 & 0.29 & B & 0/1044\
2FGL J1704.9$-$4618 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J170503.47$-$462929.4 & 676.28 & 1.12 & 0.04 & 2.59 & 0.03 & 2.37 & 0.04 & 0.75 & 0.76 & A & 0/6392\
J170511.74$-$462809.5 & 608.53 & 0.57 & 0.03 & 2.2 & 0.03 & 2.03 & 0.03 & 0.91 & 0.00 & B & 5/6392\
J170410.40$-$462600.8 & 689.62 & 0.43 & 0.04 & 2.16 & 0.03 & 2.15 & 0.03 & 0.51 & 0.00 & B & 5/6392\
J170556.65$-$462409.7 & 690.38 & 0.53 & 0.03 & 1.74 & 0.03 & 1.97 & 0.05 & 0.71 & 0.00 & B & 5/6392\
2FGL J1710.0$-$0323 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J170853.49$-$032323.4 & 1078.67 & 0.96 & 0.05 & 2.56 & 0.11 & 2.59 & 0.25 & 0.22 & 0.19 & C & 0/6212\
J170911.00$-$033720.7 & 1160.96 & 1.01 & 0.07 & 2.77 & 0.16 & 2.81 & 0.31 & 0.11 & 0.15 & C & 0/6212\
J171053.82$-$030442.3 & 1344.04 & 1.12 & 0.06 & 2.87 & 0.09 & 2.78 & 0.16 & 0.18 & 0.29 & C & 0/6212\
2FGL J1710.5$-$5020 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J171141.00$-$502817.2 & 803.32 & 0.98 & 0.06 & 2.56 & 0.05 & 1.98 & 0.11 & 0.41 & 0.3 & B & 0/2260\
\[tab:main\]
[|lccccccccccc|]{} Name & distance (arcsec) & $c_{12}$ & $\sigma_{12}$ & $c_{23}$ & $\sigma_{23}$ & $c_{34}$ & $\sigma_{34}$ & $s_b$ & $s_q$ & $class$ & $\pi$\
2FGL J1726.6$-$3545 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J172706.54$-$354400.0 & 332.55 & 0.83 & 0.05 & 2.26 & 0.05 & 1.95 & 0.16 & 0.38 & 0.16 & B & 6/2747\
J172645.15$-$355126.8 & 340.31 & 0.78 & 0.04 & 1.97 & 0.04 & 2.01 & 0.06 & 0.52 & 0.00 & B & 6/2747\
J172743.40$-$355104.9 & 823.97 & 0.75 & 0.05 & 1.97 & 0.06 & 1.8 & 0.14 & 0.38 & 0.16 & B & 6/2747\
2FGL J1727.6+0647 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J172644.95+063918.6 & 964.35 & 1.1 & 0.05 & 2.91 & 0.08 & 2.46 & 0.21 & 0.28 & 0.3 & B & 0/3011\
J172743.08+063729.0 & 610.69 & 0.88 & 0.06 & 2.79 & 0.13 & 2.16 & 0.41 & 0.15 & 0.16 & C & 0/3011\
2FGL J1729.5$-$0854 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J172917.32$-$085503.3 & 214.0 & 1.3 & 0.04 & 2.73 & 0.06 & 2.63 & 0.11 & 0.00 & 0.43 & B & 1/4158\
2FGL J1730.6$-$0353 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J173052.85$-$035247.1 & 223.9 & 1.27 & 0.04 & 2.94 & 0.04 & 2.13 & 0.1 & 0.00 & 0.49 & B & 0/1447\
2FGL J1730.8+5427 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J173238.56+543233.4 & 952.59 & 1.09 & 0.04 & 2.66 & 0.05 & 2.53 & 0.14 & 0.44 & 0.42 & A & 0/5245\
J173145.57+540836.1 & 1246.33 & 1.12 & 0.05 & 2.74 & 0.09 & 2.27 & 0.32 & 0.24 & 0.26 & B & 3/5245\
J173018.81+543700.6 & 622.98 & 1.07 & 0.07 & 2.97 & 0.17 & 2.43 & 0.49 & 0.1 & 0.15 & C & 6/5245\
J172953.81+541836.0 & 768.47 & 1.06 & 0.06 & 2.8 & 0.11 & 2.58 & 0.3 & 0.18 & 0.22 & C & 6/5245\
J173014.69+540822.6 & 1223.9 & 1.0 & 0.06 & 2.9 & 0.12 & 2.1 & 0.44 & 0.17 & 0.17 & C & 6/5245\
2FGL J1734.7$-$2533 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J173414.24$-$253645.5 & 456.0 & 0.73 & 0.03 & 2.21 & 0.03 & 1.42 & 0.03 & 0.81 & 0.38 & B & 3/2555\
2FGL J1739.6$-$2726 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J173943.37$-$272858.7 & 181.4 & 0.52 & 0.05 & 2.11 & 0.03 & 1.61 & 0.03 & 0.72 & 0.00 & B & 11/4288\
2FGL J1741.1$-$6750 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J174046.15$-$674325.0 & 471.78 & 1.15 & 0.05 & 2.86 & 0.07 & 2.24 & 0.2 & 0.29 & 0.34 & B & 0/2877\
J174059.77$-$680132.3 & 634.08 & 1.06 & 0.06 & 2.46 & 0.1 & 2.55 & 0.26 & 0.18 & 0.21 & C & 2/2877\
\[tab:main\]
[|lccccccccccc|]{} Name & distance (arcsec) & $c_{12}$ & $\sigma_{12}$ & $c_{23}$ & $\sigma_{23}$ & $c_{34}$ & $\sigma_{34}$ & $s_b$ & $s_q$ & $class$ & $\pi$\
2FGL J1742.5$-$3323 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J174220.74$-$333005.4 & 414.44 & 0.55 & 0.11 & 2.26 & 0.08 & 2.14 & 0.06 & 0.28 & 0.07 & B & 13/2475\
2FGL J1743.2$-$2304 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J174224.66$-$225942.4 & 710.92 & 1.02 & 0.06 & 2.56 & 0.04 & 1.88 & 0.04 & 0.58 & 0.35 & B & 0/3656\
2FGL J1745.6+0203 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J174526.95+020532.7 & 208.91 & 1.06 & 0.04 & 2.63 & 0.04 & 2.19 & 0.08 & 0.57 & 0.57 & A & 0/4745\
J174647.05+020925.9 & 1066.59 & 1.07 & 0.04 & 2.61 & 0.06 & 2.27 & 0.16 & 0.38 & 0.39 & A & 0/4745\
J174507.82+015442.5 & 729.02 & 1.32 & 0.03 & 3.5 & 0.03 & 2.4 & 0.03 & 0.00 & 0.7 & B & 0/4745\
2FGL J1746.5$-$3238 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J174609.56$-$323717.1 & 326.79 & 0.79 & 0.04 & 2.11 & 0.03 & 1.59 & 0.03 & 0.82 & 0.35 & B & 1/436\
2FGL J1747.2$-$3507 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J174753.04$-$352154.3 & 975.52 & 0.75 & 0.03 & 2.35 & 0.03 & 1.78 & 0.02 & 1.01 & 0.43 & A & 0/3389\
J174741.23$-$350334.3 & 385.87 & 0.72 & 0.04 & 1.97 & 0.03 & 1.34 & 0.03 & 0.87 & 0.36 & B & 6/3389\
2FGL J1748.6$-$2913 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J174832.69$-$291040.8 & 210.12 & 0.48 & 0.05 & 1.74 & 0.06 & 2.09 & 0.09 & 0.36 & 0.00 & B & 0/518\
J174830.54$-$291822.6 & 292.64 & 0.68 & 0.04 & 2.0 & 0.03 & 1.49 & 0.05 & 0.67 & 0.28 & B & 0/518\
J174838.23$-$291609.7 & 137.48 & 1.16 & 0.2 & 2.78 & 0.11 & 2.77 & 0.1 & 0.1 & 0.17 & C & 0/518\
2FGL J1749.1+0515 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J174850.00+050822.5 & 540.35 & 1.23 & 0.06 & 3.1 & 0.08 & 2.86 & 0.15 & 0.11 & 0.3 & C & 0/2912\
2FGL J1754.1$-$2930 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J175438.09$-$291752.5 & 850.88 & 0.65 & 0.04 & 2.11 & 0.03 & 1.4 & 0.02 & 0.84 & 0.39 & A & 0/3242\
J175414.40$-$293326.6 & 187.81 & 0.83 & 0.12 & 2.08 & 0.07 & 1.34 & 0.06 & 0.26 & 0.15 & B & 9/3242\
J175304.57$-$292725.2 & 860.74 & 0.69 & 0.15 & 2.09 & 0.09 & 1.72 & 0.06 & 0.3 & 0.11 & B & 9/3242\
2FGL J1759.2$-$3853 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J175903.29$-$384739.5 & 401.59 & 0.61 & 0.04 & 2.03 & 0.03 & 1.44 & 0.03 & 0.82 & 0.38 & A & 0/1855\
\[tab:main\]
[|lccccccccccc|]{} Name & distance (arcsec) & $c_{12}$ & $\sigma_{12}$ & $c_{23}$ & $\sigma_{23}$ & $c_{34}$ & $\sigma_{34}$ & $s_b$ & $s_q$ & $class$ & $\pi$\
2FGL J1802.8$-$6706 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J180100.62$-$670503.7 & 647.12 & 1.0 & 0.04 & 3.12 & 0.06 & 2.47 & 0.13 & 0.00 & 0.41 & B & 1/3111\
2FGL J1811.3$-$2421 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J181126.39$-$240459.9 & 1018.47 & 0.84 & 0.04 & 2.74 & 0.03 & 2.56 & 0.03 & 0.65 & 0.56 & A & 0/4178\
2FGL J1813.6$-$2821 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J181345.24$-$283058.6 & 594.38 & 0.75 & 0.04 & 2.26 & 0.03 & 2.1 & 0.02 & 0.94 & 0.4 & A & 0/1731\
2FGL J1819.3$-$1523 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J181947.65$-$152807.1 & 479.71 & 0.66 & 0.11 & 2.22 & 0.11 & 2.12 & 0.12 & 0.25 & 0.1 & B & 1/1363\
2FGL J1821.8+0830 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J182134.70+084319.1 & 802.9 & 1.15 & 0.09 & 2.87 & 0.13 & 2.6 & 0.28 & 0.14 & 0.18 & C & 0/2585\
2FGL J1824.5+1013 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J182448.39+100712.6 & 423.77 & 1.19 & 0.06 & 2.76 & 0.06 & 2.1 & 0.17 & 0.27 & 0.35 & B & 0/1066\
2FGL J1827.6+1149 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J182721.63+114844.0 & 265.97 & 1.11 & 0.07 & 2.57 & 0.11 & 2.43 & 0.3 & 0.17 & 0.2 & C & 0/2202\
2FGL J1831.2$-$1518 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J183033.83$-$151412.0 & 651.32 & 0.89 & 0.04 & 2.59 & 0.05 & 1.76 & 0.12 & 0.42 & 0.18 & B & 2/4390\
J183205.20$-$152327.9 & 782.97 & 0.85 & 0.07 & 2.23 & 0.06 & 1.54 & 0.12 & 0.31 & 0.15 & B & 2/4390\
J183050.58$-$153533.2 & 1104.95 & 0.46 & 0.04 & 1.85 & 0.03 & 1.71 & 0.03 & 0.74 & 0.23 & B & 2/4390\
2FGL J1832.0$-$0200 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J183208.77$-$015414.2 & 421.64 & 0.72 & 0.04 & 2.18 & 0.05 & 2.04 & 0.12 & 0.44 & 0.18 & B & 0/1036\
2FGL J1832.2$-$6502 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J183256.27$-$651006.5 & 535.98 & 1.17 & 0.06 & 2.91 & 0.12 & 2.77 & 0.26 & 0.12 & 0.22 & C & 0/1700\
2FGL J1835.4+1036 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J183551.92+103056.8 & 510.44 & 1.04 & 0.04 & 2.94 & 0.04 & 2.55 & 0.07 & 0.52 & 0.61 & A & 0/2844\
\[tab:main\]
[|lccccccccccc|]{} Name & distance (arcsec) & $c_{12}$ & $\sigma_{12}$ & $c_{23}$ & $\sigma_{23}$ & $c_{34}$ & $\sigma_{34}$ & $s_b$ & $s_q$ & $class$ & $\pi$\
2FGL J1835.4+1349 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J183522.00+135733.9 & 484.14 & 1.15 & 0.06 & 2.78 & 0.06 & 2.28 & 0.13 & 0.33 & 0.38 & A & 1/2344\
J183535.35+134848.9 & 141.16 & 0.78 & 0.04 & 2.26 & 0.05 & 2.02 & 0.15 & 0.44 & 0.19 & B & 1/2344\
J183539.22+135055.0 & 206.92 & 1.22 & 0.04 & 2.82 & 0.06 & 2.67 & 0.11 & 0.19 & 0.44 & B & 1/2344\
2FGL J1835.5$-$0649 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J183538.53$-$064854.2 & 71.66 & 0.61 & 0.04 & 1.74 & 0.04 & 2.12 & 0.09 & 0.55 & 0.00 & B & 0/622\
J183554.30$-$065518.0 & 427.7 & 0.74 & 0.05 & 1.88 & 0.05 & 1.96 & 0.09 & 0.39 & 0.00 & B & 0/622\
2FGL J1837.9+3821 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J183656.31+382233.2 & 692.72 & 1.21 & 0.04 & 2.92 & 0.05 & 2.51 & 0.1 & 0.22 & 0.5 & B & 0/6850\
J183816.58+383708.9 & 992.13 & 1.33 & 0.03 & 2.93 & 0.04 & 2.52 & 0.08 & 0.00 & 0.59 & B & 0/6850\
J183812.98+380159.9 & 1170.32 & 0.99 & 0.05 & 2.42 & 0.09 & 2.33 & 0.28 & 0.27 & 0.21 & B & 0/6850\
J183753.23+384500.2 & 1429.91 & 1.34 & 0.04 & 2.98 & 0.04 & 2.2 & 0.08 & 0.00 & 0.55 & B & 0/6850\
J183742.09+381955.6 & 167.03 & 1.14 & 0.06 & 2.75 & 0.1 & 2.16 & 0.36 & 0.18 & 0.23 & C & 2/6850\
J183828.81+382705.1 & 534.57 & 0.99 & 0.05 & 2.45 & 0.12 & 2.6 & 0.3 & 0.2 & 0.17 & C & 2/6850\
J183836.32+382924.4 & 694.43 & 1.22 & 0.06 & 3.06 & 0.1 & 2.67 & 0.26 & 0.11 & 0.25 & C & 2/6850\
J183746.20+380846.5 & 750.76 & 1.04 & 0.07 & 2.85 & 0.13 & 2.69 & 0.3 & 0.14 & 0.18 & C & 2/6850\
J183642.07+381203.1 & 1016.29 & 1.05 & 0.07 & 3.06 & 0.13 & 2.17 & 0.47 & 0.12 & 0.16 & C & 2/6850\
2FGL J1839.0$-$0102 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J183839.61$-$010614.0 & 435.0 & 0.85 & 0.04 & 2.69 & 0.03 & 2.21 & 0.04 & 0.79 & 0.48 & A & 1/1441\
2FGL J1842.3$-$5839 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J184317.58$-$583752.0 & 452.64 & 1.25 & 0.05 & 2.91 & 0.07 & 2.72 & 0.13 & 0.00 & 0.38 & B & 1/883\
J184240.89$-$584439.7 & 340.91 & 0.95 & 0.07 & 2.99 & 0.11 & 2.91 & 0.21 & 0.11 & 0.16 & C & 0/883\
2FGL J1844.3+1548 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J184425.36+154645.9 & 150.64 & 0.91 & 0.03 & 2.36 & 0.04 & 1.95 & 0.09 & 0.57 & 0.24 & B & 0/350\
2FGL J1846.6$-$2519 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J184700.67$-$245940.2 & 1215.87 & 1.19 & 0.11 & 2.75 & 0.1 & 2.13 & 0.28 & 0.12 & 0.19 & C & 2/5081\
2FGL J1847.2$-$0236 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J184633.39$-$023728.2 & 613.36 & 0.69 & 0.04 & 2.28 & 0.08 & 1.47 & 0.3 & 0.25 & 0.12 & B & 0/1203\
2FGL J1857.6+0211 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J185756.07+020729.2 & 323.88 & 0.58 & 0.05 & 2.1 & 0.07 & 1.98 & 0.22 & 0.3 & 0.07 & B & 0/415\
2FGL J1901.1+0427 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J190055.36+041949.3 & 517.32 & 0.95 & 0.04 & 2.57 & 0.04 & 1.94 & 0.07 & 0.59 & 0.34 & B & 0/1306\
2FGL J1902.7$-$7053 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J190317.61$-$705539.6 & 199.8 & 0.93 & 0.06 & 2.8 & 0.14 & 2.43 & 0.36 & 0.16 & 0.16 & C & 1/1056\
2FGL J1904.8$-$0705 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J190444.57$-$070740.0 & 169.32 & 1.1 & 0.12 & 2.9 & 0.1 & 2.48 & 0.17 & 0.18 & 0.23 & C & 0/1562\
2FGL J1914.0+1436 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J191415.95+142839.3 & 484.89 & 0.77 & 0.03 & 2.07 & 0.03 & 1.28 & 0.04 & 0.7 & 0.36 & B & 0/2020\
\[tab:main\]
[|lccccccccccc|]{} Name & distance (arcsec) & $c_{12}$ & $\sigma_{12}$ & $c_{23}$ & $\sigma_{23}$ & $c_{34}$ & $\sigma_{34}$ & $s_b$ & $s_q$ & $class$ & $\pi$\
2FGL J1917.0$-$3027 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J191637.70$-$303356.6 & 525.92 & 1.19 & 0.06 & 3.01 & 0.08 & 2.47 & 0.2 & 0.15 & 0.28 & C & 1/1040\
2FGL J1923.4+2013 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J192142.39+201107.1 & 1491.67 & 1.08 & 0.12 & 2.61 & 0.07 & 2.29 & 0.13 & 0.28 & 0.27 & B & 7/14898\
J192540.72+201244.2 & 1870.96 & 0.95 & 0.05 & 2.64 & 0.04 & 1.88 & 0.06 & 0.55 & 0.34 & B & 7/14898\
J192501.65+204022.6 & 2080.26 & 0.95 & 0.06 & 2.28 & 0.04 & 2.01 & 0.08 & 0.43 & 0.22 & B & 7/14898\
2FGL J1924.9$-$1036 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J192501.64$-$104315.3 & 409.6 & 1.36 & 0.07 & 3.31 & 0.06 & 2.65 & 0.09 & 0.00 & 0.4 & B & 0/1471\
2FGL J1931.8+1325 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J193226.87+134708.5 & 1394.03 & 1.08 & 0.13 & 2.54 & 0.09 & 2.43 & 0.2 & 0.17 & 0.2 & C & 2/8391\
2FGL J1936.5$-$0855 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J193635.53$-$091142.4 & 943.64 & 1.27 & 0.05 & 2.91 & 0.05 & 2.46 & 0.1 & 0.00 & 0.44 & B & 0/5385\
J193718.37$-$090822.4 & 986.29 & 0.94 & 0.05 & 2.46 & 0.1 & 2.44 & 0.28 & 0.23 & 0.17 & C & 1/5385\
2FGL J1944.3+7325 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J194738.74+732636.3 & 843.32 & 1.27 & 0.04 & 2.83 & 0.04 & 2.38 & 0.07 & 0.00 & 0.61 & B & 2/1991\
J194312.51+731730.7 & 559.24 & 0.95 & 0.05 & 2.88 & 0.1 & 2.39 & 0.29 & 0.19 & 0.25 & C & 0/1991\
2FGL J1947.8$-$0739 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J194757.07$-$075000.1 & 614.49 & 1.09 & 0.06 & 2.69 & 0.13 & 2.44 & 0.48 & 0.14 & 0.17 & C & 1/4369\
2FGL J1949.7+2405 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J195012.96+235508.8 & 712.46 & 0.93 & 0.04 & 2.58 & 0.03 & 2.32 & 0.04 & 0.75 & 0.6 & A & —\
J195009.38+235610.2 & 634.3 & 0.61 & 0.04 & 2.13 & 0.04 & 1.45 & 0.12 & 0.41 & 0.18 & B & —\
J194857.53+240407.6 & 651.18 & 0.74 & 0.03 & 2.18 & 0.03 & 2.44 & 0.04 & 0.78 & 0.23 & B & —\
J194845.97+240237.4 & 820.79 & 0.79 & 0.05 & 2.12 & 0.06 & 2.19 & 0.08 & 0.47 & 0.00 & B & —\
2FGL J1950.3+1223 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J195014.42+123119.6 & 461.61 & 1.01 & 0.07 & 2.8 & 0.07 & 2.7 & 0.1 & 0.27 & 0.37 & B & 0/3119\
2FGL J2006.2$-$0929 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J200802.67$-$093641.9 & 1617.39 & 0.81 & 0.05 & 2.75 & 0.1 & 2.4 & 0.24 & 0.19 & 0.14 & C & 2/15089\
J200615.96$-$095721.0 & 1669.93 & 1.16 & 0.05 & 2.7 & 0.08 & 2.3 & 0.24 & 0.23 & 0.3 & C & 2/15089\
J200728.94$-$090737.4 & 1688.58 & 1.24 & 0.06 & 2.82 & 0.1 & 2.31 & 0.28 & 0.12 & 0.25 & C & 2/15089\
2FGL J2006.5$-$2256 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J200725.61$-$230605.9 & 906.51 & 1.05 & 0.05 & 2.91 & 0.09 & 2.39 & 0.21 & 0.28 & 0.29 & B & 0/2088\
2FGL J2006.9$-$1734 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J200626.14$-$173418.6 & 429.99 & 1.04 & 0.05 & 2.78 & 0.08 & 2.37 & 0.24 & 0.28 & 0.29 & B & 0/2143\
J200623.81$-$173639.2 & 473.07 & 1.16 & 0.07 & 3.09 & 0.11 & 2.73 & 0.23 & 0.13 & 0.24 & C & 0/2143\
\[tab:main\]
[|lccccccccccc|]{} Name & distance (arcsec) & $c_{12}$ & $\sigma_{12}$ & $c_{23}$ & $\sigma_{23}$ & $c_{34}$ & $\sigma_{34}$ & $s_b$ & $s_q$ & $class$ & $\pi$\
2FGL J2009.2$-$1505 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J200901.29$-$151620.3 & 700.87 & 1.02 & 0.06 & 3.02 & 0.1 & 2.52 & 0.24 & 0.17 & 0.26 & C & 0/1969\
2FGL J2031.4$-$1842 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J203142.40$-$182208.0 & 1219.37 & 0.89 & 0.04 & 2.39 & 0.09 & 2.31 & 0.26 & 0.29 & 0.18 & B & 0/3790\
J203159.63$-$183824.4 & 499.26 & 0.92 & 0.07 & 2.66 & 0.11 & 2.3 & 0.32 & 0.22 & 0.18 & C & 1/3790\
J203003.91$-$184441.6 & 1208.58 & 1.23 & 0.06 & 2.85 & 0.12 & 2.43 & 0.32 & 0.11 & 0.23 & C & 1/3790\
J203035.02$-$185910.1 & 1269.41 & 1.24 & 0.06 & 2.95 & 0.1 & 2.63 & 0.2 & 0.12 & 0.27 & C & 1/3790\
2FGL J2044.4$-$4757 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J204444.65$-$481006.7 & 764.03 & 1.02 & 0.03 & 2.8 & 0.04 & 2.44 & 0.07 & 0.64 & 0.65 & A & 0/1279\
J204520.57$-$475648.5 & 515.06 & 1.39 & 0.04 & 2.89 & 0.06 & 2.41 & 0.14 & 0.00 & 0.38 & B & 0/1279\
2FGL J2131.0$-$5417 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J213014.80$-$540748.6 & 728.48 & 1.09 & 0.05 & 2.6 & 0.13 & 2.64 & 0.32 & 0.16 & 0.18 & C & 1/2080\
2FGL J2200.1$-$6931 & & & & & & & & & & &\
J215916.12$-$692856.1 & 324.01 & 1.11 & 0.05 & 2.8 & 0.09 & 2.3 & 0.28 & 0.25 & 0.26 & B & 0/910\
\[tab:main\]
[^1]: http://www.asdc.asi.it/bzcat/
[^2]: http://wise2.ipac.caltech.edu/docs/release/prelim/
[^3]: http://wise2.ipac.caltech.edu/docs/release/allsky/
[^4]: http://wise2.ipac.caltech.edu/docs/release/prelim/expsup/sec2\_3g.html
[^5]: http://wise2.ipac.caltech.edu/docs/release/prelim/figures/prelim\_3x3-w1-equ.jpg
[^6]:
[^7]:
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
[**MARKET MILL DEPENDENCE PATTERN IN THE STOCK MARKET: MULTISCALE CONDITIONAL DYNAMICS**]{}
**[ Sergey Zaitsev$^{(a)}$, Alexander Zaitsev$^{(a)}$,\
Andrei Leonidov$^{(b,a,c)}$[^1]$^,$[^2], Vladimir Trainin$^{(a)}$, ]{}**
\(a) [*Letra Group, LLC, Boston, Massachusetts, USA*]{}
\(b) [*Theory Department, P.N. Lebedev Physics Institute, Moscow, Russia*]{}
\(c) [*Institute of Theoretical and Experimental Physics, Moscow, Russia*]{}
[**Abstract**]{}
Market Mill is a complex dependence pattern leading to nonlinear correlations and predictability in intraday dynamics of stock prices. The present paper puts together previous efforts to build a dynamical model reflecting the market mill asymmetries. We show that certain properties of the conditional dynamics at a single time scale such as a characteristic shape of an asymmetry generating component of the conditional probability distribution result in the “elementary” market mill pattern. This asymmetry generating component matches the empirical distribution obtained from the market data. We discuss these properties as a mixture of trend-preserving and contrarian strategies used by market agents. Three basic types of asymmetry patterns characterizing individual stocks are outlined. Multiple time scale considerations make the resulting “composite” mill similar to the empirical market mill patterns. Multiscale model also reflects a multi-agent nature of the market.
Introduction
============
The present paper continues a series of papers studying the complex dependence patterns in high frequency stock price dynamics [@LTZ05; @LTZZ06a; @LTZZ06b; @LTZZ06c; @LTZZ07]. The most important of them, the market mill asymmetries [@LTZZ06a; @LTZZ06b; @LTZZ06c; @LTZZ07], correspond to specific probabilistic interrelations between consequent price increments. The term “market mill” refers to a mill-like asymmetric four-blade dependence pattern [@LTZZ06a], see Fig. 1. The main emphasis of [@LTZZ06a; @LTZZ06b; @LTZZ06c] was on systematic phenomenological description of the market mill asymmetries and other related properties of high frequency stock price dynamics.
In [@LTZZ07] a causal conditional dynamics model leading to the market mill asymmetries and nonlinear dependence of expectation value of a future price increment y (“response”) on the value of a realized price increment x (“push”) was suggested. The model described probabilistic relation between the push $x$ and the response $y$ in terms of the three - component conditional distribution ${\cal P}(y|x)$. The distribution ${\cal
P}(y|x)$ was described as an $x$-dependent additive superposition of the symmetric contribution ${\cal P}^0(y|x)$ and the asymmetry-generating components ${\cal P}^+(y|x)$ and ${\cal P}^-(y|x)$ characterized by a bias towards trend-preserving and contrarian strategies correspondingly. The model of [@LTZZ07] referred to a single time scale.
It is however well known that a description of certain features of stock price dynamics requires accounting for multiple time scales, at the level of both price increments (returns) [@Man; @G80; @LB01; @LZ03; @LB05; @LB06; @LBY07; @P08] and microscopic long-memory properties of order flow and trades [@LF04; @BGPW04; @BKP06]. In particular, the presence of several distinct time scales in volatility dynamics was explicitly demonstrated in [@LZ03]. In [@LTZZ06a] the empirical market mill patterns were shown to exist at different time scales ranging from minutes to hours.
In the present paper we incorporate the idea of multiple time scales into the market mill model. First we introduce an elementary market mill mechanism at a fixed time scale. We describe an easier way of specifying the elementary market mill by reformulating the model of [@LTZZ07] in such a way that $y$ is a [*sum*]{} of noise and non-random asymmetry generating components. Introducing specific features of the non-random component based on empirical data we come up with the market mill pattern. Then we build a multiscale composite mill as a weighted superposition of elementary asymmetry-generating mechanisms operating at different timescales.
The outline of the paper is as follows.
We start with a description of generic features of the market mill asymmetries in paragraph [**2.1**]{}. Particular emphasis is put onto formulating a version stock price dynamics with an additive superposition of noise and asymmetry-generating mechanisms. In paragraph [**2.2**]{} we describe the conditional distribution allowing to reproduce all observed market mill asymmetries. The properties of explicit dynamical model giving rise to a single time scale elementary market mill asymmetries are discussed in paragraph [**2.3**]{}. The composite multiscale dynamics allowing to reproduce all the properties of the market mill asymmetries is described in paragraph [**2.4**]{}. The section [**3**]{} contains a discussion of the origin of the market mill asymmetries in terms of three basic strategies, market mill, trend-following and contrarian, used by market participants. We demonstrate that appropriately weighted superpositions of these basic strategies allows to describe various two-dimensional asymmetry patterns characterizing individual stocks. We formulate our conclusions in section [**4**]{}.
Conditional dynamics
====================
Qualitative features
--------------------
At the fundamental level the ultimate goal of studying the dependence patterns in price dynamics is to describe the observed dependence patterns between price increments $x=p(t_1+\Delta T)-p(t_1)$ and $y=p(t_2+\Delta
T)-p(t_2)$, where $t_2 \geq t_1+\Delta T$, in terms of explicit strategies used by market participants. These strategies are realized through systematic reaction of market participants to the information about the sign and magnitude of the increment $x$ leading to some predictability of the increment $y$. A strategy is thus fully described by probabilistic properties of $y$ at given $x$ i.e. by a conditional distribution ${\cal P}(y|\,x)$. An existence of dependence patterns relating the push $x$ and the response $y$ is then reflected in systematic non-random features of ${\cal P}(y|\,x)$ which induce, in turn, dependence patterns of the full bivariate distribution ${\cal P}(x,y)$ such as the market mill ones.
Let us describe the most important properties of ${\cal P}(y|\,x)$ following from an analysis of empirical data. To this aim let us introduce an additive decomposition of the response $y$ into noise $y_{\rm rand}$ and systematic $y_{\rm mill}$ contributions: $$\label{sumresp}
y(x) \, = \, y_{\rm rand}(x) + y_{\rm mill} (x) \, ,$$ where the random component $y_{\rm rand}(x)$ is described by a distribution ${\cal P}_0 (y_{\rm rand}|\,x)$ and the systematic component $y_{\rm mill}$ is described by a distribution ${\cal P}_{\rm mill}(y_{\rm mill}|\,x)$. The probability distribution for $y(x)$ is, naturally, ${\cal P}(y|\,x)$. A graphic illustration of the decomposition (\[sumresp\]) and qualitative features of the corresponding probability distributions ${\cal P}_0
(y_{\rm rand}|\,x)$, ${\cal P}_{\rm mill}(y_{\rm mill}|\,x)$ and ${\cal P}(y|\,x)$ is given, for the positive push $x$, in Fig. 2 in columns [I]{}, [II]{} and [III]{} respectively. Let us note that the above additive decomposition is very natural from the point of view of an agent-based description where the orders originating from different strategies are [*added*]{} in the time interval under consideration at each evolution step.
The distribution ${\cal P}_0 (y_{\rm rand}|\,x)$ is a symmetric function of its argument, ${\cal P}_0 (y_{\rm
rand} |\,x)={\cal P}_0(-y_{\rm rand}|\,x)$, see column [I]{} in Fig. 2, and describes the main contribution to the conditional dynamics. Market data shows [@LTZZ06b; @LTZZ07] that the relative weight of the symmetric contribution is dominant with respect to the asymmetric one[^3].
On top of the dominating random dynamics described by ${\cal P}_0 (y_{\rm rand}|\,x)$ there exists a systematic asymmetry-generating dynamics described by ${\cal P}_{\rm mill}(y_{\rm mill}|\,x)$ illustrated in column [II]{} of Fig. 2 for $x=x_0>0$. Its message can be formulated in a simple statement. If the push $x$ is followed by the response $y$ that does not exceed $x$ by magnitude, it is slightly more probable that the response is contrarian, ${\rm sign}(y)=-{\rm sign}(x)$. For responses with the magnitude exceeding that of the push it is, on contrary, more probable that the response is trend-following, ${\rm sign}(y)={\rm sign}(x)$. For example, for positive pushes $x>0$ there is a small bias towards responses of two sorts: those in the interval $y \in [-x,0]$ and those in the interval $y>x$. Let us note that this particular property of ${\cal P}_{\rm mill}(y_{\rm mill}|\,x)$ also goes along with the empirically observed features, see Fig. 3.
The above-described coexistence of dominating symmetric and subdominant asymmetric responses leads to the total distribution with the shape sketched in column [III]{} in Fig. 2. Technically the conditional distribution ${\cal P}(y|\,x)$ is given by an appropriate convolution of the distributions of the random and systematic components $$\label{condistot}
{\cal P} (y|\,x) = \int dy_{\rm rand} dy_{\rm mill} \, \delta (y - y_{\rm rand}-y_{\rm mill}) \,
{\cal P}_0 (y_{\rm rand}|\,x) \, {\cal P}_{\rm mill} (y_{\rm mill}|\,x)$$
With the specified probabilistic model for the conditional distribution ${\cal P}(y|\,x)$ the last step is to establish its relation to the full bivariate distribution ${\cal P}(x,y)$ and its asymmetry patterns. Let us remind that the specific dependence patterns of major interest to us, the market mill asymmetries [@LTZZ06a; @LTZZ06b; @LTZZ06c], refer to specific asymmetries of the bivariate distribution ${\cal P}(x,y)$ with respect to the axes $x=0$, $y=x$, $y=0$ and $y=-x$.
First, one reconstructs the bivariate distribution ${\cal P}(x,y)$ from conditional dynamics described by ${\cal
P}(y|\,x)$. This reconstruction is based on the relation ${\cal P}(x,y)={\cal P}(y|\,x) {\cal P}(x)$, where ${\cal P}(x)$ is a corresponding marginal distribution.
The market mill asymmetry patterns are described in terms of corresponding nontrivial asymmetric components ${\cal
P}^a (x,y)$ of the distribution ${\cal P}(x,y)$. For example, for the asymmetry with respect to the axis $x=0$ this asymmetric component reads $${\cal P}^a \, = \, \frac{1}{2} \left( {\cal P} (x,y) - {\cal P}(x,-y) \right )$$ The corresponding market mill dependence pattern refers [@LTZZ06a] to the specific shape of ${\cal P}_{\rm
mill} (x,y) \equiv {\cal P}^a (x,y) \cdot \Theta \left[ {\cal P}^a (x,y) \right]$, where $\Theta$ is the Heaviside step function. The asymmetric components ${\cal P}^a (x,y)$ are also responsible for nontrivial conditional dependencies between $y$ and $x$. For example, again in the case of the asymmetry with respect to the axis $x=0$, the mean conditional response $\langle y \rangle_x$, $$\label{condmeanpush}
\langle y \rangle_x \, = \, \int dy \, y \, \frac{{\cal P}^a (x,y)}{{\cal P}(x) } \, ,$$ has a specific $z$-shaped dependence on $x$ [@LTZZ06a].
The required identification of noise and asymmetry-generating components of ${\cal P}(y|\,x)$ is achieved [@LTZZ06a] by extracting, in complete analogy with the above-described procedure for the bivariate distribution ${\cal P} (x,y)$, the symmetric and mill components of ${\cal P}(y|\,x)$. One could say that ${\cal
P}_{\rm mill} (y_{\rm mill}|\,x)$ contains “irreducible” information on the asymmetry-generating dynamics. The experimentally measured mill component [@LTZZ06a] is shown in Fig. 3. The explicit version of conditional dynamics described in the next paragraph is based on stylized features of ${\cal P}_{\rm mill}(y_{\rm mill}|\,x)$ following from the analysis of Fig. 3 and illustrated in Fig. 4. Let us stress once again that from the shape of the mill component shown in Figs. 3,4 it is clear that the systematic asymmetry-generating contribution $y_{\rm
mill} (x)$ originates from [*both*]{} trend-preserving and contrarian order placement.
Quantitative formulation
------------------------
Let us now turn to a step-by-step description of the conditional dynamics in question.
A compact description of the conditional distributions shown in Figs. 2-4 can be given by dividing the $x-y$ plane into eight sectors [@LTZZ06a] shown in Fig. 5 and introducing an indicator function $f_{\rm mill}(x,y)$ equal to $1$ in the even sectors and equal to $0$ in the odd ones, see Fig. 5(a)[^4]. Then $$\label{conmilldist}
{\cal P}_{\rm mill} (y_{\rm mill}|\,x) \, = \, f_{\rm mill}(x,y_{\rm mill}) \, {\cal P}_0 (y_{\rm mill}|\,x)$$ where ${\cal P}_0 (y|\,x)$ is a symmetric distribution of the response $y$ at some fixed push $x$. The indicator function $f_{\rm mill}(x,y)$ cuts from ${\cal P}_0 (y|\,x)$ the pieces having support on the corresponding segments of the $y$ axis. These cuts and the corresponding support intervals in the $y$ axis are shown, for $x=\pm
\$ \, 0.07$, in Fig. 5(b). The lines in the shaded areas correspond to the segments of the $y$ axis carrying nonzero contribution to ${\cal P} (y|\,x)$ in Fig. 3.
We see that the structure of systematic response $y_{\rm mill}$ depends, in an essential way, on the sign of the push $x$.
Let us first assume that the push $x$ is positive, $x>0$. The corresponding response $y_{\rm mill}$ could be positive or negative. For $y_{\rm mill}>0$ its value lies in the interval $y_{\rm mill}>x$ with the probabilistic weight determined by the part of distribution in Fig. 4 (a) marked with green. For $y_{\rm mill}<0$ its value lies in the interval $y_{\rm mill} \in [-x,0)$ with the probabilistic weight determined by the part of distribution in Fig. 4(a) marked with red.
In terms of systematic strategies of market agents this corresponds to a push-dependent mixture of trend-preserving and contrarian strategies. Indeed, the part of distribution in Fig. 4(a) marked with green corresponds to trend-preserving order placement favoring the price growth while that marked with red is contrarian and corresponds to that favoring its decline.
If the push is negative, $x<0$, the response could again be negative or positive. For $y_{\rm mill}<0$ its value lies in the interval $y_{\rm mill}<x$ with the probabilistic weight determined by the part of distribution in Fig. 4 (b) marked with green. For $y_{\rm mill}>0$ its value lies in the interval $y_{\rm mill} \in (0,-x]$ with the probabilistic weight determined by the part of distribution in Fig. 4(b) marked with red. Here again we see a push-dependent mixture of trend-preserving (green) and contrarian (red) strategies.
The technical message of Figs. 2-5 is that a procedure of constructing\
${\cal P}_{\rm mill} (y_{\rm mill}|\,x)$ consists in cutting appropriate pieces from the symmetric distribution ${\cal P}_0(y|\,x)$.
In our simulations described below we shall assume, for simplicity, that ${\cal P}_0 (y_{\rm mill}|\,x)$ does not depend on $x$[^5] and use a Laplace distribution $$\label{dlaplace}
{\cal P}_0 (y) = \frac{1}{2 \sigma_{\Delta T}} \exp \left \{ -\frac{|\,y|}{\sigma_{\Delta T}} \right \}$$ that gives a reasonably good description of the bulk of the distribution of price increments at small intraday timescales.
Then for small $|\,x| < \log 2 \cdot \sigma_{\rm \Delta T}$ a dominating strategy is the trend-preserving one while for large $|\,x| > \log 2 \cdot \sigma_{\rm \Delta T}$ this is a contrarian one.
In what follows the asymmetry-generating distributions (\[conmilldist\]) will be used for explicitly constructing a series of price increments combining the noise $y_{\rm rand}$ and asymmetric $y_{\rm mill}$ contributions. In this construction a decision of using the systematic strategy is also randomized. In our simulations we first generate the noise increment price series using the distribution (\[dlaplace\]). Then we move along this price series and, at each step, decide whether a nontrivial asymmetry-generating contribution will be added to the noise increment in one of the following time intervals. Thus, in addition to knowing how to generate the asymmetry-generating component as described by (\[conmilldist\]), we have to decide whether, for a given realized price increment $x$, the asymmetric contribution is generated and define an interval in which the systematic price increment will be added. It is convenient to first specify a target interval and then either generate a nontrivial contribution to the increment in this interval or leave the interval’s increment untouched[^6].
Randomization of an appearance of the asymmetry-generating component is realized by assuming that at each step the asymmetry-generating contribution is either switched on with a push-dependent probability $\nu(x)$ or switched off with a probability $1-\nu(x)$. If it is switched off a zero contribution $y_{\rm mill}=0$ is generated.
Single-scale conditional dynamics. Elementary mill
--------------------------------------------------
Let us now describe an explicit numerical realization of the dynamical model described in the previous paragraph. This model is an additive superposition of a trivial memoryless dynamics generating uncorrelated price increments sampled from the symmetric distribution ${\cal P}_0(y_{\rm rand})$ and the above-described nontrivial conditional dynamics generating asymmetric response $y_{\rm mill}$ for a given push $x$ in the interval separated from that corresponding to the push by a randomly chosen number of intervals $l$. The single-scale conditional dynamics corresponding to the elementary mill is then fully specified by selecting a distribution ${\cal P}(l|L)$ in the number $l-1$ of time intervals separating those corresponding to the push $x$ and the response $y_{\rm mill}$ where the parameter $L$ controls a shape of this distribution. In what follows we shall use ${\cal P}(l|L) \propto
\exp (-l/L)$ with $L=3$. More precisely, when reaching a time interval with the realized price increment $x$ in it[^7]:
1. [If $x \neq 0$ in a fraction of $\nu_0=0.12$ cases an [*additional*]{} price increment $y_{\rm mill}$ sampled from ${\cal P}(y_{\rm mill}|\,x)$ is added to the preexisting increment in the interval at some distance $l \, \Delta T$ from the interval with the realized increment $x$ where $l$ is sampled from ${\cal P}(l|L)$.]{}
2. [ If $x=0$ no action is taken. ]{}
3. [ The basic symmetric distribution ${\cal P}_0 (y)$ is a Laplace one (\[dlaplace\]) and the width of the “elementary” distribution $\sigma=\$ \, 0.02$ corresponds to the observable standard deviation of price increments for $\Delta T_0 = 1 \,{\rm min.}$. ]{}
The resulting four mills corresponding to the asymmetries with respect to the axes $x=0$, $x=y$, $y=0$ and $y=-x$ are shown in Fig. 6. We see that the the model gives a very good description of all the four market mill asymmetries.
From the analysis of market data we know that the market mill patterns are observed at different intraday time scales. Because of the response delay built in into the model one expects that the 1-minute elementary mill will propagate some millness to asymmetries measured at larger time intervals. To analyze this issue, let us again turn to the division of the $x-y$ plane into eight sectors [@LTZZ06a], see Fig. 5(a), and introduce as a quantitative measure of “millness” the quantity $\rho_{\rm mill}$ which is a relative difference between the density of even and odd sectors in the domain $ \{ x,y \} \in [-\delta p^*,\delta p^*]$: $$\rho_{\rm mill} \, = \, \frac{(n_8-n_1)+(n_2-n_7)+(n_6-n_3)+(n_4-n_5)}{n_{\rm tot}}$$ where $\{ n_i \}$ are numbers of points generated within an $i$-th sector of this square. In our analysis we used $\delta p^* = \, \$ \, 0.3$.
The mean millness $ \langle \rho_{\rm mill} \rangle$ and its standard deviation $\sigma(\rho_{\rm mill})$ computed for the market data for 2000 stocks traded at NYSE and NASDAQ stock exchanges in 2004-2005 for a set of time intervals $\Delta T = 1,3,6 \, {\rm min}$ are shown in the first two rows of Table 1. In this computation the total set of stocks was randomly divided into 20 groups containing 100 stocks each. In this way we obtained 20 values for $\rho_{\rm mill}$ within each group. Their mean and standard deviation are the numbers shown in Table 1.
In our theoretical simulations we created, for each case considered, 2000 time series of the same length as in the above-described market data which we also divide into 20 subsets containing 100 time series each. The corresponding mean values and standard deviations characterizing theoretical millness are computed from 20 values characterizing these 20 subsets.
In the third and fourth row of Table 1 we show the mean millness and its standard deviation for the elementary market mill model. We see that, at variance with experimental observations, the original millness generated by the elementary mill at the scale of $\Delta T=1 \, {\rm min}$ gradually weakens with growing time interval $\Delta
T$[^8].
[**Table 1.**]{}
Source Quantity $\Delta T=1 {\rm min}$ $\Delta T=3 {\rm min}$ $\Delta T=6 {\rm min}$
----------------- ----------------------------------------- ------------------------ ------------------------ ------------------------
Market data $ \langle \rho_{\rm mill} \rangle$ 1.52 2.32 2.32
Market data $\sigma \left( \rho_{\rm mill} \right)$ 0.07 0.08 0.10
Elementary mill $ \langle \rho_{\rm mill} \rangle $ 1.85 0.94 0.39
Elementary mill $\sigma \left( \rho_{\rm mill} \right)$ 0.02 0.02 0.04
Composite mill $\langle \rho_{\rm mill} \rangle$ 0.87 1.71 1.71
Composite mill $\sigma \left( \rho_{\rm mill} \right)$ 0.01 0.04 0.04
Table 1. Values of mean millness and its standard deviation (both in percent) for market data, elementary and composite mills.
Multiscale conditional dynamics. Composite mill
-----------------------------------------------
The analysis in the previous section has shown that the observable initial growth and consequent constancy of millness $\rho_{mill} (\Delta T)$ can not be achieved by considering a single elementary mill operating at some “starting” scale $\Delta T_0$. A natural generalization of this construction is achieved by augmenting conditional dynamics corresponding to the elementary mill by adding, with some weights, conditional dynamics mechanisms operating at larger time scales. More explicitly, let us consider a sequence of time scales $\{ \Delta T_i=i \,
\Delta T_0 \}$. Then at some given moment $t$ there is a probability $\nu_1$ of switching on an asymmetric conditional dynamics at the scale $\Delta T_0$, a probability $\nu_2$ of switching on an asymmetric conditional dynamics at the scale $2 \cdot \Delta T_0$, etc.
Let us consider as an example a superposition of two mills operating at time scales $\Delta T_0$ and $2 \cdot
\Delta T_0$.
For the first dynamics the push at time $t$ is a price increment $\delta P ([t-\Delta T_0,t])$ and the response is generated in the interval $[t+l_1 \Delta T_0,t+(l_1 +1) \Delta T_0]$ where $l_1$ is sampled from ${\cal P}(l|L)$ and the standard deviation of the response is $\sigma_{\Delta T_0}$.
For the second dynamics the push at time $t$ is a price increment $\delta P ([t-2*\Delta T_0,t])$ and the response is generated in the interval $[t+l_2 \Delta T_0,t+(l_2 +1) \Delta T_0]$ where $l_2$ is sampled from ${\cal
P}(l|2*L)$ and the standard deviation of the response is $\sqrt{2} \sigma_{\Delta T_0}$.
In the general case for the i-th mill component the push at time $t$ is a price increment $\delta P ([t-i*\Delta
T_0,t])$ and the response is generated in the interval $[t+l_i \Delta T_0,t+(l_i +1) \Delta T_0]$ where $l_i$ is sampled from ${\cal P}(l|i*L)$ and the standard deviation of the response is $\sqrt{i} \sigma_{\Delta T_0}$.
The above-described probabilistic construction can be termed a composite mill, where composition refers accounting for mill mechanisms operating on a set of increasing time scales $ \{ \Delta T_i \}$.
Let us consider a regularly decaying infinite series of weights $\nu_i$, $\nu_i=0.8 \cdot \nu_{i-1}$ with $\nu_1=0.12$. This leads to well-defined market mill asymmetries akin to the ones shown in Fig. 6. The resulting mean asymmetry measure $\langle \rho_{\rm mill} \rangle$ and its standard deviation $\sigma(\rho_{\rm mill})$ calculated on the same set of time scales as in the previous section are shown in the last two rows in Table 1. We see that by including conditional dynamics mechanism operating at a set of timescales allows to reproduce the observed dependence of the millness $\rho_{\rm mill}$ on the time scale $\Delta_t$. This constitutes a clear evidence of the existence of multiscale conditional dynamics.
Discussion
==========
In this section we are going to make interpretation of the proposed model by adding a specific market sense to the model and discussing major possible reasons for the price evolution to result into such a complex pattern as the market mill.
The idea behind the developed conditional dynamics model is that properties of price increment in some time interval are probabilistically related to the behavior of price increments in one or several preceding time intervals. The properties of a price increment at some given timescale are determined by a weighted superposition of signals originating from events occurring at different timescales and separated from the interval under consideration by time intervals of varying length. This mechanism underlies the multiscale properties of price dynamics leading to the composite mill dependence patterns and leads to successful description of observable strength of market mill asymmetry on different time horizons. Let us stress that our description is based on the superposition of noise and signal where noise is dominant and signal obeys conditional dynamics.
The phenomenon of market mill asymmetry is most naturally understood in terms of an existence of multiple market agents/strategies leading to probabilistic dependence of past on future. The two basic types of such strategies are trend-following, resulting in positive correlation between past and future increments, and contrarian, leading to negative correlation between them. From the properties of conditional dynamics described in Section 2, see also [@LTZZ07], it is clear that the market mill asymmetry patterns arise as a result of a specific finely tuned balance between trend-preserving and contrarian tendencies. At this point it is important to recall that a detailed analysis of the asymmetry patterns characterizing individual stocks [@LTZZ06c] shows that the clear-cut market mill asymmetry is characteristic only for a certain subgroup of stocks and two other subgroups, predominantly trend-preserving and predominantly contrarian, can be identified. This diversity of stable individual asymmetry patterns can most naturally be described by an existence of three basic asymmetry generating modes, the market mill, contrarian and trend-following. The corresponding modes are illustrated, for positive push, in Fig. 7. An individual asymmetry pattern reflects a particular superposition of these signals reflecting the proportions in which corresponding strategies are present in the trading activity for the considered stock. Such generalized signal space indeed allows to reproduce the properties of individual asymmetry patterns. In Fig. 8 we compare the empirical [@LTZZ06c], Figs. 8.1a, 8.2a and 8.3a, and calculated, Figs. 8.1b, 8.2b and 8.3b, asymmetry patterns for the stocks DIS, HDI and DE having clear-cut correlated, market mill and anticorrelated asymmetry patterns respectively. Let us stress that the model description involves, with specific weights, all the three above-described fundamental signals. In particular, taking into account an admixture of market mill pattern is crucial for correctly reproducing the form of equiprobability lines for correlated and anticorrelated asymmetry patterns in Figs. 8.1a and 8.3a.
To establish a link to the agent-based picture described in [@LTZZ07], let us make a standard assumption that price increments $y$ are proportional to the cumulative signed volume of orders $\Omega_y$ in the time interval under consideration [@KK99; @PGGS01; @GGPS03]. The signal probability distribution can then be rephrased in terms of conditional probabilities of placing orders with cumulative signed volume $\Omega_y$ based on an information on the sign and magnitude of the set of realized price increment $\{x\}$. The resulting signal distribution of signed price orders ${\cal P} \left( \Omega_y | \, \{x\} \right)$ is thus determined by appropriately weighted contributions described by ${\cal P}^{\rm mill} \left( \Omega_y | \, \{x\} \right)$, ${\cal P}^{\rm cor} \left(
\Omega_y | \, \{x\} \right)$ and ${\cal P}^{\rm acor} \left( \Omega_y | \, \{x\} \right)$ referring to market mill, trend-following and contrarian contributions respectively.
Conclusions
===========
A reformulation of the three-component model of [@LTZZ07] providing an additive separation of noise and asymmetry-generating contributions is described. Specific shape of the asymmetry generating component of the conditional probability distribution at a single time scale leads to the elementary mill pattern. A multiscale conditional dynamics taking into account, in addition to the initial elementary mill, appropriately weighted conditional dynamics mechanisms combining trend-preserving and contrarian strategies operating on a set of increasing timescales is proposed. This composite model based on multiscale dynamics is shown to reproduce the market data on the market mill asymmetry for a set of timescales as well as three basics types of asymmetry patterns characterizing individual stocks.
V.T. is very grateful to Victor Yakhot for many useful discussions on topics related to the present paper.
The explicit expression for the appropriately normalized indicator function $f_{\rm mill}(x,y)$ reads $$\begin{aligned}
f_{\rm mill} (x>0,y) & = & 2\cdot \left [ \, \theta (y_{\rm mill}) \, \theta (y_{\rm mill}-x) +
\theta (-y_{\rm mill}) \, \theta(y_{\rm mill}+x) \, \right ] \\
f_{\rm mill} (x<0,y) & = & 2\cdot\left [ \, \theta (y_{\rm mill}) \, \theta (-y_{\rm mill}-x) +
\theta (-y_{\rm mill}) \, \theta(-y_{\rm mill}+x) \, \right ] \nonumber\end{aligned}$$
The conditional distribution taking into account the randomization of the yield of systematic strategies used in the simulations reads $${\cal P}_{\rm asym}(y_{\rm mill}|\,x) \, = \, (1-\nu(x)) \, \delta (y_{\rm mill}) + \nu(x) \,{\cal P}_{\rm mill} (y_{\rm mill}|\,x)$$ where $\delta (y_{\rm mill})$ is the Dirac delta-function. We used the following simple parametrization of $\nu(x)$: $$\begin{aligned}
\nu(x) & = & \nu_0 \, , \,\,\,\, |\,x| > 0 \nonumber \\
\nu(x) & = & 0 \, , \,\,\,\,\,\,\, |\,x| = 0\end{aligned}$$
[99]{} A. Leonidov, V. Trainin, A. Zaitsev, “On collective non-gaussian dependence patterns in high frequency financial data”, ArXiv:physics/0506072
A. Leonidov, V. Trainin, A. Zaitsev, S. Zaitsev, “Market Mill Dependence Pattern in the Stock Market: Asymmetry Structure, Nonlinear Correlations and Predictability”, arXiv:physics/0601098.
A. Leonidov, V. Trainin, A. Zaitsev, S. Zaitsev, “Market Mill Dependence Pattern in the Stock Market: Distribution Geometry, Moments and Gaussization”, arXiv:physics/0603103.
A. Leonidov, V. Trainin, A. Zaitsev, S. Zaitsev, “Market Mill Dependence Pattern in the Stock Market: Individual Portraits”, arXiv:physics/0605138.
A. Leonidov, V. Trainin, A. Zaitsev, S. Zaitsev, “Market Mill Dependence Pattern in the Stock Market: Modeling of Predictability and Asymmetry via Multi-component Conditional Distribution”, [*Physica A*]{} [**386**]{} (2007), 240
B. Mandelbrot, “Fractal and Multifractal Finance. Crashes and Long-dependence”, www.math.yale.edu/mandelbrot/webbooks/wb\_fin.html
C.W. Granger, “Long memory relationships and the aggregation of dynamical models”, [*Journal of Econometrics*]{} [**14**]{} (1980), 227-238
B. LeBaron, “Stochastic volatility as a simple generator of apparent financial power laws and long memory”, [*Quantitative Finance*]{} [**1**]{} (2001), 621-631.
P.E. Lynch, G.O. Zumbach, “Market heterogeneities and the causal struture of volatility”, [*Quantitative Finance*]{} [**3**]{} (2003), 320-331
L. Borland, J.-Ph. Bouchaud, “On a multi-timescale statistical feedback model for volatility fluctuations”, ArXiv:physics/0507073
B. LeBaron, “Time scales, agents, and empirical finance”, [*Medium Econometrische Toepassingen*]{} [**14**]{} (2006).
B. LeBaron, R. Yamamoto, “Long-memory in an order-driven market”, [*Physica A*]{} [**383**]{} (2007), 85-89.
S.V. Panuykov, “Theory of market fluctuations”, ArXiv:0804.4191(physics.soc-ph)
F. Lillo, J.D. Farmer, “The long memory of the efficient market”, [*Studies in Nonlinear Dynamics and Econometrics*]{}, [**8**]{} (2004)
J.-P. Bouchaud, Y. Gefen, M. Potters, M. Wyart, “Fluctuations and response in financial markets: the subtle nature of ’random’ price changes”, [*Quantitative Finance*]{} [**4**]{} (2004), 176-190
J.-P. Bouchaud, J. Kockelloren, M. Potters, “Random walks, liquidity molasses and critical response in financial markets”, [*Quantitative Finance*]{} [**6**]{} (2006), 115-123
A. Kempf, O. Korn, “Market depth and order size”, [*Journal of Financial Markets*]{} [**2**]{} (1999), 29
V. Plerou, X. Gabaix, P. Goikrishnan, H.E. Stanley, “Quantifying stock price reponse to demand fluctuations”, [*Phys. Rev.*]{} [**E66**]{} (2002), 027104
X. Gabaix, P. Goikrishnan, V. Plerou, H.E. Stanley, “A theory of power-law distributions in financial markets fluctuations”, [*Nature*]{}, [**423**]{} (2003), 267
[^1]: Corresponding author. E-mail [email protected]
[^2]: Supported by the RFBR grant 06-06-80357
[^3]: A quantitative analysis of the relative weight of the asymmetric contribution can be found in [@LTZZ07].
[^4]: An explicit expression for $f_{\rm mill}(x,y)$ is given in the Appendix.
[^5]: In reality the shape of ${\cal P}_0
(y_{\rm mill}|\,x)$ does depend on $x$, see a detailed discussion in [@LTZZ06b]
[^6]: The explicit formula describing the asymmetry-generating conditional dynamics is given in the Appendix.
[^7]: Note that $x$ may contain asymmetric contributions generated at earlier steps.
[^8]: The last two rows in Table 1 contain the results obtained for the composite mill, see paragraph [**2.4**]{}.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'This paper presents the design of a multi-spacecraft system for the deflection of asteroids. Each spacecraft is equipped with a fibre laser and a solar concentrator. The laser induces the sublimation of a portion of the surface of the asteroid, and the resultant jet of gas and debris thrusts the asteroid off its natural course. The main idea is to have a formation of spacecraft flying in the proximity of the asteroid with all the spacecraft beaming to the same location to achieve the required deflection thrust. The paper presents the design of the formation orbits and the multi-objective optimisation of the formation in order to minimise the total mass in space and maximise the deflection of the asteroid. The paper demonstrates how significant deflections can be obtained with relatively small sized, easy-to-control spacecraft.'
address:
- 'Dept. of Mechanical & Aerospace Engineering, University of Strathclyde, 75 Montrose Street, G1 1XJ, Glasgow, UK, Ph. +44 (0)141 548 2083, Fax +44 (0)141 552 5105'
- 'Dept. of Mechanical & Aerospace Engineering, University of Strathclyde, 75 Montrose Street, G1 1XJ, Glasgow, UK'
author:
- Massimiliano Vasile
- Christie Alisa Maddock
bibliography:
- 'bee\_design.bib'
title: Design of a Formation of Solar Pumped Lasers for Asteroid Deflection
---
Asteroid deflection ,Laser ablation ,NEO
=0.5 cm
Introduction {#intro}
============
Near Earth Objects (NEO), the majority of which are asteroids, are defined as minor celestial objects with a perihelion less than 1.3 AU and an aphelion greater than 0.983 AU. A subclass of these, deemed Potentially Hazardous Asteroids (PHA), are defined as those with a Minimum Orbital Intersection Distance (MOID) from the Earth’s orbit less than or equal to 0.05 AU and a diameter larger than 150 m (equivalent to an absolute magnitude of 22.0 or less). As of March 2012, 8758 NEO’s have been detected [@mpc]; of those, 840 are estimated to have an effective diameter larger than 1 km[^1], and 1298 are categorised as potentially hazardous. Impacts from asteroids over 1 km in diameter are expected to release over $10^5$ megatons of energy with global consequences for our planet [@stokes2003], while those with an average diameter of 100 m can are expected to release over $10^2$ megatons of energy potentially causing significant tsunamis and/or land destruction of a large city [@Toon1997]. It is estimated that there are between 30,000–300,000 NEO’s with diameters around 100 m, meaning a large number of NEO’s are still undetected.
A quantitative comparison of the various options for NEO deflection was conducted by @Colombo2006 [@Sanchez2007]. Examining the results of the comparison, one of the more interesting methods employed solar sublimation to actively deviate the orbit of the asteroid. The original concept, initially evaluated by @Melosh1994, and later assessed by @Kahle2006, envisioned a single large reflector; this idea was expanded to a formation of spacecraft orbiting in the vicinity of the NEO, each equipped with a smaller concentrator assembly capable of focusing the solar power at a distance around 1 km and greater [@Maddock2007]. This concept addressed the proper placement of the concentrators in close proximity to the asteroid while avoiding the plume impingement and provided a redundant and scalable solution. However, the contamination of the optics still posed a significant limitation as demonstrated by @vasile2010. In the same paper, the authors demonstrated that the combined effect of solar pressure and enhanced Yarkovsky effect could lead to miss (or deflection) distances of a few hundred to a thousand kilometres over eight years of deflection time. However, this deflection is orders of magnitude lower that the one achievable with a prolonged sublimation of the surface.
A possible solution is to use a collimating device that would allow for larger operational distances and protection of the optics. This paper presents an asteroid deflection method based on a formation of spacecraft each equipped with solar pumped lasers. The use of lasers has already proposed by several authors, although always in conjunction with a nuclear power source [@Phipps1992; @Phipps1997; @Park2005]. Extensive studies on the dynamics of the deflection with high power lasers were proposed by @Park2005 envisaging a single spacecraft with a MW laser. This paper proposes a different solution with a formation of smaller spacecraft, each supporting a kW laser system indirectly pumped by the Sun.
The paper starts with a simple sublimation model that is used to compute the deflection force. The orbits of the spacecraft formation are then designed by solving a multi-objective optimisation problem that yields an optimal compromise between distance from the target and impingement with the plume of debris. A Lyapunov controller is proposed to maintain the spacecraft in formation along the desired proximal orbit. A second multi-objective optimisation problem is then solved to compute a different type of controlled formation orbits in which the shape of the orbit is predefined. Finally, the number and size of the spacecraft is optimised to yield the maximum possible deflection.
Deflection Model {#sec:1}
================
The orbital properties of Near Earth Asteroids (NEA) can be grouped into four general categories based on the semi-major axis $a$ of the orbit, radius of apoapsis $r_a$ and/or radius of periapsis $r_p$, described as follows [@nasa_neo]:
Atens
: Earth-crossing asteroids with semi-major axes smaller than Earth (named after asteroid 2062 Aten), where $a < 1$ AU, $r_a \geq 0.983$ AU.
Apollos
: Earth-crossing asteroids with semi-major axes larger than Earth (named after asteroid 1862 Apollo), where $a \geq 1$ AU, $r_p \leq 1.0167$ AU.
Amors
: Earth-approaching asteroids with orbits exterior to Earth’s but interior to Mars (named after asteroid 1221 Amor), where $a > 1$ AU, $1.0167$ AU $< r_p \leq 1.3$ AU.
Atiras
: Near Earth Asteroids whose orbits are contained entirely with the orbit of the Earth (named after asteroid 163693 Atira), where $a < 1$ AU, $r_p<0.983$ AU.
Apollo is the largest class (approximately 4100 NEA’s) followed by Amors (approximately 3400 NEA’s). The asteroid Apophis 99942, part of the Apollos class, is taken as a test case with a relatively low aphelion such that enough solar power can be harvested.
While circular, or near-circular, orbits offer a more constant level of solar radiation, as suggested by @Vasile2008b [@vasile2010] if the mirrors have variable optics, i.e., the focal point can be changed, a constant power density can be achieved for asteroids on elliptical orbits or when the level of solar power available is low. In terms of altering an orbit, thrusting at the perihelion of elliptical orbits maximises the change in semi-major axis (and therefore the miss distance). Even if the level of solar radiation available is not sufficient to induce sublimation at aphelion, a deflection can still be achieved, as will be demonstrated in this paper.
The other benefit of basing the test case on the Apophis asteroid is its popularity in scientific literature due to the initial, relatively high impact level (2.7% chance of impacting the Earth in 2029) it was given when it was first observed in 2004. While further tracking data has reduced the threat level, ruling out the possibility of an impact in 2029 but leaving a non-zero impact probability for the 2036 and 2037 encounters, the asteroid Apophis remains a popular reference example. Note, in fact, that although Apophis is not necessary a typical case, the interest here is to examine the effectiveness of a fractionated laser ablation system applied to the deflection of an S-type asteroid, belonging to a given size range, on a moderately eccentric orbit (although also an extension to highly eccentric orbits will be demonstrated) of which Apophis is an example.
Table \[t:apophis\] gives the orbital and physical data of the asteroid used in this study. The asteroid shape was assumed to be tri-axial ellipsoidal, $$a_\ell = \sqrt{2} d_{\textsc{a}}\qquad b_\ell = d_{\textsc{a}}\qquad c_\ell = \frac{d_{\textsc{a}}}{\sqrt{2}}$$ where $a_\ell \ge b_\ell \ge c_\ell$ are the three radii along the three orthogonal axes and $d_{\textsc{a}}$ is the estimated average diameter based on the observed magnitude, given in Table \[t:apophis\]. S-type asteroids, as used here for the test case, are moderately bright with an albedo from 0.10 to 0.22. By comparison, C-type asteroids are extremely dark with albedos typically in the range of 0.03 to 0.10. According to @Delbo2007, the geometric albedo of Apophis is 0.33 however the value used here of 0.2 was chosen to give a more general test case.
Measured Value
------------------------ --------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------- --
Semi-major axis $a_{{\textsc{a}}_0}$ 0.9224 AU
Eccentricity $e_{{\textsc{a}}_0}$ 0.1912
Inclination $i_{{\textsc{a}}_0}$ 3.3312 deg
RAAN $\Omega_{{\textsc{a}}_0}$ 204.4428 deg
Argument of periapsis $\omega_{{\textsc{a}}_0}$ 126.4002 deg
Period $T_{{\textsc{a}}_0}$ 323.5969 days
Mean motion $n_{{\textsc{a}}_0}$ 1.2876 $\times 10^{-5}$ deg/s
Mass $m_{{\textsc{a}}_0}$ 2.7$\times 10^{10}$ kg
Gravitational constant $\mu_{\textsc{a}}$ 1.801599$\times 10^{-9}$ km[$^\textrm{3}$]{}/s[$^\textrm{2}$]{}
Physical dimensions $a_\ell, b_\ell, c_\ell$ 191 m,135 m,95 m
Rotational velocity $w_{\textsc{a}}$ 3.3$\times 10^{-3}$ deg/s
Albedo $\varsigma_{\textsc{a}}$ 0.2
: Orbital and physical properties of test asteroid.[]{data-label="t:apophis"}
![Definition of the reference frames, including the rotating Hill frame $\mathcal{A}$ centred on the asteroid.[]{data-label="fig:hillframe"}](hillframe.eps){width="100.00000%"}
The minimum orbital intersection distance (MOID) is the separation distance at the closest point between two orbits, e.g., Apophis and the Earth. The deviation distance is defined here as the difference in position between the original, undeviated orbit $\mathbf{k}_{{\textsc{a}}_0}$ and the deviated orbit $\mathbf{k}_{{\textsc{a}}_{dev}}$ at $t_\textsc{MOID}$ [@Colombo2009] (see Fig. \[fig:moid\]). Figure \[fig:hillframe\] illustrates the reference frames used here, where $\mathcal{O}\{i,j,k\}$ is the inertial heliocentric reference frame, and $\mathcal{A}\{x,y,z\}$ is the relative, rotating Hill reference frame (radial $x$, transverse $y$ and out-of-plane $z$ directions), centred on the asteroid.
Non-linear equations were used for determining the asteroid deviation vector $\Delta\mathbf{r}_{dev} = \mathbf{r}_{{\textsc{a}}_{dev}} - \mathbf{r}_{{\textsc{a}}_0}$ as a function of the ephemeris in the Hill reference frame $\mathcal{A}$, as derived by @Maddock2008, where $\Delta\mathbf{k}=\mathbf{k}_{{\textsc{a}}_{dev}} - \mathbf{k}_{{\textsc{a}}_0} = [\Delta a,\Delta e, \Delta i, \Delta\Omega, \Delta\omega, \Delta M]^{\textsc{t}}$ giving the difference in Keplerian parameters between the undeviated and deviated orbits.
The change in the orbital parameters is calculated by numerically integrating the Gauss planetary equations [see e.g., @Battin] using a thrust vector $\mathbf{u}_\textit{dev}=[u_t\; u_n\; u_h]^{\textsc{t}}$ in the tangential, normal and out-of-plane (or direction of angular momentum $h$) reference frame, induced by the deflection method: $$\Delta\mathbf{k} = \int_{t_0}^{t_{MOID}} \frac{d\mathbf{k}(\mathbf{u}_\textit{dev})}{dt}\:dt$$ Within this study, the deflection action is assumed to be aligned with the heliocentric velocity of the asteroid, therefore $u_n=0$ and $u_h=0$. Other authors have studied the optimal direction of the deflection action in the case of laser ablation [@Park2010], however, the main interest of this paper is in the system sizing in relation to the achievable deviation.
@Colombo2009 determined that the change in angular location, in this case given by the mean anomaly $M$, calculated at the MOID is, $$\label{eq:deltaM}
\Delta M = \int_{t_0}^{t_i} \frac{dM}{dt}\,dt + n_{{\textsc{a}}_0}\left(t_0-t_\textsc{moid}\right)+n_{{\textsc{a}}_i}\left(t_\textsc{moid}-t_i\right)$$ where $n_{A_0}$ is the mean motion of the undeflected asteroid, $n_{A_i}$ is the mean motion of the asteroid at the end of the deflection action, $t_0$ is the beginning of the deflection action and $t_i$ is the end of the deflection action.
The non-linear proximal motion equations in @vasile2010 together with [Eq. (\[eq:deltaM\])]{} and the Gauss planetary equations give the variation of the orbit of the asteroid at the time of the MOID. @Vasile2008a showed that an estimation of the minimum orbit interception distance can be computed by projecting the variation of the orbit at the expected impact time onto the $b$-plane of the Earth at the time of the MOID, i.e., computing the variation of the impact parameter $b$. Hence, in the test section the variation of the impact parameter will be used as a measure of the achievable deflection.
The thrust produced by the deflection method is computed assuming that the lasers are not pulsed but continuous wave and that the energy density is sufficient only to turn the matter into gas (vapour regime) but not to produce plasma [@Phipps2010]. The level of momentum coupling that can be achieved with this model is lower than what can be found in other studies [see e.g., @Phipps2010]. A further assumption is that the asteroid is absorbing part of the incoming energy without changing its temperature thus providing a constant sink for heat transmission; this might not be the case for small asteroids.
Under these assumptions, the rate of the expelled surface matter is defined as [@Sanchez2009], $$\label{eq:dmdt}
\frac{dm_{exp}}{dt} = 2 n_{sc} v_{rot} \int_{y_0}^{y_{max}} \int_{t_{in}}^{t_{out}} \frac{1}{H} \left( P_{in}-Q_{rad}-Q_{cond}\right) \; dt\; dy$$ where $[t_{in}, t_{out}]$ is the duration for which a point is illuminated, $[y_0, y_{max}]$ are the vertical limits of the illuminated surface area (i.e. orthogonal to the direction of rotation of the asteroid), $H$ is the enthalpy of sublimation, $v_{rot}$ is the linear velocity of a point as it travels horizontally (i.e., orthogonal to $y$) through the illuminated spot area and $n_{sc}$ is the number of spacecraft in the formation.
The input power per unit area due to the solar concentrators is given by, $$\label{eq:pauPin}
P_{in} = \eta_{sys} C_r (1-\varsigma_{\textsc{a}}) S_0 \left( \frac{r_{\textsc{au}}}{r_{\textsc{a}}} \right)^2$$ where $\varsigma_{\textsc{a}}=0.2$ is the albedo, $S_0=1367$ W/m[$^\textrm{2}$]{} is the solar flux at 1 AU, scaled to the Sun-asteroid distance $r_{\textsc{a}}$, $\eta_{sys}$ is the system efficiency, and $C_r$ is the concentration ratio (the ratio between the power density from the Sun on the mirror surface, and that of the illuminated spot area on the asteroid).
The heat loss due to black-body radiation and the conduction loss are defined, respectively, as, $$\begin{aligned}
Q_{rad} &= \sigma \epsilon_{bb} T^4 \label{eq:Qrad}\\
Q_{cond} &= (T_{subl}-T_0)\sqrt{\frac{c_{\textsc{a}}k_{\textsc{a}}\rho_{\textsc{a}}}{\pi t}}\label{eq:Qcond}\end{aligned}$$ where $\sigma$ is the Stefan-Boltzmann constant, $\epsilon_{bb}$ is the black body emissivity, $T$ is the temperature and $c_{\textsc{a}}$, $\rho_{\textsc{a}}$ and $k_{\textsc{a}}$ are, respectively, the heat capacity, density and thermal conductivity of the asteroid. For the asteroid Apophis, $c_{\textsc{a}}= 750$ J/kg$\cdot$K based on the average value for silicate materials, $k_{\textsc{a}}=2$ W/K/m and $\rho_{\textsc{a}}=2600$ kg/m[$^\textrm{3}$]{} [@Remo1994]. The sublimation temperature assumed is that for forsterites [@Wang1999], $T_{subl} = 1800$ K, with $T_0$ set to 278 K.
The induced acceleration due to the sublimation process can then be determined by [@Sanchez2009], $$\label{eq:defact}
\mathbf{u}_{sub} = \frac{\Lambda \,\overline{v}\,\dot{m}_{exp}}{m_{\textsc{a}}} \, \mathbf{\hat{v}}_{\textsc{a}}$$ where $m_A$ is the mass of the asteroid at a generic instant of time, $\mathbf{\hat{v}}_{\textsc{a}}$ is the direction of the velocity vector of the NEO, $\Lambda \simeq \left(\tfrac{2}{\pi}\right)$ is the scattering factor, $\overline{v}$ is the average velocity of the debris particles according to Maxwell’s distribution of an ideal gas: $$\label{eq:vexp}
\overline{v}= \sqrt{\frac{8\mathrm{k}_{\textsc{b}}T_{subl}}{\pi \textrm{M}_{Mg_2SiO_4}}}$$ where $\mathrm{k}_{\textsc{b}}$ is the Boltzmann constant, and $\textrm{M}_{\textit{Mg}_2SiO_4}$ is the molecular mass of fosterite.
The scattering factor $\Lambda$ is computed as the average of all possible thrust directions assuming that the thrust can point randomly at any angle $\alpha_{\textsc{t}}$ between 0 and $\pi$, therefore $\Lambda=\tfrac{1}{\pi}\int_0^{\pi}\cos\alpha_{\textsc{t}}\, d\alpha_{\textsc{t}}$ [@Sanchez2009]. Some preliminary experiments [@gibbings2011] demonstrate that the plume is progressively focusing inwards for rocky type of asteroids, while for highly porous asteroids the plume tends to remain unfocused; hence assuming an uniform distribution of the thrust pointing direction over an angle of 180$^\circ$ is a conservative choice. The remaining mass of the asteroid $m_{\textsc{a}}$ is calculated by numerically integrating [Eq. (\[eq:dmdt\])]{}.
Contamination Model
-------------------
The contamination of the mirror surfaces due to the debris plume is modeled based on the work by @Kahle2006. Their study made a number of initial assumptions regarding the expansion of the plume and sublimation process. The first assumption holds that the sublimation process is comparable to the generation of tails in comets. The asteroid is assumed to contain a reservoir of material underneath the surface, with the gas expanding outwards through a throat into vacuum. Preliminary experimental results have shown that this assumption, as with others in this section, are potentially overly pessimistic and may not be valid for every type of asteroid. However, altering these assumptions does not change the fundamental results in this paper, therefore it was decided to remain consistent with the existing literature and defer any further analysis on the validity of these assumptions for future work.
The second assumption is that the plume expansion is similar to the expansion of gas of a rocket engine outside the nozzle. The density of the expelled gas $\rho_{exp}$ is computed analytically, $$\label{eq:rhoexp}
\rho_{exp}(\delta r_{s/sc},\varphi) = j_c \,\frac{\dot{m}_{exp}}{\overline{v}\,A_{spot}} \left(\frac{d_{spot}}{2 \delta r_{s/sc} + d_{spot}}\right)^2 \left(\cos\Theta\right)^{2/(\kappa-1)}$$ where $d_{spot}$ is the diameter of the spot area, $\delta r_{s/sc}$ is the distance from the spot on the surface of the asteroid and the spacecraft, and $\Theta = \pi\varphi/2\varphi_{max}$ where $\varphi$ is the angle between the spot-spacecraft vector and the $y$-axis of the Hill reference frame. The jet constant $j_c$ was set to 0.345, the maximum expansion angle $\varphi_{max} = 130.45^\circ$, and adiabatic index $\kappa = 1.4$ based on the values for diatomic particles [@Legge1982].
Note that this density model is in contradiction with the assumption of a uniform scattering over a hemisphere and, in fact, suggests a much more focused plume. From ongoing experiments [@gibbings2011], the plume appears to more closely match the density distribution given in [Eq. (\[eq:rhoexp\])]{} rather than a uniform distribution; nevertheless, in the analysis in this paper the most conservative choice was selected for the scattering factor in order to account for possible unmodeled performance degradation components.
The position vector $\delta\mathbf{r}_{s/sc}$ from the spot to the spacecraft is defined as: $$\label{eq:spot_distance}
\delta\mathbf{r}_{s/sc}=\left[ \begin{array}{c}
x-r_\ell \sin w_{\textsc{a}}t \cos(-w_{\textsc{a}}t- \theta_{v_{\textsc{a}}})+r_\ell \cos w_{\textsc{a}}t \sin(-w_{\textsc{a}}t-\theta_{v_{\textsc{a}}}) \\
y-r_\ell \cos w_{\textsc{a}}t \cos(-w_{\textsc{a}}t- \theta_{v_{\textsc{a}}})-r_\ell \sin w_{\textsc{a}}t \sin(-w_{\textsc{a}}t-\theta_{v_{\textsc{a}}}) \\
z
\end{array} \right]$$ where the radius of the ellipse is given by, $$\label{eq_r_ell}
r_\ell=\frac{a_\ell b_\ell}{\sqrt{\big(b_\ell \cos(-w_{\textsc{a}}t- \theta_{v_{\textsc{a}}})\big)^2+\big(a_\ell \sin(-w_{\textsc{a}}t- \theta_{v_{\textsc{a}}})\big)^2}}$$ and, with reference to Fig. \[fig:hillframe\], the position of the spacecraft with respect to the centre of the asteroid is $\delta \mathbf{r}=[x,\; y,\; z]^{\textsc{t}}$. We assume here that the asteroid is spinning around the $z$ axis with a rotational velocity $w_{\textsc{a}}$. The direction of the velocity of the asteroid in the heliocentric reference frame projected onto the Hill reference frame $\mathcal{A}$ is $\theta_{v_{\textsc{a}}}$. In other words, in order to have a deflection thrust aligned with the velocity of the asteroid, the spot is assumed to be at an elevation angle over the $y$-axis equal to $\theta_{v_{\textsc{a}}}$.
The third assumption made is that all the particles impacting the surface of the mirror condense and stick to the surface. The exhaust velocity is constant, therefore the thrust depends only on the mass flow. A higher thrust results in a higher mass flow and thus in a faster contamination. This is a rather conservative assumption. The actual contamination level depends on the type of deposited material and the temperature of the optical surfaces. Following the approach used to compute the contamination of surfaces due to out-gassing, a view factor $\psi_\textit{vf}$ was added equal to the angle between the normal to the mirror and the incident flow of gas. The resulting variation of the thickness of the material condensing on the mirror can be computed by, $$\label{eq:hcnd}
\frac{dh_{cnd}}{dt} = \frac{2\, \overline{v}\, \rho_{exp}}{\rho_{_{layer}}} \cos \psi_\textit{vf}$$ The average debris velocity $\overline{v}$ is multiplied by a factor of 2 to account for the expansion of the gas in a vacuum. The layer density $\rho_{_{layer}}$ was set to 1 g/cm[$^\textrm{3}$]{}. The power density on the asteroid surface is decreased based on the contamination of the mirrors.
A degradation factor $\tau$ is applied to the power beamed to the asteroid surface, based on the Lambert-Beer-Bouguer law [@Kahle2006], $$\label{eq:pwrdegred}
\tau = e^{-2\upsilon h_{cnd}}$$ where $\upsilon = 10^4$/cm is the absorption coefficient for forsterite. Note that the values of $\upsilon$ and $\rho_{_{layer}}$ are based on the assumption that the deposited material is dense and absorbs the light over the whole spectrum. This is again a rather conservative assumption; experiments have shown that while it appears to be valid for some silicates such as forsterite, this assumption may not hold true for all materials. As mentioned previously, further experimentation and analysis are underway, and will be the topic of future publications.
[Eq. (\[eq:hcnd\])]{} is numerically integrated, along with the Gauss equations, for the period of the mission.
### Tugging Effect
The spacecraft will fly in formation with the asteroid at a distance $\delta r$, thus exerting a gravitational pull on it [@gong2009]. The tugging acceleration $\mathbf{u}_{tug}$ is given by: $$\label{eq:tug_force}
\mathbf{u}_{tug}= -n_{sc}\frac{G m_{sc}}{\delta r^2} \, \delta\mathbf{\hat{r}}$$ where $G$ is the universal gravity constant and $m_{sc}$ is the mass of a spacecraft. The sum of $\mathbf{u}_{tug}$ and $\mathbf{u}_{sub}$ forms the total deflection acceleration $\mathbf{u}_{dev}$. The acceleration $\mathbf{u}_{dev}$ is used with Gauss planetary equations in order to determine the change in the NEO orbit.
The Laser System
----------------
Lasers work on the general premise of exciting electrons by stimulating them with the addition of photons (or quantum energy), which temporarily boost them up to a higher energy state. This stimulation continues until a population inversion exists, where there are more electrons at a higher energy state, e.g., $E_1$ than at the lower (or original) state, e.g. $E_0$. The release of photons when the electrons drop back to their original base state produce an emission that, generally, has the same spectral properties of the stimulating radiation, and is therefore highly coherent. The energy that is not released as part of the output emission, is instead released as heat. This means that the laser must be continually cooled, which in space means large radiators.
In this paper two general methods of powering the laser are considered and defined as: *direct pumping*, where the energy is directly used to excite the laser, and *indirect pumping*, where an intermediate step is used to first convert the energy, e.g., solar radiation, into electricity.
Indirect solar-pumped lasers convert the solar energy first into electricity, which is then used to power the laser. Photovoltaic cells are an obvious choice for space applications. The drawback, of course, is the addition of an electrical power generator meaning added mass, size and power requirements. Direct solar-pumped lasers, by comparison, do precisely what the name suggests: the laser is directly energised using solar radiation. Due to the mismatch between the wide-band emissions of the Sun with the narrow absorption bands of lasers, the loss of available solar power is currently rather high. For example, the overlap between a Nd:YAG (neodymium-doped yttrium aluminium garnet) crystal absorption spectrum and the solar radiation spectrum is around 0.14 [@Weksler1988].
One option is to use high efficiency solar arrays in conjunction with a solid state laser. Solid state lasers pumped with electric power can currently reach 60% efficiency. If the solar arrays have an efficiency of 30%, then the system would have an overall efficiency of 18%. If a pumped laser is used, then the focal point can be close to the primary mirror and a high concentration factor can be obtained with a relatively small mirror. For example, if the mirror has an area of 314 m[$^\textrm{2}$]{} (equivalent to a 20 m diameter circular mirror), then the collected power at 1 AU is 429.5 kW. The solar array plus laser system converts only 18% of this power, therefore only 77.3 kW is beamed to the surface to the asteroid, while the rest needs to be dissipated.
In a paper presented in 1994, Landis discussed the use of a directly solar pumped laser based on semiconductor technology. According to Landis, the expected efficiency of directly pumped semiconductor laser would depend on the same efficiency losses of a solar cell, therefore Landis was expecting a lasing efficiency (output/input power ratio) of 35%. Such an efficiency would be one order of magnitude higher than the best Nd:YAG laser system, which is expected to reach 6% of overall efficiency.
Direct solar pumping would represent an interesting solution in terms of complexity of the overall system. In fact no cooling system for the photovoltaic conversion and no power transmission would be required. On the other hand the Technology Readiness Level (TRL) of both solar cells and semiconductor lasers is far higher than the one of a directly pumped laser and an indirectly pumped laser can be expected to be operational much sooner.
Recent electrically pumped semiconductor laser have proven over 73% wall-plug efficiency [@crump2005; @stickley2005; @nLIGHT; @peters2007] with a target efficiency of 80%. Research on fibres coupled with clusters of diodes have demonstrated slope efficiencies of up to 83% [@Jeong2003; @Jeong2004]. A substantial increase in cells efficiency has also to be expected. In particular, in order to achieve a 35% efficiency in direct pumping, semiconductor technology should allow the absorbtion of the solar spectrum over a wide range of frequencies. A high efficiency of a directly pumped laser is therefore expected to correspond to a high efficiency of solar cells. An increase of solar cell efficiency up to 50% [@Luque2004] is reasonable, allowing an indirect pumping system to have a comparable efficiency to a 35% direct pumping system.
In the following the assumption is that the overall system efficiency $\eta_{sys}$ is about 22.7%, with a 45% efficiency of the cells, a 90% efficient reflectors, a 85% efficiency of the power transmission and regulation line and a 66% efficiency of the laser (given by the product of the target 80% for the laser diode and the achieved 83% slope efficiency of the fibres). A second option with a 60% laser efficiency and 40% cell efficiency is also considered.
Formation Design
================
One idea for the orbital design is to have the spacecraft flying in formation with the asteroid, orbiting in tandem around the Sun (see Fig. \[fig:laser\_scheme\]). The spacecraft have to maintain their relative position with respect to the asteroid in order to keep the required power density on the same spot on the surface of the asteroid (note that the surface of the asteroid is moving under the spot light of the laser). Therefore, the formation orbits have to be periodic and in close proximity with relatively low excursion in the relative distance from the asteroid. On the other hand the spacecraft should minimise any impingement with the plume of debris and gas coming from the sublimation of the surface material.
In order to design the desired formation orbits, one can start by considering the local Hill reference frame $\mathcal{A}\{x,y,z\}$ in Fig. \[fig:hillframe\] and the associated linearised version of proximal motion equations [@Schaub] used in the calculation of the asteroid deviation vector:
\[eq:lin\_proxy\_s\] $$\begin{aligned}
x(\nu)&=\frac{a_Ae_A\sin\nu}{\eta}\delta M-a_A\cos\nu \delta e\\
y(\nu)&=\frac{r_{\textsc{a}}}{\eta^3}(1+e_A\cos\nu)^2\delta M+r_{\textsc{a}}\delta\omega+\frac{r_{\textsc{a}}\sin\nu}{\eta^2}(2+e_A\cos\nu)\delta e+r_{\textsc{a}}\cos i_A\delta\Omega\\
z(\nu)&=r_{\textsc{a}}(\sin\theta_A\delta i -\cos\theta_A \sin i_A \delta\Omega)\end{aligned}$$
where $\eta=\sqrt{1-e_A^2}$, $\theta_A=\nu+\omega_A$, $\nu$ is the true anomaly, $a_A,e_A,i_A,\omega_A$ are respectively the semi-major axis, eccentricity, inclination and argument of the perihelion of the orbit of the asteroid at a generic moment in time and $\delta \mathbf{k}=[\delta a,\delta e, \delta i, \delta\Omega, \delta\omega, \delta M]^{\textsc{t}}$ are the variations of the orbital elements, with the imposed conditions $\delta r \ll r_{\textsc{a}}$, and $\delta a=0$ in order to have periodic motion. These equations are a first approximation of the motion of the spacecraft and do not take into account the gravity field of the asteroid or solar pressure.
If the optimal thrust direction that maximises the deviation is along the unperturbed velocity vector of the asteroid [@Colombo2009], then the exhaust gases will flow along the direction of the velocity of the asteroid projected in the Hill reference frame. Therefore, the position vector in the radial, transversal and out-of-plane reference frame was projected onto the tangential, normal, out-of-plane reference frame to give $\delta \mathbf{r}_{tnh}=[x_{tnh}, y_{tnh}, z_{tnh}]^{\textsc{t}}$. Then, the size of the formation orbits projected in the $x_{tnh}$-$z_{tnh}$ plane was maximised. All the requirements on the formation orbits can be formulated in mathematical terms as a multi-objective optimisation problem with two objective functions,
\[eq:moo\_problem1\] $$\begin{aligned}
\min_{\delta\textbf{k}\in D} \max_\nu J_1 &= \delta r \\
\min_{\delta\textbf{k}\in D} \max_\nu J_2 &= -\arctan \left( \frac{\sqrt{x_{tnh}^2+z_{tnh}^2}}{y_{tnh}} \right)\end{aligned}$$
subject to the inequality constraint, $$\label{eq:moo_con}
C_{ineq} = \min_\nu | y(\nu)| -y_\textsc{lim} > 0$$ where $y_{\textsc{lim}}$ is a minimum distance along the $y$-axis, and $D$ is the search space for the solution vector $\delta\textbf{k}$. Table \[tab:formation\_delta\] defines the boundaries imposed on $D$. The boundary values were obtained by progressively increasing each of the boundaries from 0 to the value in the table, looking at the value of the maximum distance from the asteroid. Larger boundaries produce solutions with a better (lower) performance index $J_2$ but a higher performance index $J_1$.
------------- ------------- ----------------- ----------------- ----------------- -----------------
$\delta e$ $\delta i$ $\delta \Omega$ $\delta \omega$ $\delta M$
($10^{-7}$) ($10^{-7}$ rad) ($10^{-7}$ rad) ($10^{-7}$ rad) ($10^{-7}$ rad)
Lower bound $-0.01$ $-0.1$ $-0.9$ $-1.5$ $-0.1$
Upper bound 0 0.1 0.9 1.5 0.5
------------- ------------- ----------------- ----------------- ----------------- -----------------
: Boundaries on the formation orbital parameters[]{data-label="tab:formation_delta"}
Equations (\[eq:moo\_problem1\])–(\[eq:moo\_con\]) were optimised using a memetic multi-objective optimiser MACS (Multiagent Collaborative Search) [@Vasile2005a; @Maddock2008; @Vasile2008b]. The optimisation led to the identification of two families of formation orbits belonging to two subsets of the search space $D$. Figures \[fig:objf\_deltai\], \[fig:objf\_deltaOmega\] and \[fig:objf\_deltaomega\] show the two families in the parameter space for $y_{\textsc{lim}}=1000$ m. The solutions are almost perfectly symmetrically distributed about the $0$-value of $\delta i$, $\delta \Omega$, while there is a bias towards the negative axis for $\delta \omega$. Each family has been identified with the label $-z$ or $+z$ depending on whether the sign of the $z$ coordinate is negative or positive at $y=y_{\textsc{lim}}$. Figure \[fig:pareto\_orbits\], instead, shows the Pareto fronts for $y_{\textsc{lim}}=500$ m and $y_{\textsc{lim}}=1000$ m respectively. Note that in Fig. \[fig:pareto\_orbits\], the Pareto fronts for the branches in Figs. \[fig:objf\_deltai\], \[fig:objf\_deltaOmega\] and \[fig:objf\_deltaomega\] appear superimposed and cannot be distinguished. Therefore, the two families can be considered equally locally Pareto optimal.
Figure \[fig:form\_orbit\_min500\] shows the formation orbits in the $\mathcal{A}$ Hill frame. It can be noted that the two families are symmetric with respect to the $x$-$y$ plane. In the remainder of the paper these orbits will be called *natural formation orbits*.
\
\
\
![Pareto fronts of the optimal formation orbits[]{data-label="fig:pareto_orbits"}](pareto_sets_MOO_minrxz_500_1000.eps "fig:"){width="70.00000%"}\
![Formation orbits with minimum distance of 500 m.[]{data-label="fig:form_orbit_min500"}](formation_orbits.eps "fig:"){width="70.00000%"}\
Formation Dynamics and Control
------------------------------
In order to maintain the orbits designed in the previous section, the spacecraft need to be controlled. In the proximity of the asteroid, in a Hill rotating reference frame, the spacecraft are subject to the force due to solar pressure, the gravity of the asteroid, the gravity of the Sun, the centrifugal and Coriolis forces plus the forces induced by the impingement with the plume. An active control is therefore required to maintain the spacecraft flying in formation with the asteroid.
Following the Jacobi ellipsoid model, the minor axis $c_\ell$ of the asteroid is aligned with vector of angular momentum, which corresponds to the $z$-axis of the asteroid Hill frame $\mathcal{A}$ (see Fig. \[fig:hillframe\]). The gravity field of the asteroid is expressed as the sum of a spherical field plus a second-degree and second-order field [@Hu2002; @Rossi1999], $$\label{eq:grav_pot}
U_{20+22}=\frac{\mu_{\textsc{a}}}{\delta r^3}\left(C_{20}\,(1-\frac{3}{2}\cos^2\gamma) + 3C_{22}\,\cos^2\gamma \cos 2\lambda\right)$$ where $\gamma$ is the elevation over the $x-y$ plane and the harmonic coefficients $C_{20}$ and $C_{22}$ are a function of the semi-axes,
\[eq:grav\_coeff\] $$\begin{aligned}
C_{20}&=-\frac{1}{10}(2c_\ell^2-a_\ell^2-b_\ell^2)\\
C_{22}&=\frac{1}{20}(a_\ell^2-b_\ell^2)\end{aligned}$$
and $\lambda$ is defined as, $$\label{eq:sph_coor}
\lambda=\arctan\left(\frac{y}{x}\right)+ w_{\textsc{a}}\, t$$ Note that a different rotational state or shape would alter the time-varying gravity field that the spacecraft would experience. In a real scenario, the rotational state coupled with the shape of the asteroid would require an adaptive focusing of the laser beam as the distance of the spot from the source will change with time. Also the divergence of the plume will change as the laser carves a groove into the asteroid. However, within the assumptions in this paper a different rotational state and/or shape would not alter the main results.
If one considers a Hill reference frame $\mathcal{A}$ centred in the barycentre of the asteroid (see Fig. \[fig:hillframe\]), the motion of the spacecraft in the proximity of the asteroid is given by:
\[eq:proxdynsolar3\] $$\begin{aligned}
\ddot{x}(\nu) &=-\ddot{r}_{A}+2\dot{\nu}\dot{y}+\dot{\nu}^2(r_{\textsc{a}}+x)+\ddot{\nu}y - \frac{\mu_{{\textsc{sun}}}(r_{\textsc{a}}+x)}{r_{sc}^3}- \frac{\mu_{\textsc{a}}}{\delta r^3}x + \frac{F_{s_x}(x,y,z)}{m_{sc}} + \frac{\partial U_{20+22}}{\partial x}\\
\ddot{y}(\nu) &=-2\dot{\nu}\dot{x}-\ddot{\nu}(r_{\textsc{a}}+x) +\dot{\nu}^2y - \frac{\mu_{{\textsc{sun}}}}{r_{sc}^3}y - \frac{\mu_{\textsc{a}}}{\delta r^3}y + \frac{F_{s_y}(x,y,z)}{m_{sc}}+\frac{\partial U_{20+22}}{\partial y}\\
\ddot{z}(\nu) &=-\frac{\mu_{{\textsc{sun}}}}{r_{sc}^3}z - \frac{\mu_{\textsc{a}}}{\delta r^3}z + \frac{F_{s_z}(x,y,z)}{m_{sc}}+\frac{\partial U_{20+22}}{\partial z} \label{eq:proxdynsolar_c}\end{aligned}$$
with, $$\begin{aligned}
\ddot{\nu} &= \frac{u_{dev_y}-2\dot{r}_{\textsc{a}}r_{\textsc{a}}\dot{\nu}}{r_{\textsc{a}}^2}\label{eq:nuddot}\\
\ddot{r}_{\textsc{a}}&= \dot{\nu}^2 r_{\textsc{a}}-\frac{\mu_{\textsc{sun}}}{r_{\textsc{a}}^2}+u_{dev_x}\label{eq:rAddot}\end{aligned}$$ The force term $\mathbf{F}_s=[F_{s_x}\, F_{s_y}\, F_{s_z}]^{\textsc{t}}$ is made of two contributions: light pressure from the emitted light from the laser $\mathbf{F}_{srp}$ and the force due to the flow of gas and debris coming from the asteroid $\mathbf{F}_{plume}$.
The force due to solar radiation $\mathbf{F}_{srp}$ is defined as, $$\label{eq:force_srp}
\mathbf{F}_{srp} =2\eta_{sys} A_{{\textsc{m}}_1} \frac{S_0}{c} \left (\frac{r_{\textsc{au}}}{r_{sc}}\right)^2 \cos^2\beta \, \; \hat{\mathbf{n}}_{steer}+(1-\eta_{\textsc{m}}^2) A_{{\textsc{m}}_1} \frac{S_0}{c} \left (\frac{r_{\textsc{au}}}{r_{sc}}\right)^2 \hat{\mathbf{x}}$$ where $c$ is the speed of light and $A_{{\textsc{m}}_1}$ is the cross section area of the primary mirror (see \[fig:laser\_scheme\]). The angle $\beta$ is the half angle between the normal to the steering mirror $\hat{\mathbf{n}}_{steer}$ and the Sun-mirror vector (which is approximated by setting it equal to the Sun-asteroid vector). The second term in [Eq. (\[eq:force\_srp\])]{} takes into account a non-perfect reflection of the primary and secondary mirror. The reflectivity of the two mirrors is here assumed to be $\eta_{\textsc{m}}=0.90$. The assumption is that the energy dissipated by the radiators is emitted uniformly in every direction and does not contribute to any change in the linear momentum of the spacecraft. If the flow rate per unit area at distance $\delta r_{spot}$ is $(2\rho_{exp}(\delta r_{spot},\varphi) \overline{v})$ and all the particles stick to the surface of the mirror then the force $\mathbf{F}_{plume}$ is: $$\label{eq:debries_force}
\mathbf{F}_{plume}= 4\rho_{exp}(\delta r_{spot},\varphi) \bar{v}^2 A_{eq} \cos\psi_\textit{vf} \;\; \hat{\delta\mathbf{r}}_{s/sc}$$ The flow rate depends on the power density and therefore on the distance from the Sun. The part of the spacecraft exposed to the plume and to the reflected light changes along the orbit and is irregular. In order to simplify the calculations, the assumption adopted in this paper is that the total effect is equivalent to a flat surface with area $A_{eq}=A_{{\textsc{m}}_1}$ and normal unit vector $\hat{\mathbf{n}}_{eq}$ such that the cross product $\langle\hat{\mathbf{n}}_{eq},\hat{\delta\mathbf{r}}_{s/sc}\rangle=\cos\psi_\textit{vf}$.
Given these equations, the resultant of all the forces acting on the spacecraft is not zero and in particular the difference between gravity and $\mathbf{F}_s$ is a function of time. Therefore, an active control is required to maintain the position of the spacecraft with respect to the asteroid.
If one assumes that solar pressure, the gravity of the asteroid, and the force due to the plume impingement are the main source of perturbation of the proximity motion of the spacecraft and that any non-spherical terms in the gravity field expansion result in only a small (second order) additional perturbation, then one can build a simple control law based on the Lyapunov control function: $$\label{eq:VAEP}
V = \frac{1}{2}\delta v^2 + \frac{1}{2} K \left( \left(x-x_\textit{ref}\right)^2 + \left(y-y_\textit{ref}\right)^2 + \left(z-z_\textit{ref}\right)^2 \right)$$ where $\delta\mathbf{r}_\textit{ref} = [x_\textit{ref}, y_\textit{ref}, z_\textit{ref}]^{\textsc{t}}$ are the coordinates of a point along the nominal formation orbit (in the Hill frame $\mathcal{A}$). The assumption here is that the motion along the reference formation orbit is much slower than the control action, which is valid as the period of the spacecraft orbit is equal to the period of the asteroid (just under 1 year). Therefore, the spacecraft targets a set of static points along the formation orbit. Now if there exist a control $\mathbf{u}$ such that $dV/dt < 0$ then one can maintain the mirror in the proximity of the reference point as the reference point moves along the reference formation orbit. A possible control is given by: $$\label{eq:uVAEP}
\mathbf{u} = - \left( -\frac{\mu_{\textsc{a}}}{\delta r^3} \delta\mathbf{r} + \frac{\mathbf{F}_\textit{srp}}{m_{sc}}+ \frac{\mathbf{F}_\textit{plume}}{m_{sc}}\right) - K \left(\delta\mathbf{r} - \delta\mathbf{r}_\textit{ref} \right) - c_d \delta\textbf{v}$$ The total derivative of the function $V$ is:
\[eq:dVdt\]$$\begin{aligned}
\frac{dV}{dt} &= \delta\mathbf{v}^T \delta\mathbf{\dot{v}} + K(\delta\mathbf{r}-\delta\mathbf{r}_\textit{ref})^T \delta\mathbf{v}\\
& = \delta\mathbf{v}^T \Bigg( -\frac{\mu_{\textsc{a}}}{\delta r^3}\delta\mathbf{r} + \frac{\mathbf{F}_\textit{srp}}{m_{sc}} + \frac{\mathbf{F}_\textit{plume}}{m_{sc}} -
\left( -\frac{\mu_{\textsc{a}}}{\delta r^3} \delta\mathbf{r} + \frac{\mathbf{F}_\textit{srp}}{m_{sc}}+ \frac{\mathbf{F}_\textit{plume}}{m_{sc}} \right) \\ \nonumber
&\qquad\qquad - K\left(\delta\mathbf{r} - \delta\mathbf{r}_\textit{ref} \right) - c_d \delta\mathbf{v} \Bigg) + K (\delta\mathbf{r} - \delta\mathbf{r}_\textit{ref})^T \delta\mathbf{v}\\
& = -c_d \delta\mathbf{v}^T \delta\mathbf{v} < 0\end{aligned}$$
where $\delta\mathbf{v}=[\dot{x},\dot{y},\dot{z}]^{\textsc{t}}$ is the relative velocity of the spacecraft in the asteroid Hill reference frame $\mathcal{A}$.
The control in [Eq. (\[eq:uVAEP\])]{} can now be introduced into the full dynamic model in [Eq. (\[eq:proxdynsolar3\])]{} to test the validity of the assumption that the light coming from the asteroid and aspherical gravity field are indeed small. The elastic coefficient $K$ for both cases was chosen to be $10^{-6}$ while the dissipative coefficient $c_d$ was set to $10^{-5}$.
Figure \[fig:maxT\_maxD\_min1000\] shows the maximum thrust level as a function of the maximum distance from the asteroid for a 20 m diameter mirror. Figure \[fig:prop\_maxD\_min1000\] shows the propellant consumption as a function of the maximum distance from the asteroid for a 20 m diameter mirror.
![Maximum thrust versus maximum distance for the formation orbits with minimum distance of 1000 m.[]{data-label="fig:maxT_maxD_min1000"}](Lyapunov_controlled_natural_20d_uvsd.eps "fig:"){width="70.00000%"}\
![Propellant consumption versus maximum distance for the formation orbits with minimum distance of 1000 m.[]{data-label="fig:prop_maxD_min1000"}](Lyapunov_controlled_natural_20d_massvsd.eps "fig:"){width="70.00000%"}\
Shaped Formation
----------------
Although the natural formation orbits are designed to minimise the impingement with the plume of gas and debris, none of them can avoid the plume completely. In order to maximise the amount of solar power collected, the mirrors should be constantly pointing directly towards the Sun, hence in a direction perpendicular to the $y$-axis. By following one of the natural formation orbits, the spacecraft will rise above the $z$-$y$ plane (i.e, in the $+x$ direction) once per revolution around the Sun, thus directly exposing the reflector to the plume. According to the contamination model, every surface directly exposed to the plume builds up a layer of a contaminants. This is quite a strong assumption as all the impinging material is assumed to condense and only the surfaces in view of the plume are contaminated. We hold on to these assumptions in this paper, although some experimental work is underway to build a more realistic model [@gibbings2011]. If one sticks to the assumptions of the contamination model, then one solution to mitigate the contamination would be to fly always below the plume of gas (i.e., $-x$ direction, below the $z$-$y$ plane). In order to make the spacecraft follow the desired proximal motion the following shape is assigned to the formation orbit:
\[eq:shaped\_formations\] $$\begin{aligned}
x(\nu)&=x_1\cos(\nu)+x_2\sin(\nu)+x_3 \\
y(\nu)&=y_1\cos(\nu)+y_2\sin(\nu)+y_3 \\
z(\nu)&=z_1\cos(\nu)+z_2\sin(\nu)
\end{aligned}$$
By differentiating with respect to time and inserting [Eq. (\[eq:shaped\_formations\])]{} and their first and second derivatives into the dynamic equations in [Eq. (\[eq:proxdynsolar3\])]{}, one can compute the control profile and the corresponding propellant consumption. The interest now is to design formation orbits that minimise the propellant consumption required by the control system to remain below the $z$-$y$ plane and operate as close as possible to the asteroid to minimise pointing requirements. The problem can be formulated as follows:
\[eq:moo\_shaped\_formation\_problem\] $$\begin{aligned}
\min_{\textbf{s}\in X} J_1 &= \textit{MF}_{\textsc{c}}\\
\min_{\textbf{s}\in X} \max_\nu J_2 &= \delta r\\
\min_{\textbf{s}\in X} \max_\nu J_3 &= \|\mathbf{u}\|\end{aligned}$$
subject to the inequality constraints:
\[eq:moo\_shaped\_formation\_con\] $$\begin{aligned}
C_{1} &= \max_\nu x(\nu)< 0\\
C_{2} &= \max_\nu y(\nu)< 0\end{aligned}$$
where the solution vector is $\mathbf{s} = [x_1, x_2, x_3, y_1, y_2, y_3, z_1, z_2]^{\textsc{t}}$, and $\textit{MF}_{\textsc{c}}$ is the propellant mass fraction for the control over one year of operations. The search space $X$ is defined by the lower and upper bounds on the components of $\mathbf{s}$, respectively $\mathbf{s}_{l}=[-1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -2, -1, -1]^{\textsc{t}}$ and $\mathbf{s}_{u}=[1, 1, 0, 1, 1, 0, 1, 1]^{\textsc{t}}$. Again MACS was used to solve the constrained problem in [Eq. (\[eq:moo\_shaped\_formation\_problem\])]{} and [Eq. (\[eq:moo\_shaped\_formation\_con\])]{}.
The result of the multi-objective optimisation can be found in Fig. \[fig:shaped\_formation\_pareto\], and shows the propellant mass fraction versus the maximum thrust level versus the maximum distance to the asteroid for the case of 10 spacecraft, each carrying a 20 m diameter mirror, over the first year of operations.
![Pareto front of the shaped formation problem.[]{data-label="fig:shaped_formation_pareto"}](multirun_shaped_formation_d_u_dv_run4.eps "fig:"){width="110.00000%"}\
As expected the level of thrust and control propellant mass fraction are monotonically increasing with the distance to the asteroid. However, even for close distances the annual propellant consumption and the thrust level are quite small, only a few milli-Newton of thrust are enough to maintain the orbit.
Spacecraft and System Sizing
============================
The proposed configuration of each spacecraft is as follows: each spacecraft is made of a primary mirror that focuses the sunlight onto a secondary mirror that reflects the light onto a solar array seated behind of the primary mirror (see Fig. \[fig:laser\_scheme\]). The electric power coming from the solar array pumps a semiconductor laser and a steering mirror directs the beam. The secondary mirror, the solar array and the laser need to be maintained at an acceptable temperature. Hence the need for radiators that dissipate the excess of energy that is not converted into the laser beam.
![Illustration of the spacecraft and laser system, showing the two parabolic mirrors ($M_1$, $M_2$), the directional steering mirror ($M_d$), the solar arrays ($S$) which pump the laser ($L$), and the radiators ($R$).[]{data-label="fig:laser_scheme"}](laser_scheme_cm.eps "fig:"){width="90.00000%"}\
The size of the radiators can be computed considering the steady state thermal balance between the input power coming from the concentrator and the dissipated power through radiation.
Three radiating areas were considered for the design of the spacecraft: one associated to the secondary mirror with area $A_{R_{M2}}$, one associated to the solar array with area $A_{R_S}$, and one associated to the laser with area $A_{R_L}$. The size of each radiating area can be computed from the steady state equilibrium thermal equations:
\[eq:radiatorA\]$$\begin{aligned}
A_{R_S}&=\left(\alpha_{\textsc{s}}\eta_M P_{iM_2} -\eta_{\textsc{s}}\eta_M P_{iM_2}-2\epsilon_{\textsc{s}}\sigma A_{S} T_{S}^4\right) \Big/ \left(\epsilon_{{\textsc{r}}} \sigma T_{{\textsc{r}}_S}^4\right) \label{eq:S_radiator}\\
A_{R_L}&=\eta_{\textsc{s}}\eta_M P_{iM_2}(1-\eta_{\textsc{l}})\Big/ \left(\epsilon_{\textsc{r}}\sigma T_{\textsc{l}}^4\right) \label{eq:L_radiator}\\
A_{R_{M2}}&=\left(\alpha_{{\textsc{m}}_2}P_{iM_2}-2T_{{\textsc{m}}_2}^4 \epsilon_{\textsc{s}}\sigma \bar{A}_{{\textsc{m}}_2}\right) \Big/ \left(\epsilon_{\textsc{r}}\sigma T_{{\textsc{m}}_2}^4\right)\label{eq:M_radiator}\end{aligned}$$
where $\alpha_{\textsc{s}}$ is the absorptivity of the solar array, $A_S$ its area, $\epsilon_s$ its emissivity, $T_S$ its temperature, $P_{iM_2}=\eta_M A_{M_1} S_0 (r_{AU}/r_A)^2$ is the input power to the secondary mirror, and $\sigma$ is the Stefan-Boltzmann constant. Then, $\eta_S$ is the efficiency of the solar array, $T_{{\textsc{r}}_S}$ is the temperature of the radiator associated to the solar array, and $\epsilon_{{\textsc{r}}}$ its emissivity. Assuming the efficiency of the laser to be $\eta_{\textsc{l}}$, and its temperature $T_{\textsc{l}}$ one can compute the area of the radiator $A_{R_L}$ assuming that laser and radiator are in direct contact and that the heat can be transported with an efficiency close to 1. This is a reasonable assumption for relatively small scale systems that allow the use of a single or bi-phase passive cooling system. For large systems a dual phase active system might be required which lowers the overall efficiency and increases the system mass. Finally, the secondary mirror is assumed to operate at temperature $T_{{\textsc{m}}_2}$ and has absorptivity $\alpha_{{\textsc{m}}_2}$.
--------------------- ----------------------- ------------------------- ------------------ ---------------------- --------------------------- ------------------------- --------------------- ------------------
Radiator:
$\eta_{\textsc{s}}$ $\alpha_{\textsc{s}}$ $\epsilon_{\textsc{s}}$ $T_{\textsc{s}}$ $T_{{\textsc{m}}_2}$ $\alpha_{{\textsc{m}}_2}$ $\epsilon_{\textsc{r}}$ $\eta_{\textsc{l}}$ $T_{\textsc{l}}$
0.4-0.45 0.8 0.8 373 K 373 K 0.01 0.9 0.6-0.66 313 K
--------------------- ----------------------- ------------------------- ------------------ ---------------------- --------------------------- ------------------------- --------------------- ------------------
: Thermal Properties of Spacecraft Elements[]{data-label="tab:sc_elements"}
----------------- ---------------------------- ---------------------------
Specific mass: $\varrho_{{\textsc{m}}}$ 0.1 kg/m[$^\textrm{2}$]{}
$\varrho_{{\textsc{m}}_d}$ 0.1 kg/m[$^\textrm{2}$]{}
$\varrho_{\textsc{l}}$ 0.005 kg/W
$\varrho_{\textsc{s}}$ 1 kg/m[$^\textrm{2}$]{}
$\varrho_{\textsc{r}}$ 1.4 kg/m[$^\textrm{2}$]{}
Mass: $m_{bus}$ 500 kg
Mass fractions: $\textit{MF}_{\textsc{h}}$ 0.2
$\textit{MF}_p$ 0.3
$\textit{MF}_t$ 0.1
----------------- ---------------------------- ---------------------------
: Mass of Spacecraft Elements[]{data-label="tab:mass_sc_elements"}
The total mass of the spacecraft is $m_{sc}=m_{dry}+m_p(1 + \textit{MF}_t)$, where the mass of the propellant $m_p=m_{dry}\textit{MF}_p$ is a fraction of the dry mass $m_{dry}$, augmented by the mass fraction $\textit{MF}_t=10$% to include the mass of the tanks.
The dry mass $m_{dry}=1.2(m_{\textsc{h}}+m_{\textsc{s}}+m_{\textsc{m}}+m_{\textsc{l}}+m_{\textsc{r}}+m_{bus})$ is the sum of the mass of the laser $m_{\textsc{l}}$, mass of the bus $m_{bus}$, mass of the mirrors $m_{\textsc{m}}$, mass of the solar array $m_{\textsc{s}}$, mass of the radiators $m_{\textsc{r}}$ and mass of the harness $m_{\textsc{h}}$. Given the low maturity of the technology employed for this system, we considered a system margin of 20% on the dry mass.
The mass of the harness $m_{\textsc{h}}$ is a fraction of the combined mass of the laser and solar array $m_{\textsc{h}}=\textit{MF}_{\textsc{h}}(m_{\textsc{s}}+m_{\textsc{l}})$. The mass of the solar array is $m_s=1.15\varrho_{\textsc{s}}A_{\textsc{s}}$ where we considered a 15% margin given the high efficiency of the cells.
The mass of the laser is $m_{\textsc{l}}=1.5\varrho_{\textsc{l}}P_{\textsc{l}}\eta_{\textsc{l}}$ where the margin is now 50% given that a semiconductor laser of this size for space applications has not flown yet. The mass of the power management and distribution unit dedicated to the laser system is included in the mass of the harness while the mass of the bus is assumed to account also for the power electronics. The power input to the laser is, $$P_{\textsc{l}}=0.85\eta_{\textsc{s}}\eta_{\textsc{m}}^2 A_{M_1}S_0\left( \frac{r_{\textsc{au}}}{r_{\textsc{a}}} \right)^2$$ and is a function of the input light power on the solar array, the efficiency of the solar array $\eta_{\textsc{s}}$ and the reflectivity of the mirrors $\eta_{\textsc{m}}=0.90$. The loss due to power regulation and transmission was considered to be 15% of the generated power.
The mass of the radiators $m_{\textsc{r}}=1.2(A_{{\textsc{r}}_S}+A_{{\textsc{r}}_{M_2}}+A_{{\textsc{r}}_L})\varrho_{\textsc{r}}$ from [Eq. (\[eq:radiatorA\])]{} is proportional to the area and is augmented by a 20% margin. The total mass of the mirror is $m_{\textsc{m}}=1.25(\varrho_{{\textsc{m}}_d} A_d + \varrho_{{\textsc{m}}} \bar{A}_{{\textsc{m}}_1} + \varrho_{{\textsc{m}}} \bar{A}_{{\textsc{m}}_2})$, where $\bar{A}_{{\textsc{m}}_1}$ and $\bar{A}_{{\textsc{m}}_2}$ are the areas of the primary and secondary mirrors. The total mass of the mirrors is augmented by a 25% margin given the technology readiness level of the primary mirror.
The thermal properties of the system are reported in Table \[tab:sc\_elements\] while the values of the specific masses $\varrho$, mass factors *MF* and mass of the bus $m_{bus}$ are reported in Table \[tab:mass\_sc\_elements\]. The margins on the mirrors and power system are considered to include the marginal use of power to control the spacecraft in proximity of the asteroid. As it will be shown later, the required thrust level is small and therefore the power demand is marginal compared to the one required for the sublimation.
Multiobjective Design
---------------------
Once the deflection and the spacecraft models are defined, the interest is to optimise the formation in order to obtain the maximum value of the impact parameter for the minimum mass into orbit, given a warning time. The problem can be formulated as follows:
\[eq:moo\_bees\] $$\begin{aligned}
&\min_{\mathbf{x}\in D} \left(-b\right)\\
&\min_{\mathbf{x}\in D} \left(n_{sc}m_{sc}\right)
\end{aligned}$$
where the design vector $\mathbf{x}$ is defined by $[d_{\textsc{m}},\, n_{sc},\, C_r]^T$ and the search space $D$ is defined in Table \[tab:D\_space\_mirror\_design\].
Design Parameter Lower Bound Upper Bound
------------------------------------------------ ------------- -------------
Mirror aperture diameter, $d_{\textsc{m}}$ (m) 2 20
Number of spacecraft, $n_{sc}$ 1 10
Concentration ratio, $C_r$ 1000 5000
: Boundary values on the design variables for the formation design.[]{data-label="tab:D_space_mirror_design"}
The problem has two objectives, and a mix of integer and real variables. MACS was used to solve [Eq. (\[eq:moo\_bees\])]{}. The achievable deflection depends on the contamination of the optics, therefore the optimisation was run for both the shaped and the natural orbits. The result for the case of natural formation orbits can be seen in Fig. \[fig:pareto\_spacecraft\_b\_D\_L6C4\], where the impact parameter is represented against the mass of the system and the aperture diameter of the primary mirror for a laser with $\eta_L=0.6$ and solar cells with $\eta_S=0.4$, and Fig. \[fig:pareto\_spacecraft\_b\_D\_L66C45\], where the impact parameter is represented against the mass of the system and the aperture diameter of the primary mirror for a laser with $\eta_L=0.66$ and solar cells with $\eta_S=0.45$. Analogous solutions for the case of the shaped orbits can be found in Figs. \[fig:pareto\_spacecraft\_b\_nsc\_shaped\_L66C45\] and \[fig:pareto\_spacecraft\_b\_nsc\_shaped\_L6C4\].
It is interesting to note that the number of spacecraft increases when the aperture diameter increases. This is due to that fact that as the diameter of the primary mirror increases the radiator and laser mass increases up to the point at which the mass of a single spacecraft exceeds the total mass of two or more spacecraft of smaller size. This is a very important point that is in favour of the use of a formation instead of a single large spacecraft.
Furthermore, it has to be noted that the assumption is that the system for each spacecraft is scalable. This is actually not true in general as the technology for radiators and concentrators cannot be arbitrarily scaled up. In other words, technological solutions for small size spacecraft cannot be applied to large size spacecraft without modifications. This is a further reason in favour of the use of multiple spacecraft of small size.
Figures \[fig:deflection\_5mlaser\] and \[fig:deflection\_10mlaser\] show the achievable impact parameter for the case of the natural formation orbits with two alternative design solutions, a 5 m in diameter reflector and a 10m in diameter reflector both with a concentration ratio of 5000, i.e., the ratio between the area of the concentrator and the area of the spot on the surface of the asteroid is 5000. Figures \[fig:deflection\_shaped\_5mlaser\_shaped\] and \[fig:deflection\_shaped\_10mlaser\_shaped\] show the achievable impact parameter for the case of the shaped formation orbits. Figure \[fig:deflection\_shaped\_Cratio\_shaped\] shows the sensitivity to the concentration ratio for a fixed warning time of 8 years. The evident difference between the achievable impact parameter in the case of natural and shaped formation depends on the contamination effect that stops the sublimation process quite rapidly (less than one year in some cases) when the spacecraft rises above the $y$-$z$ plane. Because the sublimation stops at the beginning of the deflection operations, the efficiency of the deflection, in the case of the natural formations, is strongly affected by the position along the orbit at which the sublimation starts. This is consistent with the results presented in [@colombo2009b].
![Total mass of the system against the diameter of the primary mirror of each spacecraft and the achieved impact parameter. Natural formation orbits: $\eta_L=0.60$, $\eta_S=0.40$.[]{data-label="fig:pareto_spacecraft_b_D_L6C4"}](mass_b_D_Cr5k_etaL06_etaS041_natural.eps "fig:"){width="70.00000%"}\
![Total mass of the system against the diameter of the primary mirror of each spacecraft and the achieved impact parameter. Natural formation orbits: $\eta_L=0.66$, $\eta_S=0.45$.[]{data-label="fig:pareto_spacecraft_b_D_L66C45"}](mass_b_D_Cr5k_etaL066_etaS045_natural.eps "fig:"){width="70.00000%"}\
![Total mass of the system against the diameter of the primary mirror of each spacecraft and the achieved impact parameter. Shaped formation orbits: $\eta_L=0.66$, $\eta_S=0.45$.[]{data-label="fig:pareto_spacecraft_b_nsc_shaped_L66C45"}](mass_b_D_Cr5k_etaL066_etaS045_shaped.eps "fig:"){width="70.00000%"}\
![Total mass of the system against the diameter of the primary mirror of each spacecraft and the achieved impact parameter. Shaped formation orbits: $\eta_L=0.60$, $\eta_S=0.40$.[]{data-label="fig:pareto_spacecraft_b_nsc_shaped_L6C4"}](mass_b_D_Cr5k_etaL06_etaS041_shaped_run9.eps "fig:"){width="70.00000%"}\
![Impact parameter as a function of the number of spacecraft and warning time: 5 m aperture diameter and a concentration ratio of $C_r = 5000$. Natural formation orbits: $\eta_L=0.60$, $\eta_S=0.40$.[]{data-label="fig:deflection_5mlaser"}](twarn_vs_nsc_d5_CR5000_etaL060_etaS040_natural_formation.eps "fig:"){width="70.00000%"}\
![Impact parameter as a function of the number of spacecraft and warning time: 10 m aperture diameter and a concentration ratio of $C_r=5000$. Natural formation orbits: $\eta_L=0.60$, $\eta_S=0.40$.[]{data-label="fig:deflection_10mlaser"}](twarn_vs_nsc_d10_CR5000_etaL060_etaS040_natural_formation.eps "fig:"){width="70.00000%"}\
![Impact parameter as a function of the number of spacecraft and warning time: 5 m aperture diameter and a concentration ratio of $C_r = 5000$. Shaped formation orbits: $\eta_L=0.60$, $\eta_S=0.40$.[]{data-label="fig:deflection_shaped_5mlaser_shaped"}](twarn_vs_nsc_d5_CR5000_etaL060_etaS040_shaped_formation.eps "fig:"){width="70.00000%"}\
![Impact parameter as a function of the number of spacecraft and warning time: 10 m aperture diameter and a concentration ratio of $C_r=5000$. Shaped formation orbits: $\eta_L=0.60$, $\eta_S=0.40$.[]{data-label="fig:deflection_shaped_10mlaser_shaped"}](twarn_vs_nsc_d10_CR5000_etaL060_etaS40_shaped_formation.eps "fig:"){width="70.00000%"}\
![Impact parameter as a function of the number of spacecraft and the concentration ratio: 10 m aperture diameter and a warning time of 8 years. Shaped formation orbits: $\eta_L=0.60$, $\eta_S=0.40$.[]{data-label="fig:deflection_shaped_Cratio_shaped"}](Cr_vs_nsc_twarn8_d10_etaL060_etaS040_shape_formation.eps "fig:"){width="70.00000%"}\
Effect of Eccentricity
======================
One may argue that the method is effective only on asteroids relatively close to the Sun as the solar collectors need to power the laser. Indeed if the asteroid has an aphelion far from the Sun the power can drop below the minimum required to sublimate the surface. Using the idea of the shaped orbits, one can try to apply the laser concept to asteroids with an increasing aphelion from 1 AU to 2 AU and with a decreasing perihelion from 1 AU to 0.5 AU. The assumption is that the Earth is moving on a circular planar orbit and the asteroid on a planar elliptic orbit. The impact parameter is computed at one of the two intersections with the orbit of the Earth and the deflection action starts at the perihelion of the orbit of the asteroid.
Figure \[fig:impact\_rp\_ra\] shows the achievable impact parameter as a function of radius of the aphelion and perihelion for 9 years of warning time, $C_r=5000$ and a 20 m diameter collector. For comparison with the case of Apophis one can notice that the achievable impact parameter is substantially high for highly elliptical asteroids. There are two good reasons for that. One is that the thrust is applied mainly at the pericentre of the orbit but for highly elliptical orbits a variation of velocity at the pericentre produces a much higher change of the semi-major axis than for low eccentric orbits. The other is that the orbit of the asteroid has a much steeper intersection with the Earth’s orbit and therefore a small variation of the arrival time generates a greater impact parameter.
If one sticks to the hypothesis used above for the contamination, even in the case of natural orbits the spacecraft will experience no contamination as they fly above the plume when the sublimation is minimal or null. Therefore, the laser ablation seems to be effective even for high elliptical asteroids with high aphelion.
![Impact parameter as a function of the radius of perihelion $r_P$ and aphelion $r_A$ of the orbit of the asteroid.[]{data-label="fig:impact_rp_ra"}](laser_impact_rp_ra_twarn9years.eps "fig:"){width="90.00000%"}\
Conclusion
==========
This paper presented the multidisciplinary design of a formation of spacecraft equipped with solar pumped laser for the deflection of asteroids.
The paper demonstrated that the use of multiple spacecraft is an optimal solution to maximise the deflection while minimizing the mass of the overall system. In fact as the diameter of the primary mirror increases the radiator and laser mass increases up to the point at which the mass of a single spacecraft exceeds the total mass of two or more spacecraft of smaller size. This is a very important point that is in favour of the use of a formation instead of a single large spacecraft. A formation, or fractionated system, has the further advantage of increasing redundancy and scalability as for a bigger asteroid the solution is simply to increase the number of spacecraft. The sizing of the spacecraft was based on a simple model in which the mass of the main bus is considered constant and the propellant mass is not optimised. These are two limiting assumptions that cause an overestimation of the mass for small systems. At the same time the deployment and thermal control systems are assumed to be scalable within the range of variability of the design parameters. Looking at present technology, this assumption can correspond to an underestimation of the mass for large systems. The efficiency of the laser and solar cells are at the upper limit of what is currently achievable in a lab environment. Although this is an optimistic assumption, current developments are progressing towards those limits independently of the deflection of asteroids. It is therefore reasonable to expect the system efficiencies presented in this paper in the near future. The paper also analyzed the control of the spacecraft in the vicinity of the asteroid and showed that with minimal control and propellant consumption the spacecraft can be maintained in their desired formation orbits.
Finally it was demonstrated that the laser ablation concept based on solar power is applicable also to high eccentric orbits (deep crossers) with even better performance with respect to the shallow crosser case. In fact, for deep crossers the deflection action is maximal where most effective, i.e., around the perihelion, and the steep intersection between orbit of the Earth and orbit of the asteroid amplifies the deflection effect.
Acknowledgements
================
This research was partially supported by the ESA/Ariadna Study Grant AO/1-5387/07/NL/CB [@ariadna]. The authors would like to thank Dr. Leopold Summerer of the ESA Advanced Concepts Team for his support.
[^1]: An asteroid with an effective diameter equal to or greater than 1 km is defined here to be any NEA with an absolute brightness or magnitude $H \le 17.75$, as per @Stuart2003.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'In this paper, we study the codes over the matrix ring over $\mathbb{Z}_4$, which is perhaps the first time the ring structure $M_2(\mathbb{Z}_4)$ is considered as a code alphabet. This ring is isomorphic to $\mathbb{Z}_4[w]+U\mathbb{Z}_4[w]$, where $w$ is a root of the irreducible polynomial $x^2+x+1 \in \mathbb{Z}_2[x]$ and $U\equiv$ ${11}\choose{11}$. We first discuss the structure of the ring $M_2(\mathbb{Z}_4)$ and then focus on algebraic structure of cyclic codes and self-dual cyclic codes over $M_2(\mathbb{Z}_4)$. We obtain the generators of the cyclic codes and their dual codes. Few examples are given at the end of the paper.'
address:
- ' Department of Mathematics, National Institute of Technology Durgapur, Durgapur, INDIA'
- 'Department of Mathematics, Dr. SPM International Institute of Information Technology, Naya Raipur, INDIA'
author:
- Sanjit Bhowmick
- Satya Bagchi
- Ramakrishna Bandi
title: 'Self-dual cyclic codes over $M_2(\mathbb{Z}_4)$'
---
Codes over $\mathbb{Z}_4+u\mathbb{Z}_4$ ,Gray map ,Lee weight ,Self-dual codes
: 94B05 ,94B15
Introduction
============
Codes over finite rings are very old on the other hand their applications in digital communication is rather young. Codes over rings have got the attention of researchers only after Hammons et. al. [@Hammons1994] in which they have shown an interesting relation between popular non-linear codes and linear codes over integer residue rings modulo 4, via a map called Gray map. This attracted the researchers to focus on codes over rings and their applications. As a result so many new ring structures have been considered as code alphabets. However most of the study was restricted to codes over commutative rings [@Hammons1994; @Pless1997; @Pless1996]. Recently, codes over a non-commutative ring, the matrix ring over $\mathbb{Z}_2$, i.e., $M_2(\mathbb{Z}_2)$ has been considered as a code alphabet to study space time codes [@Oggier2012]. The advantage of this type of matrix rings is that they are non-commutative, which allows a quotient ring to have wide left and right ideals (cyclic codes). This is also true in the case of skew polynomial rings, however, the polynomial factorization is a big hurdle in the construction of codes over skew polynomial rings, which is not the case with codes over matrix rings. A notable work on cyclic codes over non-commutative finite rings is [@Bachoc1997; @Greferath1999; @Wisbauer1991].
In [@Greferath1999], the authors have studied cyclic codes over $M_2(\mathbb{Z}_2)$ and obtained some optimal codes over the same. Inspired by this work Luo and Uday [@Luo2017] have obtained the structure of cyclic codes over $M_2(\mathbb{Z}_2+u\mathbb{Z}_2)$ and found some optimal cyclic codes. Motivated by this, in this paper, we explored the construction of codes over $M_2(\mathbb{Z}_4)$. The reason for choosing $\mathbb{Z}_4$ is that $\mathbb{Z}_4$ is best suited for the construction of modular lattices and also the relation established by Hammons et. al. [@Hammons1994] between binary non-linear codes and linear codes over $\mathbb{Z}_4$. The approach which is being used in this paper to cyclic codes over $M_2(\mathbb{Z}_4)$ is same as that of cyclic codes over $M_2(\mathbb{Z}_2)$, however, it is not straight forward as it can be seen later in the paper.
The paper is organised as follows: In Section 2, we describe the structure of $M_2(\mathbb{Z}_4)$ and show that $M_2(\mathbb{Z}_4)$ is isomorphic to $\mathbb{Z}_4[w]+U\mathbb{Z}_4[w]$, where $w$ is a root of the polynomial $x^2+x+1$ and $U\equiv$ ${11}\choose{11}$. We define a Gray map on $\mathbb{Z}_4[w]+U\mathbb{Z}_4[w]$ to $\mathbb{F}^4_4$ which preserves the Lee weight in $\mathbb{Z}_4[w]+U\mathbb{Z}_4[w]$ and Hamming weight in $\mathbb{F}^4_4$. In section 3, we discuss the structure of cyclic codes and prove some results on the dimension of cyclic codes. In section 4, we obtain the structure of dual cyclic codes and also self-dual codes.
Structure of $M_2(\mathbb{Z}_4)$
================================
Let us denote $\mathcal{R}=M_2(\mathbb{Z}_4)$. $\mathcal{R}$ is a non-commutative ring of matrices of order 2 over $\mathbb{Z}_4$. The set $\mathbb{Z}_4+X\mathbb{Z}_4+Y\mathbb{Z}_4+YX\mathbb{Z}_4$ forms a non-commutative finite ring with respect to component wise addition and multiplication defined in Table \[p1\_table1\].
$\mathcal{R}$ $\cdot$ 1 X Y YX
----------------------- --- ---- --- ----
1 1 X 0 0
X 0 0 1 X
Y Y YX 0 0
YX 0 0 Y YX
: Multiplication rule of $\mathcal{R}$[]{data-label="p1_table1"}
\[p1\_lemma1\] The ring $M_2(\mathbb{Z}_4)$ is isomorphic to the ring $\mathbb{Z}_4+X\mathbb{Z}_4+Y\mathbb{Z}_4 + YX\mathbb{Z}_4$, i.e., $M_2(\mathbb{Z}_4) \equiv \mathbb{Z}_4+X\mathbb{Z}_4+Y\mathbb{Z}_4+YX\mathbb{Z}_4$.
We define a mapping $f: M_2(\mathbb{Z}_4) \longrightarrow \mathbb{Z}_4+X\mathbb{Z}_4+Y\mathbb{Z}_4+YX\mathbb{Z}_4$ such that $f(A) = a+Xb+Yc+YXd$, where $A=\left(\begin{array}{cc} a & b \\ c & d \end{array}\right) \in M_2(\mathbb{Z}_4)$. It is easy to see that $f(A+B)=f(A)+f(B)$. Now we show that $f(AB)=f(A)f(B)$. Let $A=\left(\begin{array}{cc} a & b \\ c & d \end{array}\right)$ and $B=\left(\begin{array}{cc} a_1 & b_1 \\ c_1 & d_1 \end{array}\right)$. Then $AB=\left(\begin{array}{cc} aa_1+bc_1 & ab_1+bd_1 \\ ca_1+dc_1 & cb_1+dd_1 \end{array}\right)$. So $f(AB)=(aa_1+bc_1) +X(ab_1+bd_1) +Y(ca_1+dc_1) +YX(cb_1+dd_1)$.
Now, $$\begin{array}{rcl}
f(A)f(B) & = & (a +Xb +Yc +YXd)(a_1 +Xb_1 +Yc_1 +YXd_1)\\
& = & (aa_1+bc_1) +X(ab_1+bd_1) +Y(ca_1+dc_1) +YX(cb_1+dd_1 ) \\
& = & f(AB).
\end{array}$$ It is easy to see that $f$ is one-one and onto. Hence $M_2(\mathbb{Z}_4) \equiv \mathbb{Z}_4+X\mathbb{Z}_4+Y\mathbb{Z}_4+YX\mathbb{Z}_4$.
We consider a subset of $\mathbb{Z}_4 + X\mathbb{Z}_4 + Y\mathbb{Z}_4$ $+YX\mathbb{Z}_4$, namely $W = \lbrace 0$, $X+Y3+YX3$, $X2+Y2+YX2$, $X3+Y+YX$, $1+X+YX3$, $2+X2+YX2$, $3+X3+YX$, $1+YX$, $2+YX2$, $3+YX3$, $1+X2+Y2+YX3$, $3+X2+Y2+YX$, $1+X3+Y+YX2$, $2+X3+Y+YX3$, $2+X+Y3+YX$, $3+X+Y3+YX3 \rbrace$.
\[p1\_lemma2\] The subset $W$ forms a commutative ring with respect to component wise addition and multiplication defined on $\mathbb{Z}_4+X\mathbb{Z}_4+Y\mathbb{Z}_4+YX\mathbb{Z}_4$.
One can easily verify that $W$ is an abelian group under component wise addition. The other criteria of a ring can be verified using the Table \[p1\_table2\]. For simplicity, we use the following notation:\
$\begin{array}{cccc}
a_0=0, & a_{1}= X+Y3+YX3, & a_{2}= X2+Y2+YX2, & a_{3}= X3+Y+YX, \\
a_{4}=1+X+YX3, & a_{5}=2+X2+YX2, & a_{6}= 3+X3+YX, & a_{7}= 1+YX, \\
a_{8}=2+YX2, & a_{9}= 3+YX3, & a_{10}= 1+X2+Y2+YX3, & a_{11}=3+X2+Y2+YX, \\
a_{12}=1+X3+Y+YX2, & a_{13}=2+X3+Y+YX3, & a_{14}=2+X+Y3+YX, & a_{15}=3+X+Y3+YX3.
\end{array}$
$\cdot$ 0 $a_1$ $a_2$ $a_3$ $a_4$ $a_5$ $a_6$ $a_7$ $a_8$ $a_9$ $a_{10}$ $a_{11}$ $a_{12}$ $a_{13}$ $a_{14}$ $a_{15}$
---------- --- ---------- ------- ---------- ---------- ------- ---------- ---------- ------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ----------
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
$a_1$ 0 $a_6$ $a_5$ $a_4$ $a_9$ $a_8$ $a_7$ $a_1$ $a_2$ $a_3$ $a_{13}$ $a_{14}$ $a_{10}$ $a_{12}$ $a_{15}$ $a_{11}$
$a_2$ 0 $a_5$ 0 $a_5$ $a_8$ 0 $a_8$ $a_2$ 0 $a_2$ $a_2$ $a_2$ $a_{8}$ $a_5$ $a_5$ $a_8$
$a_3$ 0 $a_4$ $a_5$ $a_6$ $a_7$ $a_8$ $a_9$ $a_3$ $a_2$ $a_1$ $a_{14}$ $a_{13}$ $a_{11}$ $a_{15}$ $a_{12}$ $a_{10}$
$a_4$ 0 $a_9$ $a_8$ $a_7$ $a_1$ $a_2$ $a_3$ $a_4$ $a_5$ $a_6$ $a_{15}$ $a_{12}$ $a_{14}$ $a_{11}$ $a_{10}$ $a_{13}$
$a_5$ 0 $a_8$ 0 $a_8$ $a_2$ 0 $a_2$ $a_5$ 0 $a_5$ $a_5$ $a_5$ $a_5$ $a_8$ $a_8$ $a_2$
$a_6$ 0 $a_7$ $a_8$ $a_9$ $a_3$ $a_2$ $a_1$ $a_6$ $a_5$ $a_4$ $a_{12}$ $a_{15}$ $a_{13}$ $a_{10}$ $a_{11}$ $a_{14}$
$a_7$ 0 $a_1$ $a_2$ $a_3$ $a_4$ $a_5$ $a_6$ $a_7$ $a_8$ $a_9$ $a_{10}$ $a_{11}$ $a_{12}$ $a_{13}$ $a_{14}$ $a_{15}$
$a_8$ 0 $a_2$ 0 $a_2$ $a_5$ 0 $a_5$ $a_8$ 0 $a_8$ $a_8$ $a_8$ $a_5$ $a_2$ $a_2$ $a_5$
$a_9$ 0 $a_3$ $a_2$ $a_1$ $a_6$ $a_5$ $a_4$ $a_9$ $a_8$ $a_7$ $a_{11}$ $a_{10}$ $a_{15}$ $a_{14}$ $a_{13}$ $a_{12}$
$a_{10}$ 0 $a_{13}$ $a_2$ $a_{14}$ $a_{15}$ $a_5$ $a_{12}$ $a_{10}$ $a_8$ $a_{11}$ $a_7$ $a_9$ $a_6$ $a_1$ $a_3$ $a_4$
$a_{11}$ 0 $a_{14}$ $a_2$ $a_{13}$ $a_{12}$ $a_5$ $a_{15}$ $a_{11}$ $a_8$ $a_{10}$ $a_9$ $a_7$ $a_4$ $a_3$ $a_1$ $a_6$
$a_{12}$ 0 $a_{10}$ $a_8$ $a_{11}$ $a_{14}$ $a_5$ $a_{13}$ $a_{12}$ $a_5$ $a_{15}$ $a_6$ $a_4$ $a_1$ $a_7$ $a_9$ $a_3$
$a_{13}$ 0 $a_{12}$ $a_5$ $a_{15}$ $a_{11}$ $a_8$ $a_{10}$ $a_{13}$ $a_2$ $a_{14}$ $a_1$ $a_3$ $a_7$ $a_6$ $a_4$ $a_9$
$a_{14}$ 0 $a_{15}$ $a_5$ $a_{12}$ $a_{10}$ $a_8$ $a_{11}$ $a_{14}$ $a_2$ $a_{13}$ $a_3$ $a_1$ $a_9$ $a_4$ $a_6$ $a_7$
$a_{15}$ 0 $a_{11}$ $a_8$ $a_{10}$ $a_{13}$ $a_2$ $a_{14}$ $a_{15}$ $a_5$ $a_{12}$ $a_4$ $a_6$ $a_3$ $a_9$ $a_7$ $a_1$
: Multiplication table of $W$[]{data-label="p1_table2"}
We choose the element $1+X+Y+YX$ from $\mathbb{Z}_4+X\mathbb{Z}_4+Y\mathbb{Z}_4+YX\mathbb{Z}_4$ and denote it by $U$, i.e., $U = 1+X+Y+YX$. So $UW = \lbrace 0$, $3+Y3$, $2+Y2$, $1+Y$, $X+YX$, $X2+YX2$, $X3+YX3$, $1+X+Y+YX$, $2+X2+Y2+YX2$, $3+X3+Y3+YX3$, $3+X+Y3+YX$, $1+X3+Y+YX3$, $2+X+Y2+YX$, $3+X2+Y3+YX2$, $1+X2+Y+YX2$, $2+X3+Y2+YX3\rbrace$. This implies that $W \cap UW=\lbrace 0 \rbrace$, which inturn implies that $W+UW=\mathbb{Z}_4+X\mathbb{Z}_4+Y\mathbb{Z}_4+YX\mathbb{Z}_4$ as $W+UW$ is sub-ring of $\mathbb{Z}_4+X\mathbb{Z}_4+Y\mathbb{Z}_4+YX\mathbb{Z}_4$ and $\mid W+UW \mid =256$. Therefore $\mathbb{Z}_4+X\mathbb{Z}_4+Y\mathbb{Z}_4+YX\mathbb{Z}_4 = W+UW$.
Let $x^2+x+1$ be a basic irreducible polynomial over $\mathbb{Z}_4$. Then $\dfrac{\mathbb{Z}_4[x]}{\langle x^2+x+1 \rangle}$ is called the Galois extension ring of $\mathbb{Z}_4$ and is denoted by GR(4,2). If $w$ is a root of $x^2+x+1$ then $\dfrac{\mathbb{Z}_4[x]}{\langle x^2+x+1 \rangle} = GR(4,2) \cong \mathbb{Z}_4[w]$.
\[p1\_lemma4\] The ring $W$ is isomorphic to the ring $\mathbb{Z}_4[w]$, i.e., $W\cong\mathbb{Z}_4[w]$.
We consider the mapping as follows: $0\longmapsto 0$, $X+Y3+YX3\longmapsto w$, $X2+Y2+YX2\longmapsto 2w$, $X3+Y+YX\longmapsto 3w$, $1+X+Y3\longmapsto 3w^2$, $2+X2+Y2\longmapsto 2w^2$, $3+X3+Y\longmapsto w^2$, $1+YX\longmapsto 1$, $2+YX2\longmapsto 2$, $3+YX3\longmapsto 3$, $1+X2+Y2+YX3\longmapsto 2w+1$, $3+X2+Y2+YX\longmapsto 2w+3$, $1+X3+Y+YX2\longmapsto 3w+1$, $2+X3+Y+YX3\longmapsto 3w+2$, $2+X+Y3+YX\longmapsto w+2$, $3+X+Y3+YX2\longmapsto w+3$. It is clear from Table \[p1\_table2\] that this map is a ring isomorphism. Therefore $W\cong\mathbb{Z}_4[w]$.
\[p1\_thm1\] The ring $M_2(\mathbb{Z}_4)$ is isomorphic to the ring $\mathbb{Z}_4[w]+U\mathbb{Z}_4[w]$, i.e., $M_2(\mathbb{Z}_4) \cong\mathbb{Z}_4[w]+U\mathbb{Z}_4[w]$.
We have $$\begin{aligned}
M_2(\mathbb{Z}_4) & \cong & \mathbb{Z}_4+X\mathbb{Z}_4+Y\mathbb{Z}_4+YX\mathbb{Z}_4 ~~\mbox{from Lemma}~ \ref{p1_lemma1}\\
&\cong & W+UW \\
& \cong & \mathbb{Z}_4[w]+U\mathbb{Z}_4[w] ~~\mbox{from Lemma}~ \ref{p1_lemma4}\end{aligned}$$ Therefore $M_2(\mathbb{Z}_4) \cong\mathbb{Z}_4[w]+U\mathbb{Z}_4[w]$.
We notice here that the rings $W$ and $\mathbb{Z}_4[w]$ are commutative, however, their extensions, both $W+UW$ and $\mathbb{Z}_4[w]+U\mathbb{Z}_4[w]$ are non-commutative. Summarising the above discussion, we have $\mathcal{R} \cong \mathbb{Z}_4[w]+U\mathbb{Z}_4[w]$, where $U^2=2U$, $U^3=0$, $2U=U2$ and $2U^2=0$.
We know that each element of $\mathbb{Z}_4$ has 2-adic representation $a+2b$, where $a,~b \in \mathbb{Z}_2$, so is $\mathbb{Z}_4[w]$. Now we define a Gray map on $\mathcal{R}$. For this, first we define a mapping $\mathcal{R}$ to $\mathbb{Z}^2_4[w]$, and then define a mapping $\mathbb{Z}^2_4[w]$ to $\mathbb{F}^4_4$ so that the Gray map is $$\begin{array}{cccc}
\Phi: & \mathcal{R} & \longrightarrow & \mathbb{F}_4^4\\
& a+2b+Uc+U2d & \longmapsto & (d,~ c+d,~ b+d,~ a+b+c+d),
\end{array}$$ where $a, b, c, d\in \mathbb{F}_4$. This map can easily be extended to $\mathcal{R}^n$ component wise. The Hamming weight $w_H$ of $x \in \mathbb{F}_4^n$ is defined as the number of non-zero coordinates of $x$. For $x=a+2b+Uc+U2d \in \mathcal{R}^n$, we define the Lee weight of $x$, denoted by $w_L(x)$, as $$w_L(x)=w_H(d)+w_H(d+c) + w_H(d+b)+w_H(a+b+c+d).$$ For any $x$, $y \in \mathcal{R}^n$, the Lee distance $d_L(x, y)$ between $x$ and $y$ is the Lee weight of $x-y$, i.e., $d_L(x,y)=w_L(x-y)$. A linear code $C$ of length $n$ over $\mathcal{R}$ is an $\mathcal{R}$-submodule of $\mathcal{R}^n$. $C$ is said to be a [*[free code]{}*]{} if $C$ has a $\mathcal{R}$-basis. We define the *rank* of a code $C$ as the minimum number of generators for $C$. The Lee distance of $C$ is denoted by $d_L(C)$ and is defined by $d_L(C)=min \lbrace w_L(c)=\sum^{n-1}_{i=0 }w_L(c_i)\vert c=(c_0, c_1,\dots, c_{n-1})\in C\rbrace$. From the above discussion, we can easily verify the following theorem.
\[p1\_thm2\] If $C$ is a linear code over $\mathcal{R}$ of length $n$, size $M$ with Lee distance $d_L$, then $\Phi(C)$ is a code of length $4n$ over $\mathbb{F}_4$, size $M$.
Cyclic codes over $M_2(\mathbb{Z}_4)$
=====================================
Let $\tau$ be the standard cyclic shift operator on $\mathcal{R}^n$. A linear code $C$ of length $n$ over $\mathcal{R}$ is cyclic if $\tau(c) \in C$ whenever $c \in C$, *i.e.,* if $(c_0, c_1, \ldots, c_{n-1}) \in C$, then $(c_{n-1}, c_0, c_1, \ldots, c_{n-2}) \in C$. As usual, in the polynomial representation, a cyclic code of length $n$ over $\mathcal{R}$ is an ideal of $\frac{\mathcal{R}[x]}{\left\langle x^n-1\right\rangle}$. Note here that $\frac{\mathcal{R}[x]}{\left\langle x^n-1\right\rangle}$ is a ring.\
\[thm2.2\] A linear code $C = C_1 + UC_2$ of length $n$ over $\mathcal{R}$ is cyclic if and only if $C_1$, $C_2$ are cyclic codes of length $n$ over $\mathbb{Z}_4[w]$.
Let $c_1+Uc_2 \in C$, where $c_1 \in C_1$ and $c_2 \in C_2$. Then $\tau(c_1+Uc_2) = \tau(c_1) +U\tau(c_2) \in C$, since $C$ is cyclic and $\tau$ is a linear map. So, $\tau(c_1) \in C_1$ and $\tau(c_2) \in C_2$. Therefore $C_1, C_2$ are cyclic codes. Conversely if $C_1$, $C_2$ are cyclic codes, then for any $c_1+Uc_2 \in C$, where $c_1 \in C_1$ and $c_2 \in C_2$, we have $\tau(c_1) \in C_1$ and $\tau(c_2) \in C_2$, and so, $\tau(c_1+Uc_2) = \tau(c_1) +U\tau(c_2) \in C$. Hence $C$ is cyclic.
We assume that $n$ is odd for the rest of this paper. Let $\mathcal{R}[x]$ be the ring of polynomials over the ring $\mathcal{R}$. We define a mapping $$\begin{array}{cccc}
\mu: & \mathcal{R}[x] & \longrightarrow & \mathbb{F}_4[x] \\
& \sum_{i=0}^n a_ix^i & \longmapsto & \sum_{i=0}^n \mu(a_i)x^i,
\end{array}$$ where $\mu(a_i)$ denote reduction of modulo $2$ and $U$.
A polynomial $f \in \mathcal{R}[x]$ is called [*[basic irreducible polynomial]{}*]{} if $\mu(f)$ is irreducible over $\mathbb{F}_4$. Two polynomials $f(x), g(x) \in \mathcal{R}[x]$ are said to be *coprime* if there exist $a(x), b(x) \in \mathcal{R}[x]$ such that $$a(x)f(x) + b(x)g(x) = 1~.$$
The polynomial $x^n-1$ factorizes uniquely into pairwise coprime irreducible polynomials over $\mathbb{F}_4$. Let $x^n-1=f_1f_2f_3\cdots f_m$, where $f_i$’s are irreducible polynomials over $\mathbb{F}_4$.
Let $f_i$ be a basic irreducible polynomial over $\mathcal{R}$. Then $\dfrac{\mathcal{R}[x]}{\langle f_i \rangle}$ is not a ring but a right module over $\mathcal{R}$.
Since $\langle f_i \rangle$ is not two sided ideal of $\mathcal{R}[x]$ so $\dfrac{\mathcal{R}[x]}{\langle f_i \rangle }$ is not a ring for $1 \leq i \leq m$. Then each $\dfrac{\mathcal{R}[x]}{\langle f_i \rangle }$ is a right $\mathcal{R}$-module.
We need a non-commutative analogue of the Chinese Remainder Theorem for modules.
Let $n$ be an odd integer. Then $$\dfrac{\mathcal{R}[x]}{\langle x^n-1 \rangle} = \bigoplus^m_1 \dfrac{\mathcal{R}[x]}{\langle f_i \rangle}.$$
The proof follows from [@Oggier2012], [@Wisbauer1991].
\[p1\_thm3\] If $f$ be an irreducible polynomial in $\mathbb{F}_4[x]$, then the right $\mathcal{R}$-modules of $\dfrac{\mathcal{R}[x]}{\langle f \rangle}$ are $$\langle 0 \rangle, \langle 1+\langle f \rangle \rangle, \langle U+\langle f \rangle \rangle, \langle 2U+\langle f \rangle \rangle, \langle (2+Um_{f}) + \langle f \rangle \rangle, \langle 2+\langle f \rangle \rangle, \langle \langle 2, U \rangle+\langle f \rangle \rangle,$$ where $m_{f}$ is an unit in $\dfrac{\mathbb{F}_4[x]}{\langle f \rangle}$.
Let $I$ be a non-zero right sub-module of $\dfrac{\mathcal{R}[x]}{\langle f \rangle}$ and $g(x) \in \mathcal{R}[x]$ such that $g(x) + \langle f \rangle \in I$ but $g(x)\notin \langle f \rangle$. If $gcd(\mu(g(x))$, $f(x))=1$ then $g$ is invertible $\pmod f$. So $I=\langle 1 + \langle f \rangle \rangle =\dfrac{\mathcal{R}[x]}{\langle f \rangle}$. If $gcd(\mu(g(x)), f(x)) = f(x)$ then there exit $g_1(x)$, $g_2(x)$, $g_3(x)$, $g_4(x)\in\mathbb{F}_4[x]$ such that $g(x) = g_1(x) + Ug_2(x) + 2g_3(x) + 2Ug_4(x)$ with $gcd((g_1(x)), f(x))=f(x)$ then $g(x) +\langle f \rangle = Ug_2(x)+2g_3(x)+2Ug_4(x)+\langle f \rangle$. If $gcd(g_2(x), f(x))=f(x)$ then $g(x)+\langle f \rangle =2g_3(x)+2Ug_4(x)+\langle f \rangle$. It follows that $I=\langle 2+\langle f \rangle \rangle$. If $gcd(g_3(x), f(x))=f(x)$, implies that $I=\langle 2U+\langle f \rangle \rangle$. Also if $gcd(g_2(x), f(x))=1$, then there exits $g^{-1}_2(x)\in \mathbb{F}_4[x]$ such that $g_2(x)g^{-1}_2(x)\equiv 1 \pmod f$. Therefore $2U=2g(x)g^{-1}_2(x)$. Hence $2U+\langle f \rangle =2g(x)g^{-1}_2(x)+\langle f \rangle\in I$. It follows that $ Ug_2(x)+2g_3(x)+\langle f \rangle = g(x) + 2Ug_4(x)+\langle f \rangle\in I$. If $gcd(g_3(x), f(x))=f(x), $ then $I=\langle U+\langle f \rangle \rangle$. Otherwise $gcd(g_3(x), f(x))=1$, then $g^{-1}_3(x)\in \mathbb{F}_4[x]$ such that $g_3(x)g^{-1}_3(x)\equiv 1 \pmod f$. Hence $2+Ug_2(x)g^{-1}_3(x)+\langle f \rangle \in I$, i.e., $\langle 2+Um_{f}+\langle f \rangle \rangle =I$, where $m_{f}=g_2(x)g_3^{-1}(x)$ is an unit in $\dfrac{\mathbb{F}_4[x]}{\langle f \rangle}$. Since $gcd(g_2(x), f(x))=1,~ gcd(g_3(x), f(x))=1$ then there exit $a_1(x)$, $a_2(x)$, $b_1(x)$, $b_2(x)\in\mathbb{F}_4[x]$ such that $g_2(x)a_1(x)+f(x)a_2(x)=1$, $g_3(x)b_1(x)+f(x)b_2(x)=1$. Therefore $$Ub_1(x)+\langle f \rangle = (Ug_2(x) + \langle f \rangle)(a_1(x)b_1(x)+\langle f \rangle)$$ $$2a_1(x)+\langle f \rangle=(Ug_3(x)+\langle f \rangle)(a_1(x)b_1(x)+\langle f \rangle)$$ $$Ub_1(x)+2a_1(x)+\langle f \rangle=(Ug_2(x)+2g_3(x)\langle f \rangle)(a_1(x)b_1(x)+\langle f \rangle)$$ It follows that $I=\langle \langle U, 2 \rangle + \langle f \rangle \rangle$.
\[p1\_thm4\] Let $x^n-1=f_1f_2f_3 \cdots f_m$, where $f_i$’s are monic basic irreducible pairwise coprime polynomials in $\mathcal{R}[x]$. Let $\hat{f}_i=\dfrac{x^n-1}{f_i}$. Then any ideal in $\dfrac{\mathcal{R}[X]}{\left\langle x^n-1\right\rangle}$ is the sum of the right sub-modules: $\left\langle \hat{f}_i+\left\langle x^n-1\right\rangle \right\rangle$, $\left\langle 2\hat{f}_i+\left\langle x^n-1\right\rangle \right\rangle$, $\left\langle U\hat{f}_i+\left\langle x^n-1\right\rangle \right\rangle$, $\left\langle 2U\hat{f}_i+\left\langle x^n-1\right\rangle \right\rangle$, $\left\langle (2+Um_f)\hat{f}_i+\left\langle x^n-1\right\rangle \right\rangle$, $\left\langle \left\langle2, U \right\rangle \hat{f}_i+\left\langle x^n-1\right\rangle \right\rangle $, where $m_{f}$ is an unit in $\dfrac{\mathbb{F}_4[x]}{\left\langle f \right\rangle}$.
It follows from the Chinese Remainder Theorem for modules and the right $\mathcal{R}$-modules of the $\dfrac{\mathcal{R}[x]}{\left\langle f\right\rangle}$.
\[p1\_thm5\] Let $C$ be a cyclic code of length $n$ over $\mathcal{R}$. Then there exists a family of pairwise monic polynomials $F_0, F_1, \dots, F_6\in \mathbb{F}_4[x]$ such that $F_0F_1\cdots F_6=x^n-1$ and $C=\left\langle \hat{F}_1 \right\rangle$ $\oplus$ $\left\langle U\hat{F}_2 \right\rangle $ $\oplus $ $ \left\langle 2\hat{F}_3 \right\rangle $ $\oplus $ $\left\langle 2U\hat{F}_4 \right\rangle $ $\oplus $ $\left\langle (2+Um_f)\hat{F}_5 \right\rangle $ $\oplus $ $ \left\langle \left\langle 2, U\right\rangle \hat{F}_6 \right\rangle$, where $m_{f}$ is an unit in $\dfrac{\mathbb{F}_4[x]}{\left\langle f \right\rangle}$. Moreover $\vert C \vert = 4^\alpha$, where $\alpha = 4 degF_1+2 degF_2+2 degF_3+degF_4+2 degF_5+3 degF_6$.
First part follows from a similar argument of Theorem 2 in [@Luo2017]. Now we compute $|C|$. We know that $C=\left\langle \hat{F}_1 \right\rangle $ $\oplus $ $\left\langle U\hat{F}_2 \right\rangle $ $\oplus $ $ \left\langle 2\hat{F}_3 \right\rangle $ $\oplus $ $\left\langle 2U\hat{F}_4 \right\rangle $ $\oplus $ $\left\langle (2+Um_f)\hat{F}_5 \right\rangle $ $\oplus $ $ \left\langle \left\langle 2,U\right\rangle \hat{F}_6 \right\rangle$, which implies that $\vert C \vert = \mid\hat{F}_{1}\mid \cdot \mid U\hat{F}_{2}\mid \cdot \mid 2\hat{F}_{3}\mid \cdot \mid 2U\hat{F}_{4}\mid \cdot \mid (2+Um_f)\hat{F}_{5}\mid \cdot \mid \langle2, U\rangle\hat{F}_{6}\mid$. The rest follows from the fact that $\mid\hat{F}_{1}\mid=4^{4degF_1}$, $|U\hat{F}_{2}|=4^{2degF_2}$, $ \mid 2\hat{F}_{3}\mid=4^{2degF_3}$, $\mid 2U\hat{F}_{4}\mid=4^{degF_4}$, $\mid (2+Um_f)\hat{F}_{5}\mid=4^{2degF_5}$, $\mid \langle2, U\rangle\hat{F}_{6}\mid=4^{3degF_6}$.
\[p1\_thm6\] Let $C$ be a cyclic code of length $n$ over $\mathcal{R}$ with $C=\left\langle \hat{F}_1 \right\rangle \oplus \left\langle U\hat{F}_2 \right\rangle \oplus \left\langle 2\hat{F}_3 \right\rangle \oplus \left\langle 2U\hat{F}_4 \right\rangle \oplus \left\langle (2+Um_f)\hat{F}_5 \right\rangle \oplus \left\langle \left\langle 2, U\right\rangle \hat{F}_6 \right\rangle$, where $m_{f}$ is an unit in $\dfrac{\mathbb{F}_4[x]}{\left\langle f \right\rangle}$ and $F=\hat{F}_1+U\hat{F}_2+2\hat{F}_3+2U\hat{F}_4+(2+Um_f)\hat{F}_5+\left\langle 2, U\right\rangle \hat{F}_6$. Then $C=\left\langle F \right\rangle$.
For any two distinct $i, j$, $0 \leq i, j \leq 6$, we have $(x^n-1)\vert \hat{F}_i\hat{F}_j$. So $\hat{F}_i\hat{F}_j=0$. Also for any $i$ with $0\leq i \leq 6$, $ F_i ,\hat{F}_i $ are coprime and $ F_i \hat{F}_i=0$. Since $ F_i, \hat{F}_i $ are coprime, there exist $a_i, b_i$ such that $(a_1F_1+b_1\hat{F}_1)(a_2F_2+b_2\hat{F}_2)(a_3F_3+b_3\hat{F}_3)(a_4F_4+b_4\hat{F}_4)(a_5F_5+b_5\hat{F}_5)=1$. This implies that $a_1F_1a_2F_2a_3F_3a_4F_4a_5F_5 + b_1\hat{F}_1a_2F_2a_3F_3a_4F_4a_5F_5 + a_1F_1b_2\hat{F}_2a_3F_3a_4F_4a_5F_5 + a_1F_1a_2F_2b_3\hat{F}_3a_4F_4a_5F_5 +a_1F_1a_2F_2a_3F_3b_4\hat{F}_4a_5F_5 +a_1F_1a_2F_2a_3F_3a_4F_4b_5\hat{F}_5 =1$. On multiplying both side by $\hat{F}_6$, we obtain $\hat{F}_6a_1F_1a_2F_2a_3F_3a_4F_4a_5F_5=\hat{F}_6$. We have $F=\hat{F}_1+U\hat{F}_2+2\hat{F}_3+2U\hat{F}_4+(2+Um_f)\hat{F}_5+\left\langle 2, U\right\rangle \hat{F}_6$. It follows that $Fa_1F_1a_2F_2a_3F_3a_4F_4a_5F_5 =\left\langle 2, U\right\rangle \hat{F}_6a_1F_1a_2F_2a_3F_3a_4F_4a_5F_5,$ which inturn implies that $Fa_1F_1a_2F_2a_3F_3a_4F_4a_5F_5=\langle 2, U\rangle \hat{F}_6$. Hence $ \langle 2, U\rangle \hat{F}_6\in \langle F\rangle$. Continuing this process, we obtain $\hat{F}_1,~ U\hat{F}_2,~ 2\hat{F}_3,~ 2U\hat{F}_4, ~(2+Um_f)\hat{F}_5,~ \left\langle 2, U\right\rangle \hat{F}_6\in \langle F \rangle$. Consequently $C=\langle F \rangle$.
Let us denote $R=\dfrac{\mathbb{F}_4[x]}{\left\langle x^n-1 \right\rangle}$.
\[p1\_thm7\] Let $C$ be a cyclic code of length $n$ over $\mathcal{R}$. Then there exists a family of polynomials $F, G, H, Q, T\in \mathbb{F}_4[x] $ which are divisors of $x^n-1$ such that $C=\left\langle F \right\rangle_{R} \oplus U\left\langle G \right\rangle_{R} \oplus 2\left\langle H \right\rangle_{R}\oplus 2U\left\langle Q \right\rangle_{R}\oplus (2+Um_f) \left\langle T \right\rangle_{R}$, where $m_{f}$ is an unit in $\dfrac{\mathbb{F}_4[x]}{\left\langle f \right\rangle}$. Moreover $\vert C \vert=4^{5n-(degF+degG+degH+degQ+degT)}$.
A similar argument as in [@Luo2017].
Self-dual cyclic codes over $M_2(\mathbb{Z}_4)$
===============================================
For given $\textbf{x}=(x_1, x_2, \dots, x_n)$, $\textbf{y}=(y_1, y_2, \dots, y_n)\in \mathcal{R}^n$, the Euclidean scalar product (or dot product) of $\textbf{x, y}$ is $\textbf{x}\cdot \textbf{y} = x_1y_1+x_2y_2+ \cdots+x_ny_n \pmod 4$. Two vectors $\textbf{x}$ and $\textbf{y}$ in $\mathcal{R}^n$ are called orthogonal if $\textbf{x}\cdot \textbf{y}=0$. For a linear code $C $ over $\mathcal{R}$, its dual code $C^\perp$ is the set of words over $\mathcal{R}$ that are orthogonal to all codewords of $C$, i.e., $C^\perp=\left\lbrace \textbf{x} \in \mathcal{R}^n \mid \textbf{x} \cdot \textbf{y}=0, \forall y\in C \right\rbrace$. A code $C$ is called self-orthogonal if $C \subset C^{\perp}$ and self-dual if $C=C^{\perp}$.
Let $f(x)=a_0+a_1x+ \cdots +a_{k-1}x^{k-1} + a_{k}x^{k}$ be a polynomial of degree $k$ with $a_{k}\neq 0$, $a_{0}\neq 0$. The reciprocal $f^\ast(x)$ of $f(x)$ is defined by $$f^\ast(x)=a_0^{-1}x^kf(x^{-1}).$$
\[p1\_thm8\] Let $C$ be a cyclic code of length $n$ over $\mathcal{R}$ with $C=\left\langle \hat{F}_1 \right\rangle $ $\oplus $ $\left\langle U\hat{F}_2 \right\rangle $ $\oplus $ $ \left\langle 2\hat{F}_3 \right\rangle $ $\oplus $ $\left\langle 2U\hat{F}_4 \right\rangle $ $\oplus $ $\left\langle (2+Um_f)\hat{F}_5 \right\rangle $ $\oplus $ $ \left\langle \left\langle 2, U\right\rangle \hat{F}_6 \right\rangle$, where $m_{f}$ is an unit in $\dfrac{\mathbb{F}_4[x]}{\left\langle f \right\rangle}$. Then $C^\perp=\left\langle \hat{F}^\ast_0 \right\rangle $ $\oplus $ $\left\langle U\hat{F}^\ast_2 \right\rangle $ $\oplus $ $ \left\langle 2\hat{F}^\ast_3 \right\rangle $ $\oplus $ $\left\langle 2U\hat{F}^\ast_6 \right\rangle $ $\oplus $ $\left\langle (2+Um_f)\hat{F}^\ast_5 \right\rangle $ $\oplus $ $ \left\langle \left\langle 2, U\right\rangle \hat{F}^\ast_4 \right\rangle$ and $\mid C^\perp\mid=4^{4degF_0+2degF_2+2degF_3+3degF_4+2degF_5+degF_6}$.
From the Theorem \[p1\_thm5\], $\mid C \mid = 4^{4degF_1 + 2degF_2 + 2degF_3 + degF_4 + 2degF_5 + 3degF_6}$. Since $\mid C \mid \mid C^\perp \mid=4^{4n}$ and $n=degF_1+degF_2+degF_3+degF_4+degF_5+degF_6$, so $\mid C^\perp \mid=4^{4degF_0+2degF_2+2degF_3+3degF_4+2degF_5+degF_6}$.
We denote $C^\ast=\left\langle \hat{F}^\ast_0 \right\rangle $ $\oplus $ $\left\langle U\hat{F}^\ast_2 \right\rangle $ $\oplus $ $ \left\langle 2\hat{F}^\ast_3 \right\rangle $ $\oplus $ $\left\langle 2U\hat{F}^\ast_6 \right\rangle $ $\oplus $ $\left\langle (2+Um_f)\hat{F}^\ast_5 \right\rangle $ $\oplus $ $ \left\langle \left\langle 2, U\right\rangle \hat{F}^\ast_4 \right\rangle $. For $i, j$, $0 \leq i, j \leq 6$, if $i+1=7-j+1$, i.e., $i=7-j,$ we can see that $\hat{F}_{i+1}\hat{F}^\ast_{7-i+1}=0$. If $i+1\neq7-j+1$, i.e., $i\neq7-j,$ then we have $ x^n-1\mid\hat{F}_{i+1}\hat{F}^\ast_{7-i+1}$. Then it follows that $\hat{F}_{i+1}\hat{F}^\ast_{7-i+1}=0$. Therefore $C^\ast \subseteq C^\perp$. Note that $\mid\hat{F}^\ast_{0}\mid=4^{4degF_0}$, $\mid U\hat{F}^\ast_{2}\mid=4^{2degF_2}$, $\mid 2\hat{F}^\ast_{3}\mid=4^{2degF_3}$, $\mid 2U\hat{F}^\ast_{6}\mid=4^{degF_6}$, $\mid (2+Um_f)\hat{F}^\ast_{5}\mid=4^{2degF_5}$, $\mid \langle2, U\rangle\hat{F}^\ast_{4}\mid=4^{degF_4}$. Hence $|C^\ast| = 4^{4degF_0+2degF_2+2degF_3+3degF_4+2degF_5+degF_6} = |C^\perp|$. Consequently $C^\ast = C^\perp$.
\[p1\_thm9\] Let $C$ be a cyclic code of length $n$ over $\mathcal{R}$ with $C$ and $C^\perp$ defined as in Theorem \[p1\_thm8\], and $F^\ast=\hat{F}^\ast_0+U\hat{F}^\ast_2+2\hat{F}_3+2U\hat{F}^\ast_6+(2+Um_f)\hat{F}^\ast_5+\left\langle 2, U\right\rangle \hat{F}^\ast_4$. Then $C^\perp=\left\langle F^\ast \right\rangle$.
The result follows from a similar argument as in the proof of Theorem \[p1\_thm6\] as $\hat{F}^\ast_i\hat{F}^\ast_j=0$ and $\hat{F}^\ast_i, F^\ast_j$ are coprime for any $i, j$, $0 \leq i,j \leq 6$.
\[p1\_thm10\] Let $C$ be a cyclic code of length $n$ over $\mathcal{R}$. Then there exists a family of polynomials $F^\ast, G^\ast, H^\ast, Q^\ast, T^\ast\in \mathbb{F}_4[x] $ which are divisors of $x^n-1$ such that $C^\perp=\left\langle F^\ast \right\rangle_{R} \oplus U\left\langle G^\ast \right\rangle_{R} \oplus 2\left\langle H^\ast \right\rangle_{R}\oplus 2U\left\langle Q^\ast \right\rangle_{R}\oplus (2+Um_f) \left\langle T^\ast \right\rangle_{R}$, where $m_{f}$ is an unit in $\dfrac{\mathbb{F}_4[x]}{\left\langle f \right\rangle}$. Moreover $\vert C^\perp \vert = 4^{5n-(degF^\ast+degG^\ast+degH^\ast+degQ^\ast+degT^\ast)}$.
Follows fromTheorem \[p1\_thm7\].
We now prove the main result of this section, a condition for a cyclic code $C$ over $\mathcal{R}$ to be self-dual. From Theorem \[p1\_thm6\] and Theorem \[p1\_thm9\], we can see that a cyclic codes $C$ is self-dual if and only if $F=F^\ast$. This implies that $$\hat{F}_1=\hat{F}^\ast_0, ~~ \hat{F}_2=\hat{F}^\ast_2,~~ \hat{F}_3=\hat{F}^\ast_3,~~\hat{F}_4=\hat{F}^\ast_6,~~\hat{F}_5=\hat{F}^\ast_5,~~ \hat{F}_6=\hat{F}^\ast_4.$$ Again since $\hat{F}_i=\dfrac{x^n-1}{F_i}$, $\hat{F}^\ast_j=\dfrac{x^n-1}{F^\ast_j}$ and $\hat{F}_i=\hat{F}^\ast_j$, we have $F_i=F^\ast_j$. Hence proved the following results.
\[p1\_thm11\] Let $C$ be a cyclic code of length $n$ over $\mathcal{R}$ with $C=\left\langle \hat{F}_1 \right\rangle $ $\oplus $ $\left\langle U\hat{F}_2 \right\rangle $ $\oplus $ $ \left\langle 2\hat{F}_3 \right\rangle $ $\oplus $ $\left\langle 2U\hat{F}_4 \right\rangle $ $\oplus $ $\left\langle (2+Um_f)\hat{F}_5 \right\rangle $ $\oplus $ $ \left\langle \left\langle 2 ,U\right\rangle \hat{F}_6 \right\rangle$, where $m_{f}$ is an unit in $\dfrac{\mathbb{F}_4[x]}{\left\langle f \right\rangle}$. Then $C$ is self-dual code if and only if $F_1=F^\ast_0,~~ F_2=F^\ast_2,~~ F_3=F^\ast_3,~~ F_4=F^\ast_6,~~ F_5=F^\ast_5.$
\[p1\_thm12\] Let $C$ be a cyclic code of length $n$ over $\mathcal{R}$ with $C=\left\langle F \right\rangle_{R} \oplus U\left\langle F \right\rangle_{R} \oplus 2\left\langle F \right\rangle_{R}\oplus 2U\left\langle F \right\rangle_{R}\oplus (2+Um_f) \left\langle F \right\rangle_{R},$ where $m_{f}$ is an unit in $\dfrac{\mathbb{F}_4[x]}{\left\langle f \right\rangle}$. Then $C$ is self-dual code if and only if $F=F^\ast,~~ G=G^\ast,~~ H=H^\ast,~~ Q=Q^\ast,~~ T=T^\ast.$
Hermitian Self-dual cyclic codes over $M_2(\mathbb{Z}_4)$
=========================================================
For any two codewords $\textbf{x}=(x_1, x_2, \dots, x_n)$, $\textbf{y}=(y_1, y_2, \dots, y_n)\in \mathcal{R}^n$, the Hermitian inner product is defined as $$\langle\textbf{x},\textbf{y}\rangle=\textbf{x} \cdot {\bar{\textbf{y}}}=x_1\bar{y_1}+x_2\bar{y_2}+ \cdots+x_n\bar{y_n},$$ where “ $\bar{~}$ " called conjugation, for example, $\bar{0}=0$, $\bar{1}=1$, $\bar{w}=w^2$, $\bar{w^2}=w$. The Hermitian dual of $C$, denoted by $C^{\perp_{H}}$, is define as $$C^{\perp_{H}}=\left\lbrace\textbf{x} \in \mathcal{R}^n \mid \langle\textbf{x},\textbf{y}\rangle=0,\forall y\in C \right\rbrace .$$ We can see that $\bar{C}^\perp=C^{\perp_{H}}$. As usual $C$ is called Hermitian self-orthogonal and Hermitian self-dual if $C\subseteq C^{\perp_{H}}$ and $C=C^{\perp_{H}}$, respectively.
Let $f(x)=a_0+a_1x+ \cdots +a_{k-1}x^{k-1} + a_{k}x^{k}$ be a polynomial of degree $k$ with $a_{k}\neq 0$, $a_{0}\neq 0$. The reciprocal $f^\ast(x)$ of $f(x)$ is defined by $$f^\ast(x)=a_0^{-1}x^kf(x^{-1}).$$ Denote $\bar{f}(x)=a^2_0+a^2_1x+ \cdots +a^2_{k-1}x^{k-1} + a^2_{k}x^{k}$. It is easy to check that two operations $\ast$ and $\bar{•}$ are commutative, i.e., $\bar{(f^\ast)}(x)=(\bar{f})^\ast(x)$. All the theorems proved in previous section are true with respect to Hermitian inner product as well. So state them here without proofs.
\[p1\_thm13\] Let $C$ be a cyclic code of length $n$ over $\mathcal{R}$ with $C=\left\langle \hat{F}_1 \right\rangle $ $\oplus $ $\left\langle U\hat{F}_2 \right\rangle $ $\oplus $ $ \left\langle 2\hat{F}_3 \right\rangle $ $\oplus $ $\left\langle 2U\hat{F}_4 \right\rangle $ $\oplus $ $\left\langle (2+Um_f)\hat{F}_5 \right\rangle $ $\oplus $ $ \left\langle \left\langle 2, U\right\rangle \hat{F}_6 \right\rangle$, where $m_{f}$ is an unit in $\dfrac{\mathbb{F}_4[x]}{\left\langle f \right\rangle}$. Then $C^{\perp_{H}}=\left\langle \hat{\bar{F}}^\ast_0 \right\rangle $ $\oplus $ $\left\langle U\hat{\bar{F}}^\ast_2 \right\rangle $ $\oplus $ $ \left\langle 2\hat{\bar{F}}^\ast_3 \right\rangle $ $\oplus $ $\left\langle 2U\hat{\bar{F}}^\ast_6 \right\rangle $ $\oplus $ $\left\langle (2+Um_f)\hat{\bar{F}}^\ast_5 \right\rangle $ $\oplus $ $ \left\langle \left\langle 2, U\right\rangle \hat{\bar{F}}^\ast_4 \right\rangle$ and $\mid C^{\perp_{H}}\mid=4^{4degF_0+2degF_2+2degF_3+3degF_4+2degF_5+degF_6}$.
\[p1\_thm14\] Let $C$ be a cyclic code of length $n$ over $\mathcal{R}$ with $C$ and $C^\perp$ defined as in Theorem \[p1\_thm13\], and $\bar{F}^\ast=\hat{\bar{F}}^\ast_0+U\hat{\bar{F}}^\ast_2+2\hat{\bar{F}}_3+2U\hat{\bar{F}}^\ast_6+(2+Um_f)\hat{\bar{F}}^\ast_5+\left\langle 2, U\right\rangle \hat{\bar{F}}^\ast_4$. Then $C^{\perp_{H}}=\left\langle \bar{F}^\ast \right\rangle$.
\[p1\_thm14 a\] Let $C$ be a cyclic code of length $n$ over $\mathcal{R}$. Then there exists a family of polynomials $\bar{F}^\ast, \bar{G}^\ast, \bar{H}^\ast, \bar{Q}^\ast, \bar{T}^\ast\in \mathbb{F}_4[x] $ which are divisors of $x^n-1$ such that $C^{\perp_{H}}=\left\langle \bar{F}^\ast \right\rangle_{R} \oplus U\left\langle \bar{G}^\ast \right\rangle_{R} \oplus 2\left\langle \bar{H}^\ast \right\rangle_{R}\oplus 2U\left\langle \bar{Q}^\ast \right\rangle_{R}\oplus (2+Um_f) \left\langle \bar{T}^\ast \right\rangle_{R}$, where $m_{f}$ is an unit in $\dfrac{\mathbb{F}_4[x]}{\left\langle f \right\rangle}$. Moreover $\vert C^{\perp_{H}} \vert = 4^{5n-(degF^\ast+degG^\ast+degH^\ast+degQ^\ast+degT^\ast)}$.
In [@Alahmadi2013 Theoem 2], the authors have claimed that Hermitian Self-dual codes do not exist over $M_2(\mathbb{Z}_2)$ but which is not true. In this paper, we present a condition for a cyclic code over $M_2(\mathbb{Z}_2)$ to be Hermitian Self-dual and also demonstrate the same with an example. We also generalise the same to cyclic codes over $M_2(\mathbb{Z}_4)$.
\[p1\_thm15\] Let $\mathcal{C}=<fh,~ ufg>$ be a cyclic code of length $n$ over $M_2(\mathbb{Z}_2)$ with $x^n-1=fgh$. Then $\mathcal{C}$ is Hermitian self-dual code if and only if $f=\hat{\bar{g}}^\ast$ and $h=\hat{\bar{h}}^\ast$.
In [@Alahmadi2013 $\mathsection$6], authors have claimed that there does not exist a nontrivial self-dual cyclic codes of length $5$. A contrary example is the following:
The factorization of $x^5-1$ is $(x-1)(x^2+wx+1)(x^2+w^2x+1)$ over $\mathbb{F}_4$. Let $f_1=(x-1)$, $f_2=(x^2+wx+1)$ and $f_3=(x^2+w^2x+1)$, then $f_1=\bar{f}^\ast_1$, $f_2=\bar{f}^\ast_3$ and $f_3=\bar{f}^\ast_2$. The following cyclic codes of length $5$ over $M_2(\mathbb{Z}_2)$ are self-dual (Hermitian) codes and their Gray image $\Phi(C)$ has parameters $[10,5,4]$ over $\mathbb{F}_4$. $$\langle f_1f_2, \quad uf_2f_3 \rangle, \qquad \langle f_1f_3, \quad uf_2f_3 \rangle.$$
\[p1\_thm15\] Let $C$ be a cyclic code of length $n$ over $\mathcal{R}$ with $C=\left\langle \hat{F}_1 \right\rangle $ $\oplus $ $\left\langle U\hat{F}_2 \right\rangle $ $\oplus $ $ \left\langle 2\hat{F}_3 \right\rangle $ $\oplus $ $\left\langle 2U\hat{F}_4 \right\rangle $ $\oplus $ $\left\langle (2+Um_f)\hat{F}_5 \right\rangle $ $\oplus $ $ \left\langle \left\langle 2 ,U\right\rangle \hat{F}_6 \right\rangle$, where $m_{f}$ is an unit in $\dfrac{\mathbb{F}_4[x]}{\left\langle f \right\rangle}$. Then $C$ is Hermitian self-dual code if and only if $$\hat{F}_1=\hat{\bar{F}}^\ast_0,~~\hat{F}_2=\hat{\bar{F}}^\ast_2,~~\hat{F}_3=\hat{\bar{F}}^\ast_3,~~\hat{F}_4=\hat{\bar{F}}^\ast_6,~~\hat{F}_5=\hat{\bar{F}}^\ast_5,~~ \hat{F}_6=\hat{\bar{F}}^\ast_4.$$
\[p1\_thm16\] Let $C$ be a cyclic code of length $n$ over $\mathcal{R}$ with $C=\left\langle F \right\rangle_{R} \oplus U\left\langle F \right\rangle_{R} \oplus 2\left\langle F \right\rangle_{R}\oplus 2U\left\langle F \right\rangle_{R}\oplus (2+Um_f) \left\langle F \right\rangle_{R},$ where $m_{f}$ is an unit in $\dfrac{\mathbb{F}_4[x]}{\left\langle f \right\rangle}$. Then $C$ is the Hermitian self-dual code if and only if $$F=\bar{F}^\ast,~~ G=\bar{G}^\ast,~~ H=\bar{H}^\ast,~~ Q=\bar{Q}^\ast,~~ T=\bar{T}^\ast.$$
The factorization of $x^7-1$ is $(x-1)(x^3+x+1)(x^3+x^2+1)$ over $\mathbb{F}_4$. Let $f_1=(x-1)$, $f_2=(x^3+x+1)$ and $f_3=(x^3+x^2+1)$, then $f_1=f^\ast_1$, $f_2=f^\ast_3$ and $f_3=f^\ast_2$. The following cyclic codes of length $7$ over $\mathcal{R}$ are self-dual (Euclidean) codes and their Gray image $\Phi(C)$ has parameters $[28,14,4]$ over $\mathbb{F}_4$.\
$$\langle f_1f_2, \quad rf_2f_3 \rangle, \qquad \langle f_1f_3, \quad rf_2f_3 \rangle, \qquad \mbox{where}~ r\in\{U,2,2+U\},$$ $$\langle 2Uf_1f_3, \quad 2f_1f_2, \quad Uf_1f_3, \quad sf_2f_3 \rangle, \qquad \mbox{where}~ s\in\{2,2+U\},$$ $$\langle 2Uf_1f_2, \quad 2f_1f_3, \quad Uf_1f_3, \quad tf_2f_3 \rangle, \qquad \mbox{where}~ t\in\{2,2+U\}.$$
The factorization of $x^5-1$ is $(x-1)(x^2+wx+1)(x^2+w^2x+1)$ over $\mathbb{F}_4$. Let $f_1=(x-1)$, $f_2=(x^2+wx+1)$ and $f_3=(x^2+w^2x+1)$, then $f_1=\bar{f}^\ast_1$, $f_2=\bar{f}^\ast_3$ and $f_3=\bar{f}^\ast_2$. The following cyclic codes of length $5$ over $\mathcal{R}$ are self-dual (Hermitian) codes and their Gray image $\Phi(C)$ has parameters $[20,10,4]$ over $\mathbb{F}_4$.\
$$\langle f_1f_2, \quad rf_2f_3 \rangle, \qquad \langle f_1f_3, \quad rf_2f_3 \rangle, \qquad \mbox{where}~ r\in\{U,2,2+U\},$$ $$\langle 2Uf_1f_3, \quad 2f_1f_2, \quad Uf_1f_3, \quad sf_2f_3 \rangle, \qquad \mbox{where}~ s\in\{2,2+U\},$$ $$\langle 2Uf_1f_2, \quad 2f_1f_3, \quad Uf_1f_3, \quad tf_2f_3 \rangle, \qquad \mbox{where}~ t\in\{2,2+U\}.$$
Conclusion
==========
In 2013, Alahmadi et al. developed cyclic codes over finite matrix ring $M_2(\mathbb{F}_2)$ and their duals as right ideals in terms of two generators. Also cyclic codes over $M_2(\mathbb{F}_2)$ were made the existence of infinitely many nontrivial cyclic codes for Euclidean product. All this was derived of odd length code. In this paper, we constructed the structure of $M_2(\mathbb{Z}_4)$ and developed cyclic dual codes and cyclic self-dual codes over $M_2(\mathbb{Z}_4)$ which is even length codes over $M_2(\mathbb{F}_2)$. In [@Alahmadi2013] [@Luo2017], it is not possible to construct negacyclic code, since the characteristic of structure of the ring is $2$. But in our construction one can form negacyclic code. Welcome to the reader to construct even length codes over $M_2(\mathbb{Z}_4)$. Another useful direction for further study would be to consider LCD codes over $M_2(\mathbb{Z}_4)$.
Acknowledgements {#acknowledgements .unnumbered}
================
The author Sanjit Bhowmick is thankful to MHRD for financial support.
[1]{} A. Alahmadi, H. Sboui, P. Sol$\acute{\mathrm{e}}$, O. Yemen, Cyclic codes over $M_2(\mathbb{F}_2)$, Journal of the Franklin Institute, 350 (9) (2013) 2837 –2847.
C. Bachoc, Applications of coding theory to the construction of modular lattices, Journal of Combinatorial Theory A 78-1 (1997) 92 – 119.
M. Greferath, S.E. Schmidt, Linear codes and rings of matrices, Proceedings of AAECC 13, Hawaii, Springer LNCS 1719 (1999) 160 –169.
A.R. Hammons Jr., P. Vijay Kumar, A.R. Calderbank, N.J.A. Sloane, P. Sol$\acute{\mathrm{e}}$, The $\mathbb{Z}_4$-linearity of Kerdock, Preparata, Goethals and related codes, IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, IT-40 (1994) 301 – 319.
R. Luo, U. Parampalli, Cyclic codes over $M_2(\mathbb{F}_2+u\mathbb{F}_2)$, Cryptography and Communications, (2017) https://doi.org/10.1007/s12095-017-0266-1.
F. Oggier, P. Sol$\acute{\mathrm{e}}$, J.-C. Belfiore, Codes over matrix rings for space-time coded modulations, IEEE Transactions on Information Theory IT-58 (2012) 734 –746.
V. Pless, P. Sol$\acute{\mathrm{e}}$, Z. Qian, Cyclic self-dual $\mathbb{Z}_4$-codes, Finite Fields and their Applications 3 (1997) 48 –69.
V. Pless, Z. Qian, Cyclic codes and quadratic residue codes over $\mathbb{Z}_4$, IEEE Transactions on Information Theory 42 (5) (1996) 1594 – 1600.
R. Wisbauer, Foundations of Module and Ring Theory, Gordon and Breach, 1991.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'Our Galactic Center hosts over 10% of the known massive stars in the Galaxy. The majority of these stars are located in three particularly massive clusters that formed within the past 5 . While these clusters are extraordinary, their formation repesents about half of the total inferred star formation rate in the Galactic Center. There is mounting evidence that the clusters are just present-day examples of the hundreds of such similar clusters that must have been created in the past, and whose stars now comprise the bulk of all stars seen in the region. I discuss the massive stellar content in the Galactic Center and present a new analysis that suggests that effects of continuous star formation in the Galactic Center can be seen in the observed luminosity functions newly-obtained HST/NICMOS and Gemini AO data.'
author:
- 'Donald F. Figer'
title: Massive Stars and The Creation of our Galactic Center
---
\#1[[*\#1*]{}]{} \#1[[*\#1*]{}]{} =
\#1 1.25in .125in .25in
Introduction
============
Over 10% of the known massive stars (M$_{\rm init}$$>$20 ) in the Galaxy reside in three clusters of young stars located within 30 pc of the Galactic Center. These clusters are the most massive young clusters in the Galaxy and contain approximately 30 Wolf-Rayet (WR) stars, at least 2 Luminous Blue Variables (LBV), approximately a half dozen red supergiants, and approximately 300 O stars. Together, they emit enough ionizing radiation to account for roughly half of the thermal radio emission in the central few degrees of the Galaxy, suggesting that the young clusters contain approximately half of the stars recently formed in this region. An additional collection of young stars exists in the region, with members scattered about the central 50 pc; some have evolved to the WR stage, while others are still deeply embedded within their natal dust cacoons.
The current star formation rate can be approximated by dividing the mass in newly formed stars by their ages, i.e. 5(10$^4$) /5 $\sim$0.01 /yr, or a star formation rate density of 10$^{-7}$ /yr pc$^{-3}$. This rate is approximately 250 times higher than the mean rate in the Galaxy, and about the same factor lower than the rate in starburst galaxies. Clearly, the Galactic Center has formed a plethora of stars in the past 5 , but it is less apparent when the millions of stars in the central 50 pc formed. If we assume that the star formation rate in the past was similar to the present rate, then the total mass of stars formed over the past 10 is $\approx$10$^8$ within a radius of 30 pc of the Galactic Center, or an order of magnitude greater than this amount over the whole Central Molecular Zone, as first suggested by Serabyn & Morris (1996).
This review summarizes the current state of knowledge concerning the massive stars in the Galactic Center, and the history of star formation therein.
The Central Cluster
===================
The first young stars discovered in the GC are within the central parsec of the Galaxy (Becklin & Neugebauer 1968). Rieke & Lebofsky (1982) and Lebofsky, Rieke, & Tokunaga (1983) confirmed the identification of blue and red supergiants in the region, claiming that these stars formed in a burst of star formation $\sim$1 ago and that their presence could account for the nearby ionized gas and heated dust. Forrest et al. (1987) discovered a blue supergiant in the center having a broad Brackett-$\alpha$ emission line, and Allen, Hyland, & Hillier (1990) identified this same star as having a spectrum similar to those for evolved massive stars in the Magellanic Clouds. Further studies discovered that many of the blue supergiants are evolved massive stars with spectra having prominent emission lines, firmly establishing a starburst event roughly 5 ago (Krabbe et al. 1991; 1995, Allen 1994, Rieke & Rieke 1994, Blum et al. 1995, Eckart et al. 1995, Genzel et al. 1996, Tamblyn et al. 1996).
We now know that the Central Cluster contains over 30 evolved massive stars having $>$20 . A current estimate of the young population includes 9 WR stars, 20 stars with Ofpe/WN9-like [*K*]{}-band spectra, several red supergiants, and many luminous mid-infrared sources in a region of 1.6 pc in diameter centered on Sgr A$^*$ (Genzel et al.1996). In addition, I estimate that it contains 100 O-stars (O7 and later) still on the main sequence. Najarro et al. (1994) modeled the infrared spectrum of the “AF” star finding that it is a helium-rich blue supergigant/Wolf-Rayet star, characterized by a strong stellar wind and a moderate amount of Lyman ionizing photons. Najarro et al. (1997) expanded this work by analyzing spectra of 8 blue supergiants in the center, finding extremely strong stellar winds ($\Mdot\sim$ 5 to 80 $\times 10^{-5}\, \Msunyr$), relatively small outflow velocities ($\sim$ 300 to 1,000 ), effective temperatures from 17,000K to 30,000K, stellar luminosities of 1 to $30 \times 10^{5}$ , and spectral characteristics consistent with an “Ofpe/WN9” classification. They concluded that the emission line stars power the central parsec and belong to a young stellar cluster of massive stars which formed a few million years ago. More recently, Paumard et al. (2001) reviewed the emission-line stellar population in the central parsec, using new narrow-band infrared imaging. They found that the brightest emission-line stars divide into two categories, bright narrow-line (200 ) and faint broad-line (1000 ) stars, the former being clustered within a few arcseconds of Sgr A\*, and the latter being distributed between 5$\arcsec$ and 10$\arcsec$ from the center.
Eckart et al. (1999) and Figer et al. (2000) identified massives stars within a few AU of the supermassive black hole. Evidently, a significant fraction of this small group of stars are young ($\tau_{\rm age}<20~\Myr$) and require extraordinarily dense pre-collapse cores ($\rho>10^{11}~cm^{-3}$) or formation sites much further away from the central black hole than their present location would suggest. Early results from proper-motion studies suggest that at least some of the stars in this cluster are bound to the black hole and are not on highly elliptical orbits (Ghez et al. 2001; Eckart et al. 2002); therefore they are likely to be near to their formation sites.
The Quintuplet Cluster
======================
The Quintuplet Cluster is located approximately 30 pc, in projection, to the northeast of the Galactic Center (Glass, Catchpole, & Whitelock 1987). In addition to the five bright stars for which the Quintuplet was named (Nagata et al. 1990; Okuda et al. 1990), the Quintuplet cluster contains a variety of massive stars, including four WN, five WC (possibly ten, see below), two WN9/Ofpe, two LBV, one red supergiant and several dozen less-evolved blue supergiants (Figer et al. 1999a, 1999c). The five Quintuplet-proper members are massive stars (L $\sim$ 10$^5$ ) embedded within dusty cacoons, although their spectral types and evolutionary status are unknown (Moneti et al. 2001). Figer et al. (1996, 1999a) argue that these stars are dust-enshrouded WCL stars, similar to WR 140 (Monnier et al. 2002) and WR 98A (Monnier et al. 1999). In addition to these post-main sequence stars, it is likely that 100 O-stars still on the main sequence exist in the cluster, assuming a flat to Salpeter IMF. The total cluster mass is estimated to be $\sim$10$^4$ ; of this, the stars with certain spectral identifications, i.e. the most massive ones, contribute a few 10$^3$ . Given the extended distribution of the cluster, the implied mass density is greater than few thousand pc$^{-3}$. The total ionizing flux is $\sim$10$^{51}$ photons s$^{-1}$, enough to ionize the nearby “Sickle” HII region (G0.18$-$0.04). The total luminosity from the massive cluster stars is $\approx$ 10$^{7.5}$ , enough to account for the heating of the nearby molecular cloud, M0.20$-$0.033.
The two LBVs are added to the list of 6 LBVs in the Galaxy. They include the Pistol Star (Moneti et al. 1994; Figer et al. 1995a, 1995b, 1998, 1999b; Cotera 1995; Cotera et al. 1996), one of the most luminous stars known, and a newly identified LBV (Geballe et al. 2000) that is nearly as luminous as the Pistol Star. Both stars are luminous, “blue,” and variable, and the Pistol Star has ejected 10 of material in the past $\sim$10$^4$ [*yrs*]{}, as evidenced by the remarkable Pistol nebula of ionized gas surrounding the star (Figer et al. 1999b; Moneti et al. 2001). Most of the luminous stars in the cluster are thought to be 3$-$5 Myr old, but significant age differences remain, i.e., the Pistol Star is thought to be $\approx$2 old.
The Arches Cluster
==================
First discovered about 10 years ago as a compact collection of a dozen or so emission-line stars (Cotera et al. 1992; Nagata et al. 1995; Figer 1995a; Cotera 1995; Cotera et al. 1996; Blum et al. 2001), the Arches cluster contains thousands of stars, including at least 160 O stars, according to Figer et al. (1999c). Figer et al. (1999c) used HST/NICMOS observations to estimate a total cluster mass ($\simgr$10$^4$ ) and radius (0.2 pc) to arrive at an average mass density of 3(10$^5$) pc$^{-3}$ in stars, suggesting that the Arches cluster is the densest, and one of the most massive, young clusters in the Galaxy. They further used these data to estimate an initial mass function (IMF) which is relatively flat ($\Gamma$ $\sim-$0.6$\pm$0.1) with respect to what has been found for the solar neighborhood ($\Gamma$ $\sim-$1.35, Salpeter 1955) and other Galactic clusters (Scalo 1998). Stolte et al. (2002) recently confirmed this flat slope by analyzing the same data and recently obtained Gemini AO data. Figer et al. (2002) estimated an age of 2.5$\pm$0.5 , based on the magnitudes, colors, mix of spectral types, and quantitative spectral analysis of stars in the cluster. Given the current state of knowledge about this cluster, it now seems apparent that we have observed a firm upper-mass cutoff, as shown in Figure 1. Note that we should expect at least 10 stars more massive than =300 . Indeed, we should even expect one star with an initial mass of 1,000 ! Of course, it is questionable how long such a star would live; however, it is clear that the Arches cluster IMF cuts off at around 150 . Finally, even if we steepen the IMF slope to the Salpeter value, we still should expect at least 4 stars more massive than 300 .
Figer et al. (2002) conclude that the most massive stars are bona-fide Wolf-Rayet (WR) stars and are some of the most massive stars known, having $>$100 , and prodigious winds, $>$10$^{-5}$ , that are enriched with helium and nitrogen. These findings are largely based upon the spectra and narrow-band equivalent widths shown in Figure 2, and a detailed quantitative analysis of these data (also see Najarro 2002). Figer et al. (2002) found an upper limit to the velocity dispersion of 22 , implying an upper limit to the cluster mass of 7(10$^4$) within a radius of 0.23 pc, and a bulk velocity of v$_{\rm cluster}\approx$+55 for the cluster. It appears that the cluster happens to be ionizing, and approaching, the surface of a background molecular cloud, thus producing the Thermal Arched Filaments. They estimate that the cluster produces 4(10$^{51}$) ionizing photons s$^{-1}$, more than enough to account for the observed thermal radio flux from the nearby cloud. Commensurately, it produces 10$^{7.8}$ in total luminosity, providing the heating source for the nearby molecular cloud, L$_{\rm cloud}\approx10^7$ . These interactions between a cluster of hot stars and a wayward molecular cloud are similar to those seen in the “Quintuplet/Sickle” region. Finally, note that significant work is being done on this cluster at radio and x-ray wavelengths, i.e. shown in Figure 3.
The Star Formation History of the Galactic Center
=================================================
The evidence for recent ($<$10 ) star formation in the Galactic Center abounds. The Lyman continuum flux emitted in the central few degrees of the Galaxy is about 10$^{52}$ photons/s (Cox & Laureijs 1989), with half coming from stars in the three massive clusters. This flux is about 10% of the that for the whole Galaxy, and the number of massive stars ( $>$20 ) in the GC is about 10% of the number in the whole Galaxy. However, note that the star formation rate in the GC is about one one-hundredth of that for the whole Galaxy. Such a low star formation rate as a function of Lyman continuum photon production necessarily follows from the relatively flat initial mass function (IMF) slope used in estimating the mass of stars formed in the young clusters.
The recent star formation history ($\tau_{\rm age}\simls50~\Myr$) in the Galactic Center is relatively clear. Embedded HII regions trace star formation at the present time (Figer 1995, Cotera 1995, Cotera et al. 1999), while the young clusters trace star formation that occured 2.5$-$5 ago. The lack of red supergiants (M$_{\rm Bol}<-6.3$ and $>$8 ) in the region provides evidence for a very low star formation rate from 5$-$20 ago. Indeed, a burst the size of that seen in the three clusters at 20 Myr ago would have produced 40 red supergiants, yet we see none (other than those associated with the young clusters).
The constraints on this activity are very strong, i.e. there were fewer than 5(10$^3$) formed in stars over this time period, assuming the type of star formation that spawned the three massive clusters. Looking beyond 20 , the picture becomes less clear because it is difficult to separate old low-mass red giants from much younger high-mass AGB stars with photometric data alone. Using spectroscopy, Blum et al. (1996) have shown that there is a relative dearth of stars with ages between 10 and 100 in the central few parsecs. Given their conclusions, I estimate a low star formation rate during this period. These same authors, and Haller (1992), identified stars with ages on the order of a few hundred in the central few arcminutes. Sjouwerman (1999) identified a population of OH/IR stars with a narrow range of expansion velocities, indicating intermediate ages and a starburst event a few ago. In addition, Frogel et al. (1999) identified an excess of bright stars in the fields they observed within 0$\fdg$2 of the Galactic Center.
In order to infer the past star formation rate, I modeled the observed surface number density of stars (Figure 4) as a function of star formation history using the Geneva stellar evolution models, assuming a range of power-law initial mass functions (IMFs), metallicity, and wind mass-loss rates. I considered: an ancient burst, episodic bursts, continuous formation, and combinations of these three. I used these models to produce synthetic luminosity functions for comparison with HST/NICMOS data. The surface number density in the observed luminosity functions has been set by dividing the number of stars per half magnitude bin by the area of the observations. The NICMOS fields vary in location from about 15 pc from the GC to 55 pc, and the sample was culled of forground and background stars by limiting the data to stars with 1.0$<$$-$$<$3.0 (1.7$<$$<$6.5). The results are presented in Figure 5.
In general, I find that the presently observed luminosity function is very well fit by continuous star formation at the level of 0.05 to 0.1 . The total mass of stars formed is $\sim$10$^8$ in these models, although the present-day mass is less as a result of mass-loss via steady winds or supernovae.
An ancient burst model is not consistent with the presence of bright stars ([*K*]{}$_0$$<$8.0), nor is it consistent with an enhanced brightness of the red clump (although the observational evidence for such an enhancement is controversial). Episodic bursts are essentially indistinguishable from continuous star formation when using the luminosity function as a metric; clearly, one needs to examine a subset of all stars in distinguishing burst widths and periodicities. The continuous star formation model reproduces the bright end of the luminosity function, although note that the bulk of the observed bright stars are not red supergiants, so that there must be a gap in significant star formation activity during recent times, excepting the last 5 . I find that variations in metallicity, IMF slope, or mass-loss rate, do not qualitatively affect our conclusion that continuous star formation produces synthetic luminosity functions that best fit the observed luminosity function, compared with the other star formation scenarios examined.
I acknowledge very useful discussions with Paco Najarro, Bob Blum, Laurant Sjouwerman, Mike Rich, Mark Morris, Sungsoo Kim, and Jay Frogel.
Allen, D. A., Hyland, A. R. & Hillier, D. J. 1990, , 244, 706 Allen, D.A., 1994, in The Nuclei of Normal Galaxies, eds. R. Genzel & A. I. Harris (Dordrecht: Kluwer), 293 Becklin, E. E., & Neugebauer, G., 1968, ApJ, 151, 145 Blum, R. D., Depoy, D. L., & Sellgren, K. 1995, , 441, 603 Blum, R. D., Schaerer, D., Pasquali, A., Heydari-Malayeri, M., Conti, P. S., & Schmutz, W. 2001, , 122, 1875 Cotera, A. S., Erickson, E. F., Simpson, J. P., Colgan, S. W. J., Allen, D. A., & Burton, M. G. 1992, American Astronomical Society Meeting, 181, 8702 Cotera, A. S. 1995, Ph.D. Thesis, Stanford University Cotera, A. S., Erickson, E. F., Colgan, S. W. J., Simpson, J. P., Allen, D. A., & Burton, M. G. 1996, , 461, 750 Cotera, A. S., Simpson, J. P., Erickson, E. F., Colgan, S. W. J., Burton, M. G., & Allen, D. A. 1999, , Cox, P. & Laureijs, R. 1989, IAU Symp. 136: The Center of the Galaxy, 136, 121 Eckart, A., Genzel, R., Hofmann, R. Sams, B. J., & Tacconi-Garman, L. E., 1995, ApJ, 445, L26 Eckart, A., Ott, T., & Genzel, R. 1999, , 352, L22 Eckart, A., Genzel, R., Ott, T., & Sch[" o]{}del, R. 2002, , 331, 917 Figer, D. F., Najarro, F., Morris, M., McLean, I. S., Geballe, T. R., Ghez, A. M., & Langer, N. 1998, , 506, 384 Figer, D. F. et al. 2000, , 533, L49 Figer, D. F., Morris, M., & McLean, I. S. 1996, The Galactic Center, San Francisco: ASP 102, 263 Figer, D. F., McLean, I. S., & Morris, M. 1995b, , 447, L29 Figer, D. F. 1995a, Ph.D. Thesis, University of California, Los Angeles Figer, D. F., Kim, S. S., Morris, M., Serabyn, E., Rich, R. M., & McLean, I. S. 1999c, , 525, 750 Figer, D. F., McLean, I. S., & Morris, M. 1999a, , 514, 202 Figer, D. F., Morris, M., Geballe, T. R., Rich, R. M., Serabyn, E., McLean, I. S., Puetter, R. C., & Yahil, A. 1999b, , 525, 759 Figer, D. F., et al. 2002, , submitted Forrest, W.J., Shure, M.A., Pipher, J.L., Woodward, C.A., 1987, in AIP Conf. 155, The Galactic Center, ed. D.Backer (New York: AIP), 153 Frogel, J.A., Tiede, G.P., & Kuchinski, L.E. 1999, , 117, 2296 Geballe, T.R., Figer, D.F., & Najarro, F. 2000, , 530, 97 Genzel, R., Thatte, N., Krabbe, A., Kroker, H. & Tacconi-Garman 1996, , 472, 153 Ghez, A. M., Kremenek, T., Tanner, A., Morris, M., & Becklin, E. 2001, Black Holes in Binaries and Galactic Nuclei, 72 Glass, I. S., Catchpole, R. M., & Whitelock, P. A. 1987, , 227, 373 Haller, J. W. 1992, Ph.D. Thesis, The University of Arizona Krabbe, A., Genzel, R., Drapatz, S. & Rotaciuc, V. 1991, , 382, L19 Krabbe, A. et al. 1995, , 447, L95 Lang, C. C., Goss, W. M., & Rodr[' i]{}guez, L. F. 2001, , 551, L143 Lang, C. C. 2002, this volume Lebofsky, M. J., Rieke, G. H., & Tokunaga, A. T. 1982, , 263, 736 Moneti, A., Glass, I. S., & Moorwood, A. F. M. 1994, , 268, 194 Moneti, A., Stolovy, S., Blommaert, J. A. D. L., Figer, D. F., Najarro, F. 2001, , 366, 106 Monnier, J. D., Tuthill, P. G., & Danchi, W. C. 2002, , 567, L137 Monnier, J. D., Tuthill, P. G., & Danchi, W. C. 1999, , 525, L97 Nagata, T., Woodward, C. E., Shure, M., Pipher, J. L. & Okuda, H. 1990, , 351, 83 Nagata, T., Woodward, C. E., Shure, M., & Kobayashi, N. 1995, , 109, 1676 Najarro, F., Hillier, D. J., Kudritzki, R. P., Krabbe, A., Genzel, R., Lutz, D., Drapatz, S. & Geballe, T. R. 1994, , 285, 573 Najarro, F., Krabbe, A., Genzel, R., Lutz, D., Kudritzki, R. P., & Hillier, D. J. 1997, , 325, 700 Najarro, F. 2002, this volume Okuda, H, Shibai, H., Nakagawa, T., Matsuhara, H., Kobayashi, Y., Kaifu, N., Nagata, T., Gatley, I. & Geballe, T. R. 1990, , 351, 89 Paumard, T., Maillard, J. P., Morris, M., & Rigaut, F. 2001, , 366, 466 Rieke, G. H. & Lebofsky, M. J. 1982, AIP Conf. Proc. 83: The Galactic Center, 194 Rieke, G. H., & Rieke, M. J., 1994, in The Nuclei of Normal Galaxies, ed. R. Genzel & A. I. Harris (Dordrecht: Kluwer), 283 Salpeter, E. E. 1955, , 121, 161 Scalo, J. 1998, in [*The Stellar Initial Mass Function*]{}, G. Gilmore and D. Howell (eds.), vol. 142 of 38$^{th}$ [*Herstmonceux Conference*]{}, San Francisco: ASP, 201 Serabyn, E., & Morris, M. 1996, , 382, 602 Sjouwerman, L. O., Habing, H. J., Lindqvist, M., van Langevelde, H. J., & Winnberg, A. 1999, ASP Conf. Ser. 186: The Central Parsecs of the Galaxy, 379 Stolte, A., Grebel, E. K., Brandner, W., & Figer, D. F. 2002, å, in press Tamblyn, P., Reike, G., Hanson, M., Close, L., McCarthy, D., Reike, M. 1996, , 456, 206 Yusef-Zadeh, F., Law, C., Wardle, M., Wang, Q. D., Fruscione, A., Lang, C. C., & Cotera, A. 2002, , 570, 665
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'Let ${{{\bf A}}}\in {\mathbb{R}}^{n \times n}$ be a nonnegative irreducible square matrix and let $r({{{\bf A}}})$ be its spectral radius and Perron-Frobenius eigenvalue. Levinger asserted and several have proven that $r(t):={r}((1{-}t) {{{\bf A}}}+ t {{{\bf A}}}{^{\!\top}})$ increases over $t \in [0,1/2]$ and decreases over $t \in [1/2,1]$. It has further been stated that $r(t)$ is concave over $t \in (0,1)$. Here we show that the latter claim is false in general through a number of counterexamples, but prove it is true for ${{{\bf A}}}\in {\mathbb{R}}^{2\times 2}$, weighted shift matrices (but not cyclic weighted shift matrices), tridiagonal Toeplitz matrices, and the 3-parameter Toeplitz matrices from Fiedler, but not Toeplitz matrices in general. A general characterization of the range of $t$, or the class of matrices, for which the spectral radius is concave in Levinger’s homotopy remains an open problem.'
author:
- |
Lee Altenberg\
Information and Computer Sciences,\
University of Hawai‘i at Mānoa\
\
\
and\
\
Joel E. Cohen\
Laboratory of Populations,\
Rockefeller University & Columbia University, New York\
Department of Statistics, University of Chicago\
title: |
Nonconcavity of the Spectral Radius\
in Levinger’s Theorem
---
Keywords: circuit matrix, convexity, direct sum, homotopy, nonuniform convergence, skew symmetric\
MSC2010: 15A18, 15A42, 15B05, 15B48, 15B57
Introduction
============
The variation of the spectrum of a linear operator as a function of variation in the operator has been extensively studied, but even in basic situations like a linear homotopy $(1{-}t) {{{\bf X}}}+ t {{{\bf Y}}}$ between two matrices ${{{\bf X}}}, {{{\bf Y}}}$, the variational properties of the spectrum have not been fully characterized. We focus here on Levinger’s theorem about the spectral radius over the convex combinations of a nonnegative matrix and its transpose, $(1{-}t) {{{\bf A}}}+ t {{{\bf A}}}{^{\!\top}}$.
We refer to ${{{\bf B}}}(t) = (1{-}t) {{{\bf A}}}+ t {{{\bf A}}}{^{\!\top}}$, $t \in [0,1]$, as *Levinger’s homotopy*,[^1] and the spectral radius of Levinger’s homotopy as *Levinger’s function* $r(t) {\, {:=}\, }{r}({{{\bf B}}}(t)) = {r}((1{-}t) {{{\bf A}}}+ t {{{\bf A}}}{^{\!\top}})$.
On November 6, 1969, the *Notices of the American Mathematical Society* received a three-line abstract from Bernard W. Levinger @Levinger:1970:Inequality for his talk at the upcoming AMS meeting, entitled “An inequality for nonnegative matrices.” We reproduce it in full:
“ Let $A \ge 0$ be a matrix with nonnegative components. Then $f(t) = p(tA + (1{-}t)A^T)$ is a monotone nondecreasing function of $t$, for $0 \le t \le 1/2$, where $p(C)$ denotes the spectral radius of the matrix $C$. This extends a theorem of Ostrowski. The case of constant $f(t)$ is discussed.”
Levinger presented his talk at the Annual Meeting of the American Mathematical Society at San Antonio in January 1970. Miroslav Fiedler and Ivo Marek were also at the meeting [@Marek:1974:Inequality]. Fiedler developed an alternative proof of Levinger’s theorem and communicated it to Marek [@Marek:1978:Perron]. Fiedler did not publish his proof until 1995 [@Fiedler:1995:Numerical]. Levinger appears never to have published his proof.
Marek @Marek:1978:Perron [@Marek:1984:Perron] published the first proofs of Levinger’s theorem, building on Fiedler’s ideas to generalize it to operators on Banach spaces. Bapat @Bapat:1987:Two proved a generalization of Levinger’s theorem for finite matrices. He showed that the condition for non-constant Levinger’s function is that ${{{\bf A}}}$ have different left and right normalized (unit) eigenvectors (*Perron vectors*) corresponding to the Perron-Frobenius eigenvalue (*Perron root*).
Fiedler @Fiedler:1995:Numerical proved also that Levinger’s function $r(t)$ is concave in some open neighborhood of $t=1/2$, and strictly concave when ${{{\bf A}}}$ has different left and right normalized Perron vectors. The extent of this open neighborhood was not elucidated.
Bapat and Raghavan @Bapat:and:Raghavan:1997 [p. 121] addressed the concavity of Levinger’s function in discussing “an inequality due to Levinger, which essentially says that for any ${{{\bf A}}}\ge 0$, the Perron root, considered as a function along the line segment joining ${{{\bf A}}}$ and ${{{\bf A}}}{^{\!\top}}$, is concave.” The inference about concavity would appear to derive from the theorem of @Bapat:1987:Two [Theorem 3] that ${r}(t \, {{{\bf A}}}+ (1{-}t){{{\bf B}}}{^{\!\top}}) \geq t\, r({{{\bf A}}}) + (1{-}t) r({{{\bf B}}})$ for all $t \in [0, 1]$, when ${{{\bf A}}}$ and ${{{\bf B}}}$ have a common left Perron vector and a common right Perron vector. The same concavity conclusion with the same argument appears in @Stanczak:Wiczanowski:and:Boche:2009:Fundamentals [Corollary 1.17].
However, concavity over the interval $t \in [0, 1]$ would require that for all $t, h_1, h_2 \in [0, 1]$, $r(t \, {{{\bf F}}}(h_1) + (1{-}t) {{{\bf F}}}(h_2) ) \geq t\, r({{{\bf F}}}(h_1)) + (1{-}t) r({{{\bf F}}}(h_2))$, where ${{{\bf F}}}(h) {\, {:=}\, }h \, {{{\bf A}}}+ (1{-} h){{{\bf B}}}{^{\!\top}}$. But Theorem 3.3.1 of @Bapat:and:Raghavan:1997 proves this only for $h_1 = 1$ and $h_2 = 0$ and cannot be extended generally to $h_1, h_2 \in (0,1)$ because ${{{\bf F}}}(h_1)$ and ${{{\bf F}}}(h_2){^{\!\top}}$ will not necessarily have common left eigenvectors and common right eigenvectors.
Here, we show that the concavity claim is true for $2 \times 2$ and other special families of matrices. We also show that for each of these matrix families, counterexamples to concavity arise among matrix classes that are “close” to them, in having extra or altered parameters. Table \[Table:Comparison\] summarizes our results.
\[Table:Comparison\]
[**Concave**]{} [**Nonconcave**]{}
------------------------------------ ------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------- --------
$2 \times 2$ Theorem \[Theorem:2x2\] $3 \times 3$, $4 \times 4$ Eqs. ,
Tridiagonal Toeplitz Theorem \[Theorem:Tridiag\] 4-parameter Toeplitz Eq.
Fiedler’s 3-parameter Toeplitz Theorem \[Theorem:FiedlerLevinger\] 4-parameter Toeplitz Eq.
$n \times n$ weighted shift matrix Theorem \[Theorem:Shift\] $n \times n$ cyclic weighted shift matrix Eq.
: Classes of nonnegative matrices with concave Levinger’s function (left), and matrix classes “close” to them with nonconcave Levinger’s function (right).
Matrices that Violate Concavity
===============================
A Simple Example
----------------
Let [$$\begin{aligned}
{{{\bf A}}}&= {\begin{pmatrix}
0&1&0\\
0&0&0\\
0&0&2/5
\end{pmatrix}}\notag
{\shortintertext}{to give}
{{{\bf B}}}(t) &= (1{-}t){{{\bf A}}}+t{{{\bf A}}}{^{\!\top}}= {\begin{pmatrix}
0&1{-}t&0\\
t&0&0\\
0&0&2/5\end{pmatrix}}. \label{eq:Ex1}\end{aligned}$$]{} The eigenvalues of ${{{\bf B}}}(t)$ are $\{2/5, +\sqrt{t(1{-}t)}, -\sqrt{t(1{-}t)}\}$, plotted in Figure \[fig:Ex1\]. On the interval $t \in [1/5, 4/5]$, ${r}({{{\bf B}}}(t)) = \sqrt{t(1{-}t)}$ is strictly concave. On the intervals $t \in [0, 1/5]$ and $t \in [4/5,1]$, ${r}({{{\bf B}}}(t))$ is constant. It is clear from the figure that ${r}({{{\bf B}}}(t))$ is not concave in the neighborhood of $t=1/5$ (and $t=4/5$), since for all small $\epsilon$, [$$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:Ineq1}
\frac{1}{2}[ {r}({{{\bf B}}}(1/5 - \epsilon) + {r}({{{\bf B}}}(1/5 + \epsilon) ]> {r}({{{\bf B}}}(1/5 )) = 2/5.\end{aligned}$$]{} By the continuity of the eigenvalues in the matrix elements [@Horn:and:Johnson:2013 2.4.9], we can make ${{{\bf B}}}(t)$ irreducible and yet preserve inequality in a neighborhood of $t=1/5$ by adding a small enough positive perturbation to each element of ${{{\bf A}}}$.
![Eigenvalues of the matrix ${{{\bf B}}}(t)$ from , $\lambda_1=2/5, \lambda_2= +\sqrt{t(1{-}t)}, \lambda_3= -\sqrt{t(1{-}t)}$, showing that the spectral radius $r({{{\bf B}}}(t))$ (thick top line) is not concave around the points $t=0.2$ and $t=0.8$.[]{data-label="fig:Ex1"}](Ex1v2b.pdf){width="50.00000%"}
The basic principle behind this counterexample is that the maximum of two concave functions need not be concave. Here ${{{\bf B}}}(t)$ is the direct sum of two block matrices. The eigenvalues of the direct sum are the union of the eigenvalues of the blocks, which are different functions of $t$. One block has a constant spectral radius and the other block has a strictly concave spectral radius. The spectral radius of ${{{\bf B}}}(t)$ is their maximum.
Another example of this principle is constructed by taking the direct sum of two $2 \times 2$ blocks, each of which is a Levinger homotopy of the matrix ${\begin{pmatrix} 0&1\\0&0\end{pmatrix}}$, but for values of $t$ at opposite ends of the [unit]{} interval, one $2\times 2$ block, ${{{\bf A}}}_1$, with $t_1 = 511/512$ and the other $2\times 2$ block, ${{{\bf A}}}_2$, with $t_2 =1/8$. We take a weighted combination of the two blocks with weight $h$, ${{{\bf A}}}(h) = (1-h) {{{\bf A}}}_1 \oplus h {{{\bf A}}}_2$, to get: [$$\begin{aligned}
{{{\bf A}}}(h) &=
{\begin{pmatrix} 0 & (1{-}h) \frac{511}{512} & 0 & 0 \\
(1{-}h) \frac{1}{512} & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & h \frac{1}{8} \\
0 & 0 & h\frac{7 }{8} & 0 \end{pmatrix}} . \label{eq:4x4}\end{aligned}$$]{} The eigenvalues of ${{{\bf B}}}(t,h) = (1{-}t) {{{\bf A}}}(h) + t {{{\bf A}}}(h){^{\!\top}}$ are plotted in Figure \[fig:4x4\]. We see that there is a narrow region of $h$ below $h=0.5$ where the maximum eigenvalue switches from block 2 to block 1 and back to block 2 with increasing $t \in [0,1]$, making ${r}({{{\bf B}}}(t,h)) = {r}((1{-}t) {{{\bf A}}}(h) + t {{{\bf A}}}(h){^{\!\top}})$ at $h=0.4$ nonconcave with respect to the interval $t \in [0,1] $.
![Eigenvalues of ${{{\bf B}}}(t,h)$ for a two-parameter homotopy: Levinger’s homotopy ${{{\bf B}}}(t,h) = (1{-}t) {{{\bf A}}}(h) + t {{{\bf A}}}(h){^{\!\top}}$, $t \in [0,1]$, and a second homotopy ${{{\bf A}}}(h)= (1{-}h){{{\bf A}}}_1 \oplus h {{{\bf A}}}_2$, $h \in [0,1]$ . The dark band at $h=0.4$ is $r({{{\bf B}}}(t,0.4))$, showing that the spectral radius is nonconcave in $t$ where it jumps between the two concave upper manifolds.[]{data-label="fig:4x4"}](4x4v2b.pdf){width="60.00000%"}
As in example \[eq:Ex1\], ${{{\bf A}}}(h)$ may be made irreducible by positive perturbation of the $0$ values without eliminating the nonconcavity.
The principle here may be codified as follows.
Let ${{{\bf A}}}= {{{\bf A}}}_1 \oplus {{{\bf A}}}_2 \in {\mathbb{R}}^{n \times n}$, where ${{{\bf A}}}_1$ and ${{{\bf A}}}_2$ are irreducible nonnegative square matrices. [Then]{} ${r}(t) {\, {:=}\, }{r}((1-t){{{\bf A}}}+ t {{{\bf A}}}{^{\!\top}})$ is not concave in $t \in (0,1)$ if there exists $t^* \in (0,1)$ such that
1. ${r}((1-t^*){{{\bf A}}}_1+ t^* {{{\bf A}}}_1{^{\!\top}}) = {r}((1-t^*){{{\bf A}}}_2+ t^* {{{\bf A}}}_2{^{\!\top}})$,\
\
[and]{} \
2. $ \left. {\displaystyle \frac{{\rm d} }{{\rm d} t}} {r}((1-t){{{\bf A}}}_1+ t {{{\bf A}}}_1{^{\!\top}})\right|_{t=t^*}
\neq \left. {\displaystyle \frac{{\rm d} }{{\rm d} t}} {r}((1-t){{{\bf A}}}_2+ t {{{\bf A}}}_2{^{\!\top}})\right|_{t=t^*} $.
Let $r^* {\, {:=}\, }r(t^*) = {r}((1{-}t^*){{{\bf A}}}_1{+} t^* {{{\bf A}}}_1{^{\!\top}}) = {r}((1{-}t^*){{{\bf A}}}_2{+} t^* {{{\bf A}}}_2{^{\!\top}})$. Since the spectral radius of a nonnegative irreducible matrix is a simple eigenvalue by Perron-Frobenius theory, it is analytic in the matrix elements [@Tsing:etal:1994:Analyticity Fact 1.2]. Thus for each of ${{{\bf A}}}_1$ and ${{{\bf A}}}_2$, Levinger’s function is analytic in $t$, and therefore has equal left and right derivatives around $t^*$. So we can set $s_1 = {{\rm d} {r}((1{-}t){{{\bf A}}}_1{+} t {{{\bf A}}}_1{^{\!\top}}) /{\rm d} t}|_{t=t^*}$ and $s_2 = {{\rm d} {r}((1{-}t){{{\bf A}}}_2+ t {{{\bf A}}}_2{^{\!\top}}) /{\rm d} t}|_{t=t^*}$. Then [$$\begin{aligned}
{r}((1{-}t^* {-} {\epsilon}){{{\bf A}}}_1+ (t^* {+} {\epsilon}) {{{\bf A}}}_1{^{\!\top}}) &= r^* + {\epsilon}s_1 + {\mathcal{O}}({\epsilon}^2) \\
{r}((1{-}t^* {-} {\epsilon}){{{\bf A}}}_2+ (t^* {+} {\epsilon}) {{{\bf A}}}_2{^{\!\top}}) &= r^* + {\epsilon}s_2 + {\mathcal{O}}({\epsilon}^2).\end{aligned}$$]{} For a small neighborhood around $t^*$, [$$\begin{aligned}
{r}(t^*{+}{\epsilon}) &= {r}( (1{-}t^* {-} {\epsilon}){{{\bf A}}}+ (t^* {+} {\epsilon}) {{{\bf A}}}{^{\!\top}}) \\&
= \max{\left\{ \, {r}((1{-}t^* {-} {\epsilon}){{{\bf A}}}_1+ (t^* {+} {\epsilon}) {{{\bf A}}}_1{^{\!\top}}), {r}((1{-}t^* {-} {\epsilon}){{{\bf A}}}_2+ (t^* {+} {\epsilon}) {{{\bf A}}}_2{^{\!\top}}) \, \right\} } \\&
= r^* + \Cases{
{\epsilon}\min(s_1, s_2) + {\mathcal{O}}({\epsilon}^2) & {\epsilon}< 0 \\
{\epsilon}\max(s_1, s_2) + {\mathcal{O}}({\epsilon}^2) & {\epsilon}> 0 .
}\end{aligned}$$]{} A necessary condition for concavity is $
\frac{1}{2}({r}(t^*{+} {\epsilon}) + {r}(t^*{-}{\epsilon})) \leq {r}(t^*).
$ However, for small enough ${\epsilon}> 0$, letting $\delta = \max(s_1, s_2) - \min(s_1, s_2) > 0$, [$$\begin{aligned}
\frac{{r}(t^*{+} {\epsilon}) + {r}(t^*{-}{\epsilon})}{2}
&= r^* + {\epsilon}\frac{\max(s_1, s_2) - \min(s_1, s_2) }{2} + {\mathcal{O}}({\epsilon}^2) \\
&= r^* + {\epsilon}\delta / {2} + {\mathcal{O}}({\epsilon}^2)
> r^* .\end{aligned}$$]{} The condition for concavity is thus violated.
Toeplitz Matrices
-----------------
The following nonnegative irreducible Toeplitz matrix has a nonconcave Levinger’s function: [$$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:ToeplitzConvex}
{{{\bf A}}}&=
{\begin{pmatrix}
5 & 0 & 6 & 0 \\
1 & 5 & 0 & 6 \\
0 & 1 & 5 & 0 \\
8 & 0 & 1 & 5
\end{pmatrix}}\end{aligned}$$]{} A plot of Levinger’s function for is not unmistakably nonconcave, so instead we plot the second derivative of ${r}({{{\bf B}}}(t))$ in Figure \[fig:ToeplitzConvex\], which is positive at the boundaries $t=0$ and $t=1$, and becomes negative in the interior.
![The second derivative of Levinger’s function for the Toeplitz matrix .\[fig:ToeplitzConvex\]](ToeplitzConvex.pdf){width="56.00000%"}
Weighted Circuit Matrices
-------------------------
Another class of matrices where Levinger’s function can be nonconcave is the weighted circuit matrix. A weighted circuit matrix is an $n \times n$ matrix in which there are $k\in[1,n]$ distinct integers $i_1, i_2, \ldots, i_k \in \{1, 2, \ldots, n\}$ such that all elements are zero except weights $c_j$, $j = 1, \ldots, k$, at matrix positions $(i_1, i_2), (i_2, i_3), \ldots, (i_{k-1}, i_k), (i_k, i_1)$, which form a circuit. We refer to a *positive weighted circuit matrix* when the weights are all positive numbers.
When focusing on the spectral radius of a positive weighted circuit matrix, we may without loss of generality consider its non-zero principal submatrix, whose canonical permutation of the indices gives a *positive cyclic weighted shift matrix*, ${{{\bf A}}}$, with elements [$$\begin{aligned}
A_{ij} &= \Cases{
c_i > 0 & j = i \text{ mod } n + 1, \quad i \in {\left\{ \, 1, \ldots, n \, \right\} } \\
0 &\text{otherwise.}
}\label{eq:CyclicShift}\end{aligned}$$]{} Equation defines a cyclic *downshift* matrix, while an *upshift* matrix results from replacing $j = i \text{ mod } n + 1$ with $i = j \text{ mod } n + 1$, which is equivalent for our purposes. Cyclic weighted shift matrices have the form [$$\begin{aligned}
{\begin{pmatrix}
0 & c_1 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & c_2 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & c_3 \\
c_4 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
\end{pmatrix}} .\end{aligned}$$]{}
If one of the weights $c_i$ is set to $0$, the matrix becomes a positive non-cyclic weighted shift matrix. In Section \[sec:WSM\], we show that Levinger’s function of a positive non-cyclic weighted shift matrix is strictly concave. Cyclicity from a single additional positive element $c_i>0$ allows nonconcavity.
Here we provide an example of nonconcavity using a cyclic shift matrix with *reversible weights*, which have been the subject of recent attention [@Chien:and:Nakazato:2020:Symmetry]. Figure \[fig:CyclicShift16\] shows Levinger’s function for a $16 \times 16$ cyclic weighted shift matrix with two-pivot reversible weights [@Chien:and:Nakazato:2020:Symmetry] [$$\begin{aligned}
c_j &= 16 + \sin\left(2 \pi \frac{j}{16}\right) & j = 1, \ldots, 16 . \label{eq:CyclicShift16}\end{aligned}$$]{} Levinger’s function is convex for most of the interval $t \in [0,1]$, and is concave only in the small interval around $t=1/2$.
![Nonconcave Levinger’s function for a $16 \times 16$ two-pivot reversible cyclic weighted shift matrix with weights $c_j = 16 + \sin(2 \pi j /16)$, .[]{data-label="fig:CyclicShift16"}](CyclicShift16.pdf){width="56.00000%"}
Matrices with Concave Levinger’s Function
=========================================
Here we show that several special classes of nonnegative matrices have concave Levinger’s functions: $2\times 2$ matrices, non-cyclic weighted shift matrices, tridiagonal Toeplitz matrices, and Fiedler’s 3-parameter Toeplitz matrices.
2 x 2 Matrices
---------------
\[Theorem:2x2\] Let ${{{\bf A}}}\in {\mathbb{R}}^{2 \times 2}$ be nonnegative and irreducible. Then the spectral radius and Perron-Frobenius eigenvalue $r(t):=r((1{-}t) {{{\bf A}}}+ t {{{\bf A}}}{^{\!\top}})$ is concave over $t \in (0,1)$, strictly when ${{{\bf A}}}$ has different left and right Perron-Frobenius eigenvectors.
Let $a, b,c,d \in (0,\infty), t\in (0,1)$, and assume $b\ne c$ to assure that ${{{\bf A}}}\ne{{{\bf A}}}{^{\!\top}}$ and the left and right Perron-Frobenius eigenvectors are not colinear. Let $${{{\bf A}}}:={\begin{pmatrix}
a & b\\
c & d
\end{pmatrix}},
\quad {{{\bf B}}}(t):=(1{-}t) {{{\bf A}}}+t {{{\bf A}}}{^{\!\top}}.$$ The Perron-Frobenius eigenvalue of ${{{\bf B}}}(t)$ is obtained by using the quadratic formula to solve the characteristic equation. After some simplification, $$r(t):= r({{{\bf B}}}(t)) = \frac{a+d+\sqrt{(a-d)^2 + 4t(1{-}t)(b-c)^2 + 4bc }}{2}.$$ The first derivative with respect to $t$ is $$r'(t)=\frac{{\left(1{-}2\,t\right)}\,{{\left(b-c\right)}}^2 }{\sqrt{(a-d)^2 + 4t(1{-}t)(b-c)^2 + 4bc}}.$$ The denominator above is positive for all $t\in(0,1)$ because of the assumption that $b\ne c$. The second derivative is, again after some simplification, [$$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:f''(t)}
r''(t)=-\frac{2\,(b-c)^2 \,\left((a-d)^2+(b+c)^2\right)}{{{\left((a-d)^2 + 4t(1{-}t)(b-c)^2 + 4bc\right)}}^{3/2} }<0.\end{aligned}$$]{} The numerator in the fraction above is positive because $b\ne c$, and the minus sign in front of the fraction guarantees strict concavity for all $t\in(0,1)$.
Tridiagonal Toeplitz Matrices
-----------------------------
\[Theorem:Tridiag\] Let ${{{\bf A}}}\in {\mathbb{R}}^{n \times n}$, $n \geq 2$, be a tridiagonal Toeplitz matrix with diagonal elements $b\geq 0$, subdiagonal elements $a \geq 0$, and superdiagonal elements $c \geq 0$, with $\max(a, \ c) > 0$. Then for $t \in (0, 1)$, ${r}( (1{-}t) {{{\bf A}}}+ t {{{\bf A}}}{^{\!\top}})$ is concave in $t$, increasing on $t \in (0,1/2)$, and decreasing on $t \in (1/2,1)$, all strictly when $a \neq c$.
The eigenvalues of a tridiagonal Toeplitz matrix ${{{\bf A}}}$ with $a, c \neq 0$ are [@Hogben:2014:Handbook 22-5.18] [@Bottcher:and:Grudsky:2005:Spectral Theorem 2.4] [$$\begin{aligned}
\lambda_k({{{\bf A}}}) &= b + 2 \sqrt{a c}\ \cos\left(\frac{k \pi}{n{+}1} \right). \label{eq:BG2005}\end{aligned}$$]{}
The matrix $(1{-}t) {{{\bf A}}}+ t {{{\bf A}}}{^{\!\top}}$ has subdiagonal values $(1{-}t) a + t c$ and superdiagonal values $t a + (1{-}t) c$. Since at least one of $a,c$ is strictly positive, $(1{-}t) a + t c > 0$ and $t a + (1{-}t) c > 0$ for $t \in (0,1)$. Therefore is applicable.
Writing $\lambda_k(t) {\, {:=}\, }\lambda_k( (1{-}t) {{{\bf A}}}+ t {{{\bf A}}}{^{\!\top}})$, we obtain [$$\begin{aligned}
\lambda_k(t) &= b + 2 \sqrt{((1{-}t) a + t c) (t a + (1{-}t) c)}\ \cos\left(\frac{k \pi}{n{+}1} \right).\end{aligned}$$]{} It is readily verified that the first derivatives are [$$\begin{aligned}
{\displaystyle \frac{{\rm d} }{{\rm d} t}}\lambda_k(t) &= \cos\left(\frac{k \pi}{n{+}1} \right)
\frac{(a-c)^2 (1{-}2t)}{\sqrt{((1{-}t) a + t c) (t a + (1{-}t) c)}},
{\shortintertext}{and the second derivatives are}
{\displaystyle \frac{{\rm d}^2 }{{\rm d} t^2}}\lambda_k(t) &= - \cos\left(\frac{k \pi}{n{+}1} \right)
\frac{(a^2-c^2)^2}{2 \big[ ( (1{-}t) a + t c) (t a + (1{-}t) c )\big]^{3/2} } .\end{aligned}$$]{} Since $(1{-}t) a + t c > 0$ and $t a + (1{-}t) c > 0$ for $t \in (0,1)$, the denominators are positive. When $a=c$ both derivatives are identically zero. When $a \neq c$, the factors without $k$ are strictly positive for all $t \in (0,1)$ except for $t=1/2$ where the first derivative of all the eigenvalues vanishes.
Because the second derivatives have no sign changes on $t \in (0,1)$, and since $[ (1{-}t) a + t c][t a + (1{-}t) c ] > 0$, there are no inflection points. Therefore each eigenvalue is either convex in $t$ or concave in $t$, depending on the sign of $\cos( k \pi/(n+1) )$. The maximal eigenvalue is [$$\begin{aligned}
r(t) = \lambda_1(t) = b + 2 \sqrt{((1{-}t) a + t c) (t a + (1{-}t) c)}\ \cos(\pi/(n{+}1)) .\end{aligned}$$]{} From its first derivative, since $ \cos(\pi/(n{+}1)) > 0$, $r(t)$ is increasing on $t \in (0, 1/2)$ and decreasing on $t \in (1/2,1)$, strictly when $a \neq c$. Since its second derivative is negative, $r(t)$ is concave in $t$ on $t \in (0,1)$, strictly when $a \neq c$.
Fiedler’s Toeplitz Matrices
---------------------------
Fiedler @Fiedler:1995:Numerical [p. 180] established this closed formula for the spectral radius of a special Toeplitz matrix.
\[Theorem:Fiedler\]
Consider a Toeplitz matrix ${{{\bf A}}}\in {\mathbb{C}}^{n \times n}$, $n \geq 3$, with diagonal values $(v, 0, \ldots, 0, v, w, u, 0, \ldots, 0, u)$, with $v, w, u \in {\mathbb{C}}$: [$$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:FiedlerFlipped}
{{{\bf A}}}&={\begin{pmatrix} w & u & 0 & \cdots & 0 & u\\
v & w & u & 0 & \cdots & 0\\
0 & v & w & u & \cdots & 0\\
\vdots & \vdots & \ddots & \ddots & \ddots & \vdots \\
0 & 0 & \cdots & v & w & u \\
v & 0 & \cdots & 0 & v & w
\end{pmatrix}}.\end{aligned}$$]{} Let $\omega = e^{2 \pi i / n}$. The eigenvalues of ${{{\bf A}}}$ are [$$\begin{aligned}
\lambda_{j+1}({{{\bf A}}}) &= w + \omega^j u^{(1{-}1/n)} v^{1/n} + \omega^{n-j} u^{1/n} v^{(1{-}1/n)}, \qquad j = 0, 1, \ldots, n{-}1.\end{aligned}$$]{}
We apply Theorem \[Theorem:Fiedler\] to the Levinger function.
\[Theorem:FiedlerLevinger\] Let ${{{\bf A}}}$ be defined as in with $u,v,w > 0$. Then ${r}(t) {\, {:=}\, }{r}( (1{-}t) {{{\bf A}}}+ t {{{\bf A}}}{^{\!\top}})$ is concave in $t$ for $t \in (0,1)$, strictly if $u \neq v$.
For $u, v, w \in {\mathbb{R}}$, ${r}({{{\bf A}}}) = \lambda_1({{{\bf A}}}) = w + u^{(1{-}1/n)} v^{1/n} + u^{1/n} v^{(1{-}1/n)}$ from Theorem \[Theorem:Fiedler\].
Let ${{{\bf B}}}(t) = (1{-}t) {{{\bf A}}}+ t {{{\bf A}}}{^{\!\top}}$. Then ${{{\bf B}}}(t)$ is again a Toeplitz matrix of the form , with diagonal values $(1{-}t)v{+}t u$, $0, \ldots, 0$, $(1{-}t)v{+}t u$, $w$, $(1{-}t)u {+} t v$, $0, \ldots, 0$, $(1{-}t)u{+}t v$ for matrix elements $A_{i, i{+}m}$, with $m \in {\left\{ \, 1{-}n, n{-}1 \, \right\} }$, and $i \in $$\{\max(1, 1{-}m)$, $\ldots$, $\min(n, n{-}m)$$\}$. So again by Theorem \[Theorem:Fiedler\], [$$\begin{aligned}
{r}({{{\bf B}}}(t)) = w &+ [(1{-}t)u + t v]^{(1{-}1/n)} [(1{-}t)v+t u]^{1/n} \\
& + [(1{-}t)u + t v]^{1/n} [(1{-}t)v+t u]^{(1{-}1/n)} .\end{aligned}$$]{} It is readily verified that [$$\begin{aligned}
&{\displaystyle \frac{{\rm d}^2 }{{\rm d} t^2}} {r}({{{\bf B}}}(t)) \\
&= - \frac{n-1}{n^2 u^2 v^2} (u-v)^2 (u+v)^2 \\&
\quad \times
\left([(1{-}t)v + u]^{1/n} [(1{-}t)u + t v]^{(1{-}1/n)} + [(1{-}t)v + u]^{(1{-}1/n)} [(1{-}t)u + t v]^{1/n} \right) \\
& \leq 0,\end{aligned}$$]{} with equality if and only if $u = v$.
With the simple exchange of $A_{1n}$ and $A_{n1}$ in , ${{{\bf A}}}$ would become a circulant matrix, which has left and right Perron vectors colinear with the vector of all ones, ${{{\bf e}}}$, and would therefore have a constant Levinger’s function.
Weighted Shift Matrices {#sec:WSM}
-----------------------
An $n \times n$ weighted shift matrix, ${{{\bf A}}}$, has the form [$$\begin{aligned}
A_{ij} = \Cases{
c_i & j=i+1, i \in {\left\{ \, 1, \ldots, n-1 \, \right\} }\\
0 &\text{otherwise},
}\end{aligned}$$]{} where $c_i$ are the weights. It is obtained from a cyclic shift matrix be setting any one of the weights to $0$ and appropriately permuting the indices. Unless we explicitly use “cyclic”, we mean *non-cyclic shift matrix* when we write “shift matrix”.
We will show that Levinger’s function for positive weighted shift matrices is strictly concave. First we develop some lemmas.
\[Lemma:poly\] Let ${{{\bf c}}}\in {\mathbb{C}}^{n+1}$ be a vector of complex numbers and $\alpha \in {\mathbb{C}}$, $\alpha \neq 0$. Then the roots of a polynomial $p(x) = \sum_{k=0}^n x^k \alpha^{n-k} c_k$ are $r_j = \alpha f_j({{{\bf c}}})$, where $f_j: {\mathbb{C}}^{n+1} {\rightarrow}{\mathbb{C}}$, $j = 1, \ldots, n$.
We factor and apply the Fundamental Theorem of Algebra to obtain [$$\begin{aligned}
p(x) &
= \sum_{k=0}^n x^k \alpha^{n-k} c_k
= \alpha^n \sum_{k=0}^n {\left(\frac{x}{\alpha}\right)}^k c_k
= \alpha^n \prod_{j=1}^n \left( \frac{x}{\alpha} - f_j({{{\bf c}}}) \right). \end{aligned}$$]{} Hence the roots of $p(x)$ are ${\left\{ \, \alpha f_j({{{\bf c}}})\ |\ j = 1, \ldots, n \, \right\} }$.
\[Lemma:ab\] Let $\alpha, \beta \in {\mathbb{C}}\backslash 0$, ${{{\bf A}}}(\alpha, \beta) = [A_{ij}]$ be a hollow tridiagonal matrix, where $A_{ij} > 0$ for $j=i+1$ and $j=i-1$, $A_{ij}=0$ otherwise, and [$$\begin{aligned}
A_{ij} =
\Cases{
\alpha \, c_{ij} &j=i+1, \quad i \in {\left\{ \, 1, \ldots, n-1 \, \right\} }\\
\beta \, c_{ij} &j=i-1, \quad i \in {\left\{ \, 2, \ldots, n \, \right\} }
}\end{aligned}$$]{} so ${{{\bf A}}}(\alpha, \beta) $ has the form [$$\begin{aligned}
{{{\bf A}}}(\alpha,\beta) &={\begin{pmatrix}
0 & \alpha \, c_{12} & 0 & \cdots & 0 & 0 & 0\\
\beta \, c_{21} & 0 & \alpha \, c_{23}& \cdots & 0 & 0 & 0\\
0 & \beta \, c_{32} & 0 & \ddots & 0 &0 & 0\\
\vdots & \vdots & \ddots & \ddots & \ddots & \vdots & \vdots \\
0 & 0 & 0 & \ddots & 0 & \alpha \, c_ {n{-}2, n{-}1} & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & \cdots & \beta \, c_{n{-}1, n{-}2} & 0 & \alpha \, c_ {n{-}1, n} \\
0 & 0 & 0 & \cdots & 0 & \beta \, c_ {n, n{-}1} & 0
\end{pmatrix}}.\end{aligned}$$]{} Let ${{{\bf c}}}\in {\mathbb{C}}^{2(n-1)}$ represent the vector of $c_{ij}$ constants.
Then the eigenvalues of ${{{\bf A}}}$ are of the form $\sqrt{\alpha \beta}\: f_h({{{\bf c}}}) $, $h = 1, \ldots, n$, where $f_h{\colon}{\mathbb{C}}^{2(n-2)} {\rightarrow}{\mathbb{C}}$ are functions of the $c_{ij}$ constants that do not depend on $\alpha$ or $\beta$.
The characteristic polynomial of ${{{\bf A}}}$ is [$$\begin{aligned}
p_{{{\bf A}}}(\lambda) &=
\det(\lambda{{{\bf I}}}- {{{\bf A}}})\\
&=
\begin{vmatrix}
\lambda & -\alpha \, c_{12} & 0 & \cdots & 0 & 0 & 0\\
-\beta \, c_{21} & \lambda & -\alpha \, c_{23}& \cdots & 0 & 0 & 0\\
0 & -\beta \, c_{32} & \lambda & \ddots & 0 &0 & 0\\
\vdots & \vdots & \ddots & \ddots & \ddots & \vdots & \vdots \\
0 & 0 & 0 & \ddots & \lambda & -\alpha \, c_ {n{-}2, n{-}1} & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & \cdots & -\beta \, c_{n{-}1, n{-}2} & \lambda & -\alpha \, c_ {n{-}1, n} \\
0 & 0 & 0 & \cdots & 0 & -\beta \, c_ {n, n{-}1} & \lambda
\end{vmatrix}.\end{aligned}$$]{} The characteristic polynomial has the recurrence relation [$$\begin{aligned}
p_{{{{\bf A}}}_k}(\lambda) &
= \lambda\, p_{{{{\bf A}}}_{k-1}}(\lambda) - \alpha\beta \, c_{k,k{-}1} \, c_{k{-}1,k} \, p_{{{{\bf A}}}_{k-2}}(\lambda), & k \in {\left\{ \, 3, \ldots, n \, \right\} }, \label{eq:rec}\\
{\shortintertext}{with initial conditions}
p_{{{{\bf A}}}_2}(\lambda) &= \lambda^2 - \alpha\beta c_{12}c_{21}, \quad\text{and} \label{eq:A2} \\
p_{{{{\bf A}}}_1}(\lambda) &= \lambda, \label{eq:A1}\end{aligned}$$]{} where ${{{\bf A}}}_k$ is the principal submatrix of ${{{\bf A}}}$ over indices $1, \ldots, k$.
We show by induction that for all $k \in {\left\{ \, 2, \ldots, n \, \right\} }$, [$$\begin{aligned}
p_{{{{\bf A}}}_k}(\lambda) &
= \sum_{j=0}^k \lambda^j (\alpha \beta)^{ (k-j)/2} \, g_{jk}({{{\bf c}}})
= \sum_{j=0}^k \lambda^j \sqrt{\alpha \beta}^{\, (k-j)} g_{jk}({{{\bf c}}}), \label{eq:IH}\end{aligned}$$]{} where each $g_{jk}{\colon}{\mathbb{C}}^{2(n-1)} {\rightarrow}{\mathbb{C}}$, $k \in {\left\{ \, 2, \ldots, n \, \right\} }$, $j \in {\left\{ \, 0, \ldots, k \, \right\} }$, is a function of constants ${{{\bf c}}}$.
From , we see that holds for $k=2$: $
p({{{\bf A}}}_2)(\lambda) = \lambda^2 - \alpha\beta c_{12}c_{21} .
$
For $k=3$, from the recurrence relation and initial conditions , , we have [$$\begin{aligned}
p({{{\bf A}}}_3)(\lambda) &
= \lambda\, p_{{{{\bf A}}}_{2}}(\lambda) - \alpha\beta \, c_{3,2} \, c_{2,3} \, p_{{{{\bf A}}}_{1}}(\lambda)
= \lambda (\lambda^2 - \alpha\beta c_{12}c_{21}) - \alpha \beta \, c_{3,2} \, c_{2,3} \, \lambda \\ &
= \lambda^3 - \lambda \sqrt{\alpha \beta}^{\, 2}( c_{12}c_{21} + c_{3,2} \, c_{2,3}),\end{aligned}$$]{} which satisfies . These are the basis steps for the induction.
For the inductive step, we need to show that if holds for $k-1, k-2$ then it holds for $k$. Suppose that holds for $2 \leq k-1, k-2 \leq n-1$. Then [$$\begin{aligned}
&p_{{{{\bf A}}}_k}(\lambda)
= \lambda\, p_{{{{\bf A}}}_{k-1}}(\lambda) - \alpha\beta \, c_{k,k{-}1} \, c_{k{-}1,k} \, p_{{{{\bf A}}}_{k-2}}(\lambda)\\ &
= \lambda \sum_{j=0}^{k{-}1} \lambda^j \sqrt{\alpha \beta}^{\, (k{-}1{-}j)} g_{j,k{-}1}({{{\bf c}}})
- \alpha\beta \, c_{k,k{-}1} \, c_{k{-}1,k} \! \sum_{j=0}^{k-2} \lambda^j \sqrt{\alpha \beta}^{\, (k-2-j)} g_{j,k-2}({{{\bf c}}}) \\ &
= \sum_{j=1}^{k} \lambda^{j} \sqrt{\alpha \beta}^{\,( k{-}j)} g_{j,k{-}1}({{{\bf c}}})
{-} \sum_{j=0}^{k{-}2} \lambda^j \sqrt{\alpha \beta}^{\, (k-j)} c_{k,k{-}1} \, c_{k{-}1,k} \, g_{j,k-2}({{{\bf c}}}) , \end{aligned}$$]{} which satisfies . Thus by induction $p_{{{{\bf A}}}_n}(\lambda)$ satisfies .
Then Lemma \[Lemma:poly\] implies that the parameters ${\left\{ \, \alpha, \beta \, \right\} }$ appear as the linear factor $\sqrt{\alpha \beta}$ in each root of the characteristic polynomial of ${{{\bf A}}}(\alpha,\beta)$ — its eigenvalues.
\[Theorem:Shift\] Levinger’s function is strictly concave for nonnegative weighted shift matrices with at least one positive weight.
Let the positive weighted shift matrix ${{{\bf A}}}$ be defined as [$$\begin{aligned}
A_{ij} = \Cases{
c_i \geq 0 & j=i+1, i \in {\left\{ \, 1, \ldots, n-1 \, \right\} }\\
0 &\text{otherwise},
}\end{aligned}$$]{} where $c_i$ are the weights and $c_i >0$ for at least one $i = 1, \ldots, n-1$.
By Lemma \[Lemma:ab\], all the eigenvalues of Levinger’s homotopy ${{{\bf B}}}(t) = (1{-}t) {{{\bf A}}}+ t {{{\bf A}}}{^{\!\top}}$ are of the form $\lambda_i({{{\bf B}}}(t)) = \sqrt{t(1{-}t)}\, f_i({{{\bf c}}})$, where ${{{\bf c}}}$ is the vector of weights, and $f_i{\colon}{{\mathbb{R}}^+\,}^{n-1} {\rightarrow}{\mathbb{R}}$, since ${{{\bf B}}}(t)$ is a direct sum of one or more (if some $c_i=0$) Jacobi matrices and these have real eigenvalues [@Hogben:2014:Handbook 22.7.2].
If at least one weight $c_i$ is positive, then ${{{\bf B}}}(t)$ has a principal submatrix ${\begin{pmatrix} 0& (1{-}t) c_i\\t c_i&0\end{pmatrix}}$ with a positive spectral radius for $t \in (0,1)$. Thus by @Horn:and:Johnson:2013 [Corollary 8.1.20(a)], ${r}({{{\bf B}}}(t)) > 0$ for $t \in (0,1)$. Therefore for $t \in (0,1)$, ${r}({{{\bf B}}}(t)) = \lambda_1({{{\bf B}}}(t)) = \sqrt{t(1{-}t)}\: f_1({{{\bf c}}}) > 0$. Since $\sqrt{t(1{-}t)}$ is strictly concave in $t$ for $t \in (0,1)$, Levinger’s function is strictly concave in $t$ for $t \in (0,1)$.
Levinger’s function is strictly concave for a nonnegative hollow tridiagonal matrix, ${{{\bf A}}}\in {\mathbb{R}}^{n \times n}$, in which $A_{ii}=0$ for $i \in {\left\{ \, 1, \ldots, n \, \right\} }$, and where for each $i \in {\left\{ \, 1, \ldots, n-1 \, \right\} }$, $A_{i,i+1} A_{i+1,i} = 0$, and for at least one $i$, $A_{i,i+1} > 0$.
${{{\bf A}}}$ is derived from a weighted shift matrix by swapping some elements of the superdiagonal $A_{i,i+1}$ to the transposed position in the subdiagonal, $A_{i+1,i}$. The determinant of Levinger’s homotopy $\det(\lambda {{{\bf I}}}- {{{\bf B}}}(t)) = \det(\lambda {{{\bf I}}}- (1-t) {{{\bf A}}}- t {{{\bf A}}}{^{\!\top}})$ remains unchanged under such swapping because the term $\alpha \beta \, c_{k,k{-}1} \, c_{k{-}1,k}$ in , which is $(1-t)t c_{k{-}1,k}^2$ in the weighted shift matrix, remains invariant under swapping as $t (1-t) c_{k,k{-}1}^2$.
We complete the connection to positive weighted shift matrices with this corollary.
By setting one or more, but not all, of the weights in a positive weighted circuit matrix to $0$, Levinger’s function becomes strictly concave.
A positive weighted circuit matrix where some but not all of the positive weights are changed to $0$ is, under appropriate permutation of the indices, a nonnegative weighted shift matrix to which Theorem \[Theorem:Shift\] applies.
What kind of transition does Levinger’s function make during the transition from a cyclic weighted shift matrix with nonconcave Levinger’s function to a weighted shift matrix with its necessarily concave Levinger’s function, as one of the weights is lowered to $0$? Does the convexity observed in Figure \[fig:CyclicShift16\] at the boundaries $t=0$ and $t=1$ flatten and become strictly concave for some positive value of that weight? We examine this transition for the cyclic shift matrix in example (Figure \[fig:CyclicShift16\]). The minimal weight is $c_{12} = 16 + \sin\left(2 \pi \frac{12}{16}\right) = 15$. Figure \[fig:C12\] plots Levinger’s function as $c_{12}$ is divided by factors of $2^{8}$.
Figure \[fig:Shift-Matrix\_Limit\] plots the second derivatives of Levinger’s function. We observe non-uniform convergence to the $c_{12}=0$ curve. As $c_{12}$ decreases, the second derivative converges to the $c_{12}=0$ curve over wider and wider intervals of $t$, but outside of these intervals the second derivative *diverges* from the $c_{12}=0$ curve, attaining larger values near and at the boundaries $t=0$ and $t=1$ with smaller $c_{12}$. Meanwhile for $c_{12}=0$, Levinger’s function is proportional to $\sqrt{t(1-t)}$, the second derivative of which goes to $-\infty$ as $t$ goes to $0$ or $1$. When $c_{12}> 0$, ${{{\bf B}}}(0)$ and ${{{\bf B}}}(1)$ are irreducible, and when $c_{12}=0$, ${{{\bf B}}}(t)$ is irreducible for $t \in (0,1)$. But for $c_{12}=0$, ${{{\bf B}}}(0)$ and ${{{\bf B}}}(1)$ are reducible matrices. While the eigenvalues are always continuous functions of the elements of the matrix, the derivatives of the spectral radius need not be, and in this case, we see an unusual example of nonuniform convergence in the second derivative of the spectral radius.
![Levinger’s function for the cyclic weighted shift matrix from in the limit as weight $c_{12}$ goes toward $0$ by being multiplied by successive powers of $2^{-8}$. The topmost line with $c_{12} = 15 \times 1$ is the same as the curve in Figure \[fig:CyclicShift16\] but with an expanded Y-axis.[]{data-label="fig:C12"}](C12.pdf){width="60.00000%"}
![The second derivative of Levinger’s function for the cyclic weighted shift matrix from as weight $c_{12}$ goes toward $0$ by being multiplied by successive powers of $2^{-8}$.[]{data-label="fig:Shift-Matrix_Limit"}](Shift-Matrix_Limit.pdf){width="75.00000%"}
Matrices with Constant Levinger’s Function
==========================================
Fiedler identified matrices with colinear left and right Perron vectors as having constant Levinger’s function. Here we make explicit a property implied by this constraint that appears not to have been described. We use the centered representation of Levinger’s homotopy. The *symmetric* part of a square matrix ${{{\bf A}}}$ is [$$\begin{aligned}
{{{\bf S}}}({{{\bf A}}}) {\, {:=}\, }({{{\bf A}}}+ {{{\bf A}}}{^{\!\top}}) / 2 . \label{eq:SymPart}\end{aligned}$$]{} The *skew symmetric* part of ${{{\bf A}}}$ is [$$\begin{aligned}
{{{\bf K}}}({{{\bf A}}}) {\, {:=}\, }({{{\bf A}}}- {{{\bf A}}}{^{\!\top}})/2 . \label{eq:SkewPart}\end{aligned}$$]{} Then ${{{\bf A}}}= {{{\bf S}}}({{{\bf A}}}) + {{{\bf K}}}({{{\bf A}}})$. Levinger’s homotopy in this centered representation is now, suppressing the ${{{\bf A}}}$ argument, [$$\begin{aligned}
{{{\bf C}}}(p) &{\, {:=}\, }{{{\bf S}}}+ p {{{\bf K}}}, \qquad p \in [-1, 1],
{\shortintertext}{and Levinger's function is}
c(p) &{\, {:=}\, }r((p+1)/2)
= {r}({{{\bf S}}}+ p {{{\bf K}}}).\end{aligned}$$]{} The range of $p$ in this centered representation may be extended beyond $[-1,1]$, while maintaining ${{{\bf C}}}(p) \geq {{{{\bf 0}}}}$, to the interval $p \in [-\alpha, \alpha]$ where [$$\begin{aligned}
\alpha = \min_{i,j} \frac{A_{ij} + A_{ji}}{| A_{ji} - A_{ij} | } \geq 1.\end{aligned}$$]{}
\[Theorem:SK\] Let ${{{\bf A}}}\in {\mathbb{R}}^{n \times n}$ be irreducible and nonnegative. Then ${r}((1{-}t) {{{\bf A}}}+ t {{{\bf A}}}{^{\!\top}})$ is constant in $t \in [0,1]$ if and only if the Perron vector of ${{{\bf A}}}+ {{{\bf A}}}{^{\!\top}}$ is in the null space of ${{{\bf A}}}- {{{\bf A}}}{^{\!\top}}$.
@Bapat:1987:Two and @Fiedler:1995:Numerical proved that ${r}((1{-}t) {{{\bf A}}}+ t {{{\bf A}}}{^{\!\top}})$ is constant in $t \in [0,1]$ if and only if the left and right Perron vectors of ${{{\bf A}}}$ are colinear. Suppose the left and right Perron vectors of ${{{\bf A}}}$ are colinear. Without loss of generality, they can be normalized to sum to $1$ in which case they are identical. Let the left and right Perron vectors of ${{{\bf A}}}$ be ${{{\bf x}}}$. Then [$$\begin{aligned}
\frac{1}{2} ({{{\bf A}}}+ {{{\bf A}}}{^{\!\top}}) {{{\bf x}}}&= {r}({{{\bf A}}}) \ {{{\bf x}}},
{\shortintertext}{and}
({{{\bf A}}}- {{{\bf A}}}{^{\!\top}}) {{{\bf x}}}&= {r}({{{\bf A}}})\ ({{{\bf x}}}- {{{\bf x}}}) = {{{{\bf 0}}}}.\end{aligned}$$]{} Hence ${{{\bf x}}}$ is the Perron vector of ${{{\bf A}}}+ {{{\bf A}}}{^{\!\top}}$ and ${{{\bf x}}}> {{{{\bf 0}}}}$ is in the null space of ${{{\bf A}}}- {{{\bf A}}}{^{\!\top}}$.
For the converse, let the Perron vector of ${{{\bf A}}}+ {{{\bf A}}}{^{\!\top}}$ be ${{{\bf x}}}> {{{{\bf 0}}}}$, and let ${{{\bf x}}}$ be in the null space of ${{{\bf A}}}- {{{\bf A}}}{^{\!\top}}$. Then [$$\begin{aligned}
({{{\bf A}}}+ {{{\bf A}}}{^{\!\top}}) {{{\bf x}}}&= {r}({{{\bf A}}}{+}{{{\bf A}}}{^{\!\top}})\ {{{\bf x}}}\text{ and }
({{{\bf A}}}- {{{\bf A}}}{^{\!\top}}) {{{\bf x}}}= {{{\bf A}}}{{{\bf x}}}- {{{\bf A}}}{^{\!\top}}{{{\bf x}}}= {{{{\bf 0}}}},\end{aligned}$$]{} [which gives]{} [$$\begin{aligned}
{{{\bf A}}}{{{\bf x}}}&
= \frac{1}{2}[({{{\bf A}}}+ {{{\bf A}}}{^{\!\top}}) +( {{{\bf A}}}- {{{\bf A}}}{^{\!\top}})] {{{\bf x}}}= \frac{1}{2}{r}({{{\bf A}}}{+}{{{\bf A}}}{^{\!\top}})\ {{{\bf x}}}+ {{{{\bf 0}}}}= \frac{{r}({{{\bf A}}}{+}{{{\bf A}}}{^{\!\top}})}{2} \ {{{\bf x}}}{\shortintertext}{and}
{{{\bf A}}}{^{\!\top}}{{{\bf x}}}&
= \frac{1}{2}[({{{\bf A}}}+ {{{\bf A}}}{^{\!\top}}) - ( {{{\bf A}}}- {{{\bf A}}}{^{\!\top}})] {{{\bf x}}}= \frac{1}{2}{r}({{{\bf A}}}{+}{{{\bf A}}}{^{\!\top}})\ {{{\bf x}}}- {{{{\bf 0}}}}= \frac{{r}({{{\bf A}}}{+}{{{\bf A}}}{^{\!\top}})}{2}\ {{{\bf x}}}\end{aligned}$$]{} hence ${{{\bf x}}}$ is a Perron vector of ${{{\bf A}}}$ and of ${{{\bf A}}}{^{\!\top}}$.
Let ${{{\bf S}}}= {{{\bf S}}}{^{\!\top}}\in {\mathbb{R}}^{n\times n}$ be a nonnegative irreducible symmetric matrix, and ${{{\bf K}}}= - {{{\bf K}}}{^{\!\top}}\in {\mathbb{R}}^{n\times n}$ be a nonsingular skew symmetric matrix such that ${{{\bf A}}}= {{{\bf S}}}+ {{{\bf K}}}\geq {{{{\bf 0}}}}$. Then $n$ is even and ${{{\bf A}}}$ has a non-constant Levinger’s function.
If ${{{\bf K}}}$ is a nonsingular skew symmetric matrix, $n$ must be even, since odd-order skew symmetric matrices are always singular [@Hogben:2014:Handbook 2-9.27]. If ${{{\bf C}}}(p) := {{{\bf S}}}+ p {{{\bf K}}}$ with ${{{\bf K}}}$ nonsingular, then because the null space of ${{{\bf K}}}$ is $\{{{{{\bf 0}}}}\}$, ${{{\bf C}}}(p)$ must have a non-constant Levinger’s function $c(p)$ by Theorem \[Theorem:SK\].
The following corollary pursues the observation made by an anonymous reviewer that a matrix ${{{\bf A}}}$ with colinear left and right Perron vectors is orthogonally similar to a direct sum ${\begin{pmatrix} {r}({{{\bf A}}})\end{pmatrix}} \oplus {{{\bf F}}}$ for some square matrix ${{{\bf F}}}$. This entails that the skew symmetric part of ${{{\bf A}}}$ is orthogonally similar to ${\begin{pmatrix} {r}({{{\bf A}}}) - {r}({{{\bf A}}})\end{pmatrix}} \oplus ({{{\bf F}}}-{{{\bf F}}}{^{\!\top}}) / 2 = {\begin{pmatrix} 0\end{pmatrix}} \oplus ({{{\bf F}}}-{{{\bf F}}}{^{\!\top}}) / 2$, and is thus singular.
Let ${{{\bf S}}}= {{{\bf S}}}{^{\!\top}}\in {\mathbb{R}}^{n\times n}$ be a nonnegative irreducible symmetric matrix, and ${{{\bf K}}}= - {{{\bf K}}}{^{\!\top}}\in {\mathbb{R}}^{n\times n}$ be a skew symmetric matrix, such that ${{{\bf A}}}= {{{\bf S}}}+ {{{\bf K}}}\geq {{{{\bf 0}}}}$. Let ${{{{\bf Q}}}}= ({{{{\bf Q}}}}{^{\!\top}})^{-1}$ be an orthogonal matrix that diagonalizes ${{{\bf S}}}$ to [$$\begin{aligned}
{{{\boldsymbol{\Lambda}}}}&{\, {:=}\, }{{{{\bf Q}}}}{^{\!\top}}{{{\bf S}}}{{{{\bf Q}}}}= {\begin{pmatrix} {r}({{{\bf S}}}) & 0 & \cdots & 0\\
0 & \lambda_2 & \cdots & 0 \\
\vdots & \vdots & \ddots & \vdots \\
0 & 0 & \cdots & \lambda_n
\end{pmatrix}} .\end{aligned}$$]{} Then ${{{\bf A}}}$ has a constant Levinger’s function if and only if [$$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:KQP}
{{{\bf K}}}_1 &{\, {:=}\, }{{{{\bf Q}}}}{^{\!\top}}{{{\bf K}}}{{{{\bf Q}}}}= {\begin{pmatrix} 0 & {{{{\bf 0}}}}{^{\!\top}}\\
{{{{\bf 0}}}}&{{{\bf K}}}_2
\end{pmatrix}} = {\begin{pmatrix} 0\end{pmatrix}} \oplus {{{\bf K}}}_2,\end{aligned}$$]{} where ${{{\bf K}}}_2 = - {{{\bf K}}}_2{^{\!\top}}\in {\mathbb{R}}^ {n{-}1 \times n{-}1} $ and ${{{{\bf 0}}}}{^{\!\top}}= (0 \ldots 0) \in {\mathbb{R}}^{n{-}1}$.
Since ${{{\bf S}}}$ is real and symmetric, ${{{\bf S}}}= {{{{\bf Q}}}}{{{\boldsymbol{\Lambda}}}}{{{{\bf Q}}}}{^{\!\top}}$ is in Jordan canonical form. Let ${{{\bf x}}}$ be the normalized Perron vector of ${{{\bf S}}}$. Then ${{{\bf x}}}= [{{{{\bf Q}}}}]_1 > {{{{\bf 0}}}}$ is the first column of ${{{{\bf Q}}}}$, and the other columns of ${{{{\bf Q}}}}$ are orthogonal to ${{{\bf x}}}$, so ${{{\bf x}}}{^{\!\top}}{{{{\bf Q}}}}= (1\:0 \cdots 0)$. The necessary and sufficient condition from Theorem \[Theorem:SK\] for ${{{\bf A}}}$ to have constant Levinger’s function is that ${{{\bf x}}}{^{\!\top}}{{{\bf K}}}= {{{{\bf 0}}}}{^{\!\top}}$, equivalent to [$$\begin{aligned}
{{{\bf x}}}{^{\!\top}}{{{\bf K}}}&
= {{{\bf x}}}{^{\!\top}}{{{{\bf Q}}}}{{{\bf K}}}_1{{{{\bf Q}}}}{^{\!\top}}= (1\: 0 \cdots 0) {{{\bf K}}}_1{{{{\bf Q}}}}{^{\!\top}}= {{{{\bf 0}}}}{^{\!\top}}.\end{aligned}$$]{} Since ${{{{\bf Q}}}}$ is orthogonal, it has null space $\{{{{{\bf 0}}}}\}$, so $ (1\: 0 \cdots 0) {{{\bf K}}}_1{{{{\bf Q}}}}{^{\!\top}}= {{{{\bf 0}}}}{^{\!\top}}$ if and only if $ (1\: 0 \cdots 0) {{{\bf K}}}_1 = {{{{\bf 0}}}}{^{\!\top}}$, which is the top row of ${{{\bf K}}}_1$. ${{{\bf K}}}_1$ and ${{{\bf K}}}_2$ must be skew symmetric since ${{{\bf K}}}$ is skew symmetric, as can be seen immediately from transposition. The skew symmetry of ${{{\bf K}}}_1$ implies its first column must also be all zeros as its first row is, establishing the form given in .
Conclusions
===========
We have shown that it is not in general true that the spectral radius along a line from a nonnegative square matrix ${{{\bf A}}}$ to its transpose — Levinger’s function — is concave. Our counterexamples to concavity have a simple principle in the case of a direct sums of block matrices, namely, that the maximum of two concave functions need not be concave. However, for the other examples we present — Toeplitz matrices, and positive cyclic weighted shift matrices — whatever principles underly the nonconcavity remain to be discerned. Also remaining to be discerned are the properties of matrix families — a few of which we have presented here — that guarantee concave Levinger functions.
Acknowledgements {#acknowledgements .unnumbered}
================
L.A. thanks Marcus W. Feldman for support from the Stanford Center for Computational, Evolutionary and Human Genomics and the Morrison Institute for Population and Resources Studies, Stanford University; the Mathematical Biosciences Institute at The Ohio State University, for its support through U.S. National Science Foundation awards DMS-0931642 and DMS-1839810, “A Summit on New Interdisciplinary Research Directions on the Rules of Life”; and the Foundational Questions Institute and Fetzer Franklin Fund, a donor advised fund of Silicon Valley Community Foundation, for FQXi Grant number FQXi-RFP-IPW-1913. J.E.C. thanks the U.S. National Science Foundation for grant DMS-1225529 during the initial phase of this work and Roseanne K. Benjamin for help during this work.
[14]{} natexlab\#1[\#1]{}\[1\][`#1`]{} \[2\][\#2]{} \[1\][\#1]{} \[1\][[](http://dx.doi.org/#1)]{} \[1\][[](pmid:#1)]{} \[2\][\#2]{} , . . , . , , . . , . , , . . , . . , , . . , . , . . , . (Ed.), . . ed., , . , , . . ed., , . , . . , . <http://www.ams.org/journals/notices/197001/197001FullIssue.pdf>. , . . , . , . . , . , . . , . , , . . , . , , , . . volume . . , , , . . , .
[^1]: Also called Levinger’s transformation @Psarrakos:and:Tsatsomeros:2003:Perron.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
author:
- '[J. García-Cuerva]{} and [J.Parcet]{}'
title: |
Vector-valued Hausdorff-Young inequality\
on compact groups
---
=13.5cm
[^1] [^2] [^3]
Introduction {#section1 .unnumbered}
============
If $1 \le p \le 2$ and $p' = p / (p-1)$ denotes the conjugate exponent of $p$, the classical Hausdorff-Young inequality establishes the boundedness of the Fourier transform from $L^p({\mathbb{R}})$ into $L^{p'}({\mathbb{R}})$. Its proof is obtained by complex interpolation between the obvious case $p = 1$ and the case $p =
2$ given by Plancherel theorem. In the same spirit, Kunze applied in $1958$ new techniques of non-commutative integration introduced by Dixmier [@D] and Segal [@S1; @S2] to study this inequality on locally compact unimodular groups, see [@Ku]. In particular, for a compact non necessarily abelian group $G$, he proved the boundedness of the Fourier transform from $L^p(G)$ to $\mathcal{L}^{p'}({\widehat{G}})$. That is, $$\Big( \sum_{\pi \in {\widehat{G}}} d_{\pi}
\|\widehat{f}(\pi)\|_{S_{d_{\pi}}^{p'}}^{p'} \Big)^{1/p'} \le
\Big( \int_G |f(g)|^p d \mu(g) \Big)^{1/p} \ \ \ \mbox{for} \ \ 1
< p \le 2,$$ and with the obvious modifications for $p = 1$. Here $\pi \in {\widehat{G}}$ denotes an irreducible unitary representation of $G$, $d_{\pi}$ is the degree of $\pi$, $S_n^{p'}$ stands for the $n
\times n$ dimensional Schatten class of exponent $p'$ and $\mu$ is the Haar measure of $G$ normalized so that $\mu(G) = 1$. On the other hand, Peetre presented in 1969 the first work [@Pe] analyzing the Hausdorff-Young inequality for Banach valued functions $f: {\mathbb{R}}\rightarrow B$. In this case, the validity of the inequality for some fixed $p$ depends on the Banach space $B$. This leads to the notion of Fourier type of a Banach space with respect to a locally compact abelian group, introduced by Milman in [@M]. The theory of Fourier type with respect to locally compact abelian groups was further developed by several authors, see [@A], [@B1], [@B2], [@GKKT], [@GKK] and [@Ko].
However, as far as we know, in the non-commutative setting there is no analogous theory of Fourier type described in the literature. Our aim is to fill this gap. Namely, to analyze the validity of Kunze’s results for vector-valued functions. In this work we investigate the validity of the Hausdorff-Young inequality for vector-valued functions defined on a compact group. As can be seen throughout the paper, compactness is an essential assumption in many of the results we present here. For a non-commutative compact group $G$, the vector-valued Fourier transform must be defined for irreducible unitary representations $\pi \in {\widehat{G}}$ and its values are vector-valued matrices. Therefore, just to start talking about the Hausdorff-Young inequality, one has to be able to define norms for vector-valued matrices. By Ruan’s theorem [@R], this matricial structure leads us to consider an operator space structure on the vector space where we are taking values. It appears clear that, in order to develop a theory of Fourier type in this context, we shall need to take values in operator spaces rather than Banach spaces. This crucial point is obviously at the root of the notion of Fourier type.
To conclude, we would like to point out that the theory initiated in this paper has been further developed in [@GMP] and [@GP]. Roughly speaking, the paper [@GMP] deals with the sharpness of Theorems \[BochnerLebesgue\] and \[PisierSchatten\] for compact semisimple Lie groups, see section \[section7\] for more on this topic. On the other hand, the notions of Fourier type and cotype of an operator space with respect to a compact group are extended in [@GP] to the more general setting of type and cotype with respect to a quantized orthonormal system. This contains, for instance, the non-commutative versions of Rademacher or Gauss type and cotype. All this is used in [@GP] to obtain an operator space version of Kwapień theorem [@Kw] characterizing Hilbert spaces by means of vector-valued orthogonal series.
The organization of the paper is as follows. In section $\ref{section2}$ we recall the notions of operator space theory and vector-valued Schatten classes that will be used in the sequel. In section $\ref{section3}$ we define the Fourier transform on compact groups for vector-valued functions. We also study the spaces ${\mathcal{L}}_E^p({\widehat{G}})$, where the Fourier transform takes values. Some results for which we have not found any reference have been proved for completeness. In particular, Proposition \[L-inf\] and Corollary \[L-one\] are specially relevant since they show that the spaces ${\mathcal{L}}_E^{\infty}({\widehat{G}})$ and ${\mathcal{L}}_E^1({\widehat{G}})$ behave with respect to the minimal and projective tensor products as the classical $L_E^{\infty}$ and $L_E^1$ do with respect to Grothendieck’s tensor norms. Sections $\ref{section4}$ and $\ref{section5}$ are mainly devoted to showing that the notions of Fourier type and cotype are well defined, and also to prove some basic properties. Section $\ref{section5}$ is specially far from the commutative theory since, as we show there, when dealing with abelian groups the notion of Fourier cotype reduces to the notion of Fourier type with respect to the dual group. In section $\ref{section6}$, given an operator space $E$, we investigate the Fourier type and cotype of some general operator spaces related to $E$ such as subspaces, duals, interpolated spaces, etc... Finally, in section $\ref{section7}$ we investigate the main examples, that is, Lebesgue spaces and Schatten classes. In particular, for the vector-valued ones we prove some quantized Minkowski inequalities that we shall need.
**Acknowledgment.** We thank Gilles Pisier for some useful comments.
Operator spaces and Schatten classes {#section2}
====================================
The basic theories behind this paper are the theory of operator spaces and the subsequent theory of vector-valued Schatten classes. The reader is referred to [@ER2] and [@P2] for a basic background on these topics and their connection with the present work. We begin with a brief summary of the results of operator space theory that will be used in the sequel.
- **Definition of operator space**. We will denote by ${\mathcal{B}}({\mathcal{H}})$ the space of bounded linear operators on some Hilbert space ${\mathcal{H}}$. For our purposes an *operator space* $E$ can be defined as a closed subspace of ${\mathcal{B}}({\mathcal{H}})$. Given an operator space $E \subset {\mathcal{B}}({\mathcal{H}})$ we write $M_n(E)$ for the space $M_n \otimes
E$ of $n \times n$ matrices with entries in $E$ and with the norm imposed by the natural embedding of $M_n \otimes E$ into ${\mathcal{B}}(l_{{\mathcal{H}}}^2(n))$. Here $l_{{\mathcal{H}}}^2(n)$ denotes the Hilbert space of all ${\mathcal{H}}$-valued $n$-tuples with its natural inner product. On the other hand, given a vector space $E$ and a collection of norms $\|-\|_n$ on the spaces $M_n \otimes E$, one can impose some extra conditions to obtain what is called an *operator space matrix norm* or *operator space structure* on $E$, see Chapter $2$ of [@ER2]. One of the main results of the theory is the *abstract characterization of operator spaces* given by Ruan in [@R]. Ruan’s theorem can be rephrased by saying that for any operator space structure on a vector space $E$, there exists a unique Hilbert space ${\mathcal{H}}$ such that the norm from the operator space structure on $M_n \otimes E$ coincides with the norm induced by the space ${\mathcal{B}}(l_{{\mathcal{H}}}^2(n))$.
- **Complete boundedness**. A linear mapping between operator spaces $u: E_1 \rightarrow E_2$ is said to be *completely bounded* if the family of maps $I_{M_n} \otimes
u: M_n(E_1) \rightarrow M_n(E_2)$ satisfy $$\|u\|_{cb} = \sup_{n
\ge 1} \|I_{M_n} \otimes u\|_{{\mathcal{B}}(M_n(E_1),M_n(E_2))} < \infty.$$ We write $cb(E_1,E_2)$ for the Banach space of completely bounded maps from $E_1$ to $E_2$ with the $cb$ norm. Let $u \in
cb(E_1,E_2)$, we say that $u$ is a *complete isometry* if the mappings $I_{M_n} \otimes u$ are isometries for all $n \ge 1$. Similarly $u$ is called *completely contractive* if $\|u\|_{cb} \le 1$. We also say that $u$ is a *complete isomorphism* if it is a completely bounded linear isomorphism whose inverse is also completely bounded. Finally $u$ is a *completely isometric isomorphism* if it is also a complete isometry.
- **Duality**. Ruan’s theorem was used by Blecher and Paulsen in [@BP] and by Effros and Ruan in [@ER1] to get a *duality theory* in the category of operator spaces. It was shown that, by imposing on $M_n \otimes cb(E_1,E_2)$ the norm induced by $cb(E_1,M_n(E_2))$, we obtain an operator space structure on $cb(E_1,E_2)$. In particular we have an operator space structure on the dual space $E^{\star} = cb(E,{\mathbb{C}})$. This notion of duality behaves as Banach space duality in many senses. For instance, it can be proved that the natural isometric inclusion $E \subset E^{\star \star}$ is a complete isometry.
- **Tensor products**. We are interested in two tensor norms that will be used repeatedly in this paper. Given two operator spaces $E_1 \subset {\mathcal{B}}({\mathcal{H}}_1)$ and $E_2 \subset
{\mathcal{B}}({\mathcal{H}}_2)$ we define their *minimal tensor product* $E_1
\otimes_{\mbox{{\tiny min}}} E_2$ by the natural embedding of $E_1
\otimes E_2$ into ${\mathcal{B}}({\mathcal{H}}_1 \otimes_2 {\mathcal{H}}_2)$, where $\otimes_2$ stands for the Hilbertian tensor product. The minimal tensor product plays the role of the *injective tensor product* of Banach spaces in the category of operator spaces. Similarly, there exists an analog for operator spaces of the *projective tensor product*. It is denoted by $E_1 \otimes^{\wedge} E_2$ and it was introduced in [@BP] and [@ER1] independently. The tensor products $\otimes_{\mbox{{\tiny min}}}$ and $\otimes^{\wedge}$ are associative and commutative. Here are some other properties which we will use in the sequel with no further reference $$\begin{array}{lclcl} E_1 \otimes^{\wedge} E_2 &
\rightarrow & E_1 \otimes_{\mbox{{\tiny min}}} E_2 & \quad &
\mbox{is a comp. contraction}
\\ E_1^{\star} \otimes_{\mbox{{\tiny min}}} E_2 &
\rightarrow & cb(E_1,E_2) & \quad & \mbox{is a comp. isometry}
\\ E_1 \otimes_{\mbox{{\tiny min}}} E_2 & \rightarrow &
cb(E_1^{\star},E_2) & \quad & \mbox{is a comp. isometry}
\\ (E_1 \otimes^{\wedge} E_2)^{\star} & \rightarrow &
cb(E_1,E_2^{\star}) & \quad & \mbox{is a comp. isometric
isomorph}.
\end{array}$$
- **Complex interpolation**. Let $\{E_0,E_1\}$ be a compatible couple of Banach spaces in the sense of complex interpolation. Let us suppose that $E_0$ and $E_1$ have an operator space structure. In [@P1] Pisier showed that, if $E_{\theta}$ denotes the interpolation space $[E_0,E_1]_{\theta}$, one can define an operator space structure on $E_{\theta}$ by imposing on $M_n \otimes E_{\theta}$ the norm of the Banach space $[M_n(E_0),M_n(E_1)]_{\theta}$. He also proved the analog for operator spaces of the classical interpolation result for Banach spaces. Namely, if we assume that $u: E_0 + E_1 \rightarrow F_0 +
F_1$ satisfies the inequalities $\|u\|_{cb(E_0,F_0)} \le C_0$ and $\|u\|_{cb(E_1,F_1)} \le C_1$, then for $0 < \theta < 1$ we have the estimate $$\|u\|_{cb(E_{\theta},F_{\theta})} \le
C_0^{1-\theta} C_1^{\theta}.$$
We now recall the definition and the main properties of the Schatten classes. The non-commutative analog of the $n$-dimensional Lebesgue space $l^p(n)$ is the Schatten class $S_n^p$ which is defined as the space $M_n$ of $n \times n$ complex matrices with the norm given by
- $\|A\|_{S_n^p} = (\mbox{tr}
|A|^p)^{1/p}$, if $1 \le p < \infty$.
- $\|A\|_{S_n^{\infty}} = \displaystyle
\sup \Big\{ \|Ax\|_{l^2(n)}: \ \|x\|_{\ell^2(n)} \le 1 \Big\}$, if $p = \infty$.
Now we present the *vector valued Schatten classes* $S_n^p(E)$, introduced by Pisier in [@P2]. The point here is that the space $E$ where we take values has to be an operator space. If $p = \infty$, we have by definition $S_n^{\infty} =
{\mathcal{B}}(l^2(n))$ and so we obtain a natural operator space structure for $S_n^{\infty}$. We define $S_n^{\infty}(E)$ as the operator space $S_n^{\infty} \otimes_{\mbox{{\tiny min}}} E$. It is obvious that $M_n(E)$ and $S_n^{\infty}(E)$ coincide, in what follows we shall write $S_n^{\infty}(E)$ for $M_n(E)$. If $p = 1$, the duality $S_n^1 = (S_n^{\infty})^{\star}$ gives a natural operator space structure on $S_n^1$. We set $S_n^1(E) = S_n^1
\otimes^{\wedge} E$. Finally, since the identity mapping $S_n^1(E)
\rightarrow S_n^{\infty}(E)$ is contractive, we define the classes $S_n^p(E)$ by means of complex interpolation. Namely, $S_n^p(E) =
[S_n^{\infty}(E),S_n^1(E)]_{1/p}$. The next theorem summarizes some properties of the vector-valued Schatten classes that will be used repeatedly throughout the paper, see Chapter $1$ of [@P2].
*In the same fashion, it is possible to define a natural operator space structure on the Bochner-Lebesgue spaces, see Chapter $2$ of [@P2].*
\[Pisier\] \[Schatten\] The vector-valued Schatten classes satisfy the following properties.
- **The $cb$ norm**. Let $E_1$ and $E_2$ be operator spaces and let $1 \le p \le \infty$. Then the $cb$ norm of any linear mapping $u: E_1 \rightarrow E_2$ is given by $$\|u\|_{cb} =
\sup_{n \ge 1} \|I_{M_n} \otimes
u\|_{{\mathcal{B}}(S_n^p(E_1),S_n^p(E_2))}.$$
- **Duality**. Let $1 \le p \le \infty$ and let $p'$ denote the conjugate exponent of $p$. The map $A \in
S_n^{p'}(E^{\star}) \mapsto \textnormal{tr} (A \hspace{2pt} \cdot)
\in S_n^p(E)^{\star}$ is completely isometric.
- **Complex interpolation**. Let $1 \le p_0,p_1
\le \infty$, $0 < \theta < 1$ and assume that $\{E_0,E_1\}$ is a compatible couple of operator spaces. Then, letting $p_{\theta}^{-1} = (1 - \theta) p_0^{-1} + \theta p_1^{-1}$, we have $$[S_n^{p_0}(E_0),S_n^{p_1}(E_1)]_{\theta} =
S_n^{p_{\theta}}(E_{\theta}).$$
- **Ordered norms**. Let $1 \le p_1
\le p_2 \le \infty$. Then the identity map $S_n^{p_1}(E)
\rightarrow S_n^{p_2}(E)$ is a contraction.
- **Fubini type theorems**. Let $1 \le p \le \infty$ and let $n_1, n_2, n \ge 1$. Then, we have completely isometrically $$S_{n_1}^p(S_{n_2}^p(E)) \simeq
S_{n_2}^p(S_{n_1}^p(E)) \quad \mbox{and} \quad
S_n^p(L_E^p(\Omega)) \simeq L_{S_n^p(E)}^p(\Omega).$$
Vector-valued Fourier transform {#section3}
===============================
We assume the reader is familiar with the language of non-commutative abstract harmonic analysis on compact groups. In any case all the results we use here can be found in [@F]. In what follows we shall assume that $G$ is a compact Hausdorff topological group endowed with its Haar measure $\mu$ normalized so that $\mu(G) = 1$. The mapping $\pi: G \rightarrow
U({\mathbb{C}}^{d_{\pi}})$ will denote an irreducible unitary representation of $G$ of degree $d_{\pi}$. That is, $\pi \in {\widehat{G}}$ where the symbol ${\widehat{G}}$ stands for the dual object of $G$.
*Given an operator space $E$, $f \in L_E^1(G)$ and $\pi \in {\widehat{G}}$, the vector-valued **Fourier coefficient** of $f$ at $\pi$ is defined as the operator* $$\widehat{f}(\pi) = \int_G f(g) \pi(g)^{\star} d\mu(g) \in
{\mathcal{B}}({\mathbb{C}}^{d_{\pi}},E^{d_{\pi}}).$$
We interpret this operator-valued integral in the weak sense. That is, given an orthonormal basis $\{v_1,v_2 , \ldots, v_{d_{\pi}}\}$ of ${\mathbb{C}}^{d_{\pi}}$ and $u \in {\mathbb{C}}^{d_{\pi}}$, we define the $j$-th component of $\widehat{f}(\pi) u$, with respect to that basis, by the following element of $E$ $$\int_G f(g) \langle\pi(g)^{\star}
u, v_j\rangle d \mu(g).$$ Since $\pi(g)$ is unitary, it follows that the vector-valued Fourier coefficients are well-defined for all $f$ in $L_E^1(G)$. Once we have fixed the basis of ${\mathbb{C}}^{d_{\pi}}$, we can identify ${\mathcal{B}}({\mathbb{C}}^{d_{\pi}},E^{d_{\pi}})$ with the space $M_{d_{\pi}} \otimes E$. This leads us to write the **Fourier transform** operator $\mathcal{F}_{G,E}$, in the form $$\mathcal{F}_{G,E}: L_E^1(G) \longrightarrow \prod_{\pi \in
{\widehat{G}}} M_{d_{\pi}} \otimes E.$$
The first step to study the Hausdorff-Young inequality is to find a *natural* $L^p$ norm for this Cartesian product, which we denote by $\mathcal{M}_E({\widehat{G}})$.
*Let $E$ be an operator space and $1 \le p <
\infty$, the **spaces** ${\mathcal{L}}_E^p({\widehat{G}})$ are defined as follows* $$\begin{aligned}
{\mathcal{L}}_E^p({\widehat{G}}) & = & \Big\{ A \in \mathcal{M}_E({\widehat{G}}): \ \
\|A\|_{{\mathcal{L}}_E^p({\widehat{G}})} = \Big( \sum_{\pi \in {\widehat{G}}} d_{\pi}
\|A^{\pi}\|_{S_{d_{\pi}}^p(E)}^p \Big)^{1/p} < \infty \Big\}
\\ {\mathcal{L}}_E^{\infty}({\widehat{G}}) & = & \Big\{ A \in \mathcal{M}_E({\widehat{G}}): \ \
\|A\|_{{\mathcal{L}}_E^{\infty}({\widehat{G}})} = \sup_{\pi \in {\widehat{G}}}
\|A^{\pi}\|_{S_{d_{\pi}}^{\infty}(E)} < \infty \Big\}.\end{aligned}$$
We write ${\mathcal{L}}^p({\widehat{G}})$ for the case $E = {\mathbb{C}}$. Note that we require the vector space $E$ to be an operator space. This condition is necessary since we are making use of the spaces $S_n^p(E)$, see Pisier’s monograph [@P2] for more on this topic. The family of spaces ${\mathcal{L}}_E^p({\widehat{G}})$ is a particular case of a bigger family of spaces studied in Chapter $2$ of [@P2], the spaces $\ell_p(\mu,\{E_i\})$. This remark allows us to provide the spaces ${\mathcal{L}}_E^p({\widehat{G}})$ with the natural operator space structure induced by $\ell_p(\mu,\{E_i\})$. We now summarize the main properties of these spaces.
- **Duality**. Let $1 \le p < \infty$ and let $p'$ be the conjugate exponent of $p$. Then the following map is a completely isometric isomorphism $$A \in {\mathcal{L}}_{E^{\star}}^{p'}({\widehat{G}})
\longmapsto \sum_{\pi \in {\widehat{G}}} d_{\pi} \mbox{tr} (A^{\pi} \cdot)
\in {\mathcal{L}}_E^p({\widehat{G}})^{\star}.$$
- **Complex interpolation**. Let $1 \le p_0,p_1
\le \infty$. Assume that $\{E_0,E_1\}$ is a compatible couple of operator spaces. Then $\{{\mathcal{L}}_{E_0}^{p_0}({\widehat{G}}),{\mathcal{L}}_{E_1}^{p_1}({\widehat{G}})\}$ is also a compatible couple and, for $0 < \theta < 1$ and $p_{\theta}^{-1} = (1 -
\theta) p_0^{-1} + \theta p_1^{-1}$, we have that $$[{\mathcal{L}}_{E_0}^{p_0}({\widehat{G}}),{\mathcal{L}}_{E_1}^{p_1}({\widehat{G}})]_{\theta} =
{\mathcal{L}}_{E_{\theta}}^{p_{\theta}}({\widehat{G}}).$$
- **Ordered norms**. The embedding ${\mathcal{L}}_E^{p_1}({\widehat{G}}) \rightarrow {\mathcal{L}}_E^{p_2}({\widehat{G}})$ is contractive whenever $1 \le p_1 \le p_2 \le \infty$.
- **Fubini type theorems**. Let $1 \le p \le \infty$ and let $n \ge 1$. Then the following are completely isometric isomorphisms $$S_n^p({\mathcal{L}}_E^p({\widehat{G}})) \simeq {\mathcal{L}}_{S_n^p(E)}^p({\widehat{G}})
\quad \mbox{and} \quad {\mathcal{L}}_{L_E^p(\Omega)}^p({\widehat{G}}) \simeq
L_{{\mathcal{L}}_E^p({\widehat{G}})}^p(\Omega).$$
We now present a couple of results concerning these spaces for which we have not found any reference. These will be especially useful in the study of the Fourier cotype, see for instance the proof of Proposition \[CotypeInfinite\]. We first need a technical result, which is an inequality of Hölder type.
\[Holder\] Let $E$ be an operator space, $n_1, n_2
\ge 1$ and $1 \le p \le \infty$. Let us consider $A \in M_{n_1}
\otimes E$ and $B_{ij} \in M_{n_1}$ for $1 \le i,j \le n_2$. Then $$\Big\| \Big( \,\ \textnormal{tr} (A B_{ij}) \,\ \Big)
\Big\|_{S_{n_2}^1(E)} \le \|A\|_{S_{n_1}^{p'}(E)} \Big\| \Big( \,\
B_{ij} \,\ \Big) \Big\|_{S_{n_1}^p(S_{n_2}^1)}.$$
*Proof*. If $a_{kl}$ and $b_{kl}^{ij}$ denote the entries of $A$ and $B_{ij}$ respectively, then we can write $$\Big( \,\
\mbox{tr} (A B_{ij}) \,\ \Big) = \sum_{k,l = 1}^{n_1} \Big( \,\
b_{lk}^{ij} \,\ \Big) \otimes a_{kl} \,\ \in \,\ M_{n_2} \otimes
E.$$ Hence, recalling the completely isometric isomorphism from $cb(S_n^1,E^{\star})$ onto $(S_n^1 \otimes^{\wedge} E)^{\star}$ given by $\Psi(A \otimes e) = \Phi(A)(e)$, we obtain $$\begin{aligned}
\Big\| \Big( \,\ \mbox{tr} (A B_{ij}) \,\ \Big)
\Big\|_{S_{n_2}^1(E)} & = &
\sup_{\|\Phi\|_{cb(S_{n_2}^1,E^{\star})} \le 1} \, \Big| \sum_{k,l
= 1}^{n_1} \big[ \Phi \Big( \,\ b_{lk}^{ij} \,\ \Big) \big]
(a_{kl}) \Big| \\ & = & \sup_{\|\Phi\|_{cb(S_{n_2}^1,E^{\star})}
\le 1} \, \big| \mbox{tr} (C A) \big| \\ & \le &
\|A\|_{S_{n_1}^{p'}(E)} \,\
\sup_{\|\Phi\|_{cb(S_{n_2}^1,E^{\star})} \le 1} \ \
\|C\|_{S_{n_1}^p(E^{\star})} \\ & \le & \|A\|_{S_{n_1}^{p'}(E)} \
\ \Big\| \Big( \,\ B_{ij} \,\ \Big) \Big\|_{S_{n_1}^p(S_{n_2}^1)}\end{aligned}$$ where $C = \big[ I_{M_{n_1}} \otimes \Phi \big] \Big( \,\ B_{ij}
\,\ \Big) \in M_{n_1} \otimes E^{\star}$. This completes the proof. [ $\Box$ 0.2cm]{}
For fixed $\pi_0 \in {\widehat{G}}$ and $1 \le i_0,j_0 \le d_{\pi_0}$, we define $M(\pi_0,i_0,j_0) \in \mathcal{M}_{{\mathbb{C}}}({\widehat{G}})$ by the relations $M(\pi_0,i_0,j_0)_{ij}^{\pi} = \delta_{\pi \pi_0}
\delta_{i i_0} \delta_{j j_0}$.
\[L-inf\] The following is a completely isometric isomorphism $$\begin{array}{crcl} \Lambda: & {\mathcal{L}}_E^{\infty}({\widehat{G}}) &
\longrightarrow & cb({\mathcal{L}}^1({\widehat{G}}),E) \\ & A & \longmapsto & \sum_{\pi
\in {\widehat{G}}} d_{\pi} \textnormal{tr}(A^{\pi} \cdot) \end{array}$$
*Proof*. We just need to show that $\Lambda$ is an isometric isomorphism, since we have the natural isometric isomorphisms $$S_n^{\infty}({\mathcal{L}}_E^{\infty}({\widehat{G}})) \sim
{\mathcal{L}}_{S_n^{\infty}(E)}^{\infty}({\widehat{G}}) \quad \mbox{and} \quad
cb({\mathcal{L}}^1({\widehat{G}}),S_n^{\infty}(E)) \sim
S_n^{\infty}(cb({\mathcal{L}}^1({\widehat{G}}),E)).$$
**1. $\Lambda$ is a contraction**. By expressing the $cb$ norm in terms of the Schatten class $S^1$, we have $$\begin{aligned}
\lefteqn{\|\Lambda(A)\|_{cb({\mathcal{L}}^1({\widehat{G}}),E)}}
\\ & \le & \sup_{n \ge 1} \Big\{ \sum_{\pi \in {\widehat{G}}} d_{\pi} \Big\|
\Big( \,\ \mbox{tr} (A^{\pi} B_{ij}^{\pi}) \,\ \Big)
\Big\|_{S_n^1(E)}: \ \ \Big\| \Big( \,\ B_{ij} \,\ \Big)
\Big\|_{S_n^1({\mathcal{L}}^1({\widehat{G}}))} \le 1 \Big\}\end{aligned}$$ But Lemma \[Holder\] with $p = 1$ gives $$\begin{aligned}
\sum_{\pi \in {\widehat{G}}} d_{\pi} \Big\| \Big( \,\ \mbox{tr} (A^{\pi}
B_{ij}^{\pi}) \,\ \Big) \Big\|_{S_n^1(E)} & \le & \sum_{\pi \in
{\widehat{G}}} d_{\pi} \|A^{\pi}\|_{S_{d_{\pi}}^{\infty}(E)} \Big\| \Big( \,\
B_{ij}^{\pi} \,\ \Big) \Big\|_{S_{d_{\pi}n}^1} \\ & \le &
\|A\|_{{\mathcal{L}}_E^{\infty}({\widehat{G}})} \Big\| \Big( \,\ B_{ij} \,\ \Big)
\Big\|_{S_n^1({\mathcal{L}}^1({\widehat{G}}))}.\end{aligned}$$
**2. $\Lambda$ is an isometry**. For fixed $\pi \in
{\widehat{G}}$, we define $B(\pi,i,j)$ to be the element of ${\mathcal{L}}^1({\widehat{G}})$ given by $d_{\pi}^{-1} M(\pi,j,i)$ and we denote by $\mathbf{B}(\pi)$ the matrix with entries $B(\pi,i,j)$ where $1\le i,j \le d_{\pi}$. Due to the natural complete isometry ${\mathcal{L}}^1({\widehat{G}}) \rightarrow
cb({\mathcal{L}}^{\infty}({\widehat{G}}),{\mathbb{C}})$, it is not difficult to check that $\|\mathbf{B}(\pi)\|_{S_{d_{\pi}}^{\infty}({\mathcal{L}}^1({\widehat{G}}))} = 1$. Since this works for any $\pi \in {\widehat{G}}$, we get $$\|\Lambda(A)\|_{cb({\mathcal{L}}^1({\widehat{G}}),E)} \ge \sup_{\pi \in {\widehat{G}}}
\|[I_{M_{d_{\pi}}} \otimes \Lambda(A)]
(\mathbf{B}(\pi))\|_{S_{d_{\pi}}^{\infty}(E)} =
\|A\|_{{\mathcal{L}}_E^{\infty} ({\widehat{G}})}.$$
**3. $\Lambda$ is surjective**. Let $\Phi \in
cb({\mathcal{L}}^1({\widehat{G}}),E)$, then we define $A \in \mathcal{M}_E({\widehat{G}})$ by the relation $$A^{\pi} = \frac{1}{d_{\pi}} \Big( \,\ \Phi(M(\pi,j,i))
\,\ \Big), \quad \pi \in {\widehat{G}}.$$ The definition of $A$ gives rise to the following expression $$\Phi(B) = \sum_{\pi \in {\widehat{G}}}
\sum_{i,j=1}^{d_{\pi}} b_{ij}^{\pi} \Phi(M(\pi,i,j)) = \sum_{\pi
\in {\widehat{G}}} d_{\pi} \mbox{tr} (A^{\pi} B^{\pi})$$ where $b_{ij}^{\pi}$ are the entries of $B^{\pi}$. Therefore it suffices to check that $A \in {\mathcal{L}}_E^{\infty}({\widehat{G}})$. But following the notation of Step $2$, we obtain $$\begin{aligned}
\|A^{\pi}\|_{S_{d_{\pi}}^{\infty}(E)} & = & \frac{1}{d_{\pi}}
\Big\| \Big( \,\ \Phi(M(\pi,j,i)) \,\ \Big)
\Big\|_{S_{d_{\pi}}^{\infty}(E)} \\ & \le &
\|\Phi\|_{cb({\mathcal{L}}^1({\widehat{G}}),E)}
\|\mathbf{B}(\pi)\|_{S_{d_{\pi}}^{\infty}({\mathcal{L}}^1({\widehat{G}}))} \le
\|\Phi\|_{cb({\mathcal{L}}^1({\widehat{G}}),E)}.\end{aligned}$$ Since $\Phi \in cb({\mathcal{L}}^1({\widehat{G}}),E)$, we have a uniform upper bound. [ $\Box$ 0.2cm]{}
The space ${\mathcal{L}}_E^{\infty}({\widehat{G}})$ behaves with respect to the minimal tensor product as $L_E^{\infty}(\Omega)$ does with respect to the injective tensor product in the category of Banach spaces. Namely, as a consequence of Proposition \[L-inf\], we have that ${\mathcal{L}}^{\infty}({\widehat{G}}) \otimes_{\mbox{{\tiny min}}} E \hookrightarrow
{\mathcal{L}}_E^{\infty}({\widehat{G}})$ is a complete isometry . The space ${\mathcal{L}}_E^1({\widehat{G}})$ behaves in the same fashion with respect to the projective tensor product.
\[L-one\] The identity ${\mathcal{L}}^1({\widehat{G}})
\otimes^{\wedge} E \rightarrow {\mathcal{L}}_E^1({\widehat{G}})$ is completely isometric.
*Proof*. By Proposition $3.2.2$ of [@ER2] it suffices to check that the adjoint mapping is a complete isometric isomorphism. But Proposition \[L-inf\] gives the following chain ${\mathcal{L}}_E^1({\widehat{G}})^{\star} \simeq {\mathcal{L}}_{E^{\star}}^{\infty}({\widehat{G}}) \simeq
cb({\mathcal{L}}^1({\widehat{G}}),E^{\star}) \simeq ({\mathcal{L}}^1({\widehat{G}}) \otimes^{\wedge}
E)^{\star}$ of completely isometric isomorphisms. This completes the proof. [ $\Box$ 0.2cm]{}
For the sake of completeness we introduce the **space $C_0({\widehat{G}},E)$**. It is defined as the collection of those $A \in
\mathcal{L}_E^{\infty}({\widehat{G}})$ satisfying $$\forall \ \ \varepsilon
> 0 \quad \mbox{we have} \quad
\|A^{\pi}\|_{S_{d_{\pi}}^{\infty}(E)} < \varepsilon \quad
\mbox{except for finitely many} \ \ \pi \in {\widehat{G}}.$$ As a subspace of ${\mathcal{L}}_E^{\infty}({\widehat{G}})$ this space inherits a natural operator space structure. The only two results about the spaces ${\mathcal{L}}_E^p({\widehat{G}})$ that fail at $p = \infty$ are the density of ${\mathcal{L}}^p({\widehat{G}}) \otimes E$ in ${\mathcal{L}}_E^p({\widehat{G}})$ and duality, the predual of ${\mathcal{L}}_{E^{\star}}^1({\widehat{G}})$ is not ${\mathcal{L}}_E^{\infty}({\widehat{G}})$. However, it is easy to see the density of $C_0({\widehat{G}}) \otimes E$ in $C_0({\widehat{G}},E)$. On the other hand, the dual of $C_0({\widehat{G}},E)$ is completely isomorphic to ${\mathcal{L}}_{E^{\star}}^1({\widehat{G}})$.
The following is a completely isometric isomorphism $$\begin{array}{crcl} \Lambda: & {\mathcal{L}}_{E^{\star}}^1({\widehat{G}}) &
\longrightarrow & C_0({\widehat{G}},E)^{\star} \\ & A & \longmapsto &
\sum_{\pi \in {\widehat{G}}} d_{\pi} \textnormal{tr} (A^{\pi} \cdot)
\end{array}$$
*Proof*. Taking into account the natural isometric isomorphisms given by $S_n^1({\mathcal{L}}_{E^{\star}}^1({\widehat{G}})) \sim
{\mathcal{L}}_{S_n^{\infty}(E)^{\star}}^1({\widehat{G}})$ and $C_0({\widehat{G}},S_n^{\infty}(E))^{\star} \sim S_n^1(C_0({\widehat{G}},E)^{\star})$ it is enough to see that $\Lambda$ is an isometric isomorphism. We prove this fact in several steps.
**1. $\Lambda$ is a contraction**. This is an obvious consequence of the duality action on the Schatten classes $S_n^p(E)$ $$\begin{aligned}
\|\Lambda(A)\|_{C_0({\widehat{G}},E)^{\star}} & \le & \sup_{\|B\|_{C_0({\widehat{G}},E)}
\le 1} \ \ \sum_{\pi \in {\widehat{G}}} d_{\pi} |\mbox{tr} (A^{\pi} B^{\pi})|
\\ & \le & \sup_{\|B\|_{C_0({\widehat{G}},E)} \le 1} \ \ \sum_{\pi \in {\widehat{G}}}
d_{\pi} \|A^{\pi}\|_{S_{d_{\pi}}^1(E^{\star})}
\|B^{\pi}\|_{S_{d_{\pi}}^{\infty}(E)} \\ & \le &
\|A\|_{{\mathcal{L}}_{E^{\star}}^1({\widehat{G}})}.\end{aligned}$$
**2. $\Lambda$ is an isometry**. Let $A \in
{\mathcal{L}}_{E^{\star}}^1({\widehat{G}})$. For all $\varepsilon > 0$ there exists a finite set $I_{A,\varepsilon} \subset {\widehat{G}}$ such that $$\sum_{\pi \notin I_{A,\varepsilon}} d_{\pi}
\|A^{\pi}\|_{S_{d_{\pi}}^1(E^{\star})} < \varepsilon / 2.$$ Furthermore, for all $\pi \in {\widehat{G}}$ there exists $B_{\varepsilon}^{\pi} \in S_{d_{\pi}}^{\infty}(E)$ of norm $1$ such that $$\mbox{tr} (A^{\pi} B_{\varepsilon}^{\pi}) >
\|A^{\pi}\|_{S_{d_{\pi}}^1(E^{\star})} -
\frac{\varepsilon/2}{|I_{A,\varepsilon}| \displaystyle \max_{\pi
\in I_{A,\varepsilon}} d_{\pi}}$$ where $|I_{A,\varepsilon}|$ denotes the number of elements of $I_{A,\varepsilon}$. Let $C_{\varepsilon}$ be the element of $C_0({\widehat{G}},E)$ of norm $1$ defined by $C_{\varepsilon}^{\pi} = B_{\varepsilon}^{\pi}$ if $\pi
\in I_{A, \varepsilon}$ and $0$ otherwise. This Step is completed by taking $\varepsilon$ arbitrarily small in the expression $$\begin{aligned}
\|\Lambda(A)\|_{C_0({\widehat{G}},E)^{\star}} & \ge & \Big| \sum_{\pi \in {\widehat{G}}}
d_{\pi} \mbox{tr} (A^{\pi} C_{\varepsilon}^{\pi}) \Big| >
\|A\|_{{\mathcal{L}}_{E^{\star}}^1({\widehat{G}})} - \varepsilon.\end{aligned}$$
**3. $\Lambda$ is surjective**. Let $\Phi \in
C_0({\widehat{G}},E)^{\star}$. Then we define $A \in
\mathcal{M}_{E^{\star}}({\widehat{G}})$ by the relation $$A^{\pi} =
\frac{1}{d_{\pi}} \Big( \,\ \Phi(M(\pi,j,i) \otimes \,\ \cdot \,\
) \,\ \Big), \quad \pi \in {\widehat{G}}.$$ As in Proposition \[L-inf\], it can be shown that $\Phi = \Lambda (A)$ with $A \in
{\mathcal{L}}_{E^{\star}}^1({\widehat{G}})$. [ $\Box$ 0.2cm]{}
Fourier type {#section4}
============
Let $E$ be an operator space and let $1 \le p \le 2$. Given $f \in
L^p(G)$ and $e \in E$ it is obvious that the Fourier transform of $f \otimes e$ coincides with $\widehat{f} \otimes e$. Thus, the Hausdorff-Young inequality for compact groups (see [@Ku] or Lemma \[H-Y\] below) provides the relation $\mathcal{F}_{G,E}
(L^p(G) \otimes E) \subset {\mathcal{L}}^{p'}({\widehat{G}}) \otimes E$. This motivates the following definition.
*Let $1 \le p \le 2$ and let $p'$ be the conjugate exponent of $p$. We say that the operator space $E$ has **Fourier type** $p$ with respect to the compact group $G$ if the Fourier transform $\mathcal{F}_{G,E}: L^p(G) \otimes E
\rightarrow {\mathcal{L}}^{p'}({\widehat{G}}) \otimes E$ can be extended to a completely bounded operator $$\Lambda_{G,E,p}^1: L_E^p(G)
\longrightarrow {\mathcal{L}}_E^{p'}({\widehat{G}}).$$ In that case, we shall denote by ${\mathcal{C}}_p^1(E,G)$ the $cb$ norm of $\Lambda_{G,E,p}^1$.*
*If the compact group $G$ is also abelian, there exists already a notion (introduced by Milman in [@M]) of Fourier type of a Banach space with respect to $G$. The only difference with Milman’s notion is that here we require the extended operator to be completely bounded while in the commutative setting, only the boundedness of this operator is required.*
The first natural question that arises after the definition of Fourier type is if the extension of $\mathcal{F}_{G,E}$ is always the natural one. That is, let us suppose that the operator space $E$ has Fourier type $p$ with respect to $G$. Then we wonder if $\Lambda_{G,E,p}^1 (f) = \mathcal{F}_{G,E} (f)$ for all $f \in
L_E^p(G)$.
\[LemmaType1\] $\|\widehat{f}\|_{{\mathcal{L}}_E^{\infty}({\widehat{G}})} \le \|f\|_{L_E^1(G)}$ for all $f \in L_E^1(G)$.
*Proof*. Since $E$ is an operator space we have $E \subset
{\mathcal{B}}({\mathcal{H}})$ for some Hilbert space ${\mathcal{H}}$. Hence, if $\mathbf{h} =
(h_1,h_2,\ldots,h_{d_{\pi}}) \in \ell_{{\mathcal{H}}}^2(d_{\pi})$, we can write $$\begin{aligned}
\|\widehat{f}(\pi)\|_{S_{d_{\pi}}^{\infty}(E)} & = &
\|\widehat{f}(\pi)\|_{{\mathcal{B}}(\ell_{{\mathcal{H}}}^2(d_{\pi}))} \\ & \le &
\sup_{\|\mathbf{h}\|_{\ell_{{\mathcal{H}}}^2(d_{\pi})} \le 1} \Big(
\sum_{i=1}^{d_{\pi}} \big[ \int_G \Big\| f(g) \Big(
\sum_{j=1}^{d_{\pi}} \overline{\pi_{ji}(g)} h_j \Big) \Big\|_{{\mathcal{H}}}
d\mu(g) \big]^2 \Big)^{1/2}.\end{aligned}$$ Applying Minkowski inequality for integrals we get $$\|\widehat{f}(\pi)\|_{S_{d_{\pi}}^{\infty}(E)} \le
\sup_{\|\mathbf{h}\|_{\ell_{{\mathcal{H}}}^2(d_{\pi})} \le 1} \int_G
\|f(g)\|_E \Big( \sum_{i=1}^{d_{\pi}} \big\| \sum_{j=1}^{d_{\pi}}
\overline{\pi_{ji}(g)} h_j \big\|_{{\mathcal{H}}}^2 \Big)^{1/2} d\mu(g).$$ Therefore we just need to check the inequality $$\sup_{\|\mathbf{h}\|_{\ell_{{\mathcal{H}}}^2(d_{\pi})} \le 1} \Big(
\sum_{i=1}^{d_{\pi}} \big\| \sum_{j=1}^{d_{\pi}}
\overline{\pi_{ji}(g)} h_j \big\|_{{\mathcal{H}}}^2 \Big)^{1/2} \le 1$$ for all $\pi \in {\widehat{G}}$ and almost all $g \in G$. But this is a simple consequence of the unitarity of $\pi(g)$ for any $g \in G$. This completes the proof. [ $\Box$ 0.2cm]{}
Let $E$ be an operator space having Fourier type $p$ with respect to $G$. Then $\Lambda_{G,E,p}^1 (f) =
\mathcal{F}_{G,E} (f)$ for all $f \in L_E^p(G)$.
*Proof*. Let $\{f_n\}_{n=1}^{\infty} \subset L^p(G) \otimes
E$ be a sequence convergent to $f$ in the norm of $L_E^p(G)$. Then, applying Lemma \[LemmaType1\], we have $$\begin{aligned}
\lefteqn{\|\Lambda_{G,E,p}^1(f) -
\mathcal{F}_{G,E}(f)\|_{{\mathcal{L}}_E^{\infty}({\widehat{G}})}} \\ & \le &
\|\Lambda_{G,E,p}^1(f - f_n)\|_{{\mathcal{L}}_E^{\infty}({\widehat{G}})} +
\|\mathcal{F}_{G,E}(f_n - f)\|_{{\mathcal{L}}_E^{\infty}({\widehat{G}})} \\ & \le &
\|\Lambda_{G,E,p}^1(f - f_n)\|_{{\mathcal{L}}_E^{p'}({\widehat{G}})} +
\|\mathcal{F}_{G,E}(f_n - f)\|_{{\mathcal{L}}_E^{\infty}({\widehat{G}})} \\ & \le &
{\mathcal{C}}_p^1(E,G) \|f - f_n\|_{L_E^p(G)} + \|f_n - f\|_{L_E^1(G)}
\\ & \le & \big( {\mathcal{C}}_p^1(E,G) + 1 \big) \|f - f_n\|_{L_E^p(G)}\end{aligned}$$ The result follows by taking the limit in $n$. This completes the proof. [ $\Box$ 0.2cm]{}
As it is well-known, every Banach space has Fourier type 1 in the sense of Milman [@M]. In the following result, which extends Lemma \[LemmaType1\], we show that every operator space has Fourier type $1$.
\[Type1\] We have ${\mathcal{C}}^1_1(E,G) = 1$ for every pair $(E,G)$.
*Proof*. Let us denote by $\max B$ the operator space which results when we impose on the Banach space $B$ its max quantization, see Chapter $3$ of [@ER2] for the details. Let $E_1$ and $E_2$ be operator spaces. Then the natural identification $cb((\max B) \otimes^{\wedge} E_1, E_2) \simeq
\mathcal{B}(B, cb(E_1, E_2))$, given by $\Psi(b \otimes e_1) =
\Phi(b)(e_1)$, is a completely isomorphic isomorphism. This follows by the factorization $$cb((\max B) \otimes^{\wedge} E_1,
E_2) \simeq cb(\max B, cb(E_1, E_2)) \simeq \mathcal{B}(B, cb(E_1,
E_2))$$ which is composed of completely isometric isomorphisms, see Chapters $3$ and $7$ of [@ER2]. Therefore, since the space $L_E^1(G)$ can be rewritten as $\max L^1(G) \otimes^{\wedge} E$, we get that $$\mathcal{C}_1^1(E,G) = \sup_{\|f\|_{L^1(G)} \le 1}
\|\widehat{f} \otimes \hspace{2pt} \cdot \hspace{2pt} \|_{cb(E,
\mathcal{L}_E^{\infty}({\widehat{G}}))} \le \sup_{\|f\|_{L^1(G)} \le 1}
\|\widehat{f}\|_{\mathcal{L}^{\infty}({\widehat{G}})} = 1$$ by the Hausdorff-Young inequality on compact groups, see [@Ku] or Lemma \[H-Y\] below. Recall that the supremum is attained taking $f$ to be the constant function $1$. This completes the proof. [ $\Box$ 0.2cm]{}
*There exists an alternative approach to this result using similar arguments to those employed in the proof of Proposition \[CotypeInfinite\].*
The following corollary exhibits the Fourier type as a stronger condition on the pair $(E,G)$ as the exponent $p$ approaches $2$. Its proof follows by means of Proposition \[Type1\] and the complex interpolation method.
Let $1 \le p_1 \le p_2 \le 2$ and assume that the operator space $E$ has Fourier type $p_2$ with respect to $G$. Then $E$ has Fourier type $p_1$ with respect to $G$. Moreover we have ${\mathcal{C}}_{p_1}^1(E,G) \le {\mathcal{C}}_{p_2}^1(E,G)^{p_2'/p_1'}$.
A vector-valued version of the Riemann-Lebesgue lemma on compact groups follows easily from Proposition \[Type1\] and the scalar result.
$\mathcal{F}_{G,E}
(L_E^1(G)) \subset C_0({\widehat{G}},E)$ for every operator space $E$.
Fourier cotype {#section5}
==============
If $G$ is a locally compact abelian group, the Fourier inversion theorem asserts that any $f \in L^1(G)$ such that $\widehat{f} \in
L^1({\widehat{G}})$ can be recovered as $$f(g) = \,\
\widehat{\!\!\widehat{f}} (g^{-1}) \qquad \mbox{for almost every}
\ \ g \in G.$$ Furthermore, if $G$ is compact one can conclude that the operators $\mathcal{F}_G^{-1}$ and $\mathcal{F}_{{\widehat{G}}}$ are essentially the same via the topological isomorphism from $G$ onto its bidual, given by the Pontrjagin duality theorem. In the vector-valued context this means that, in order to study the operator $\mathcal{F}_{G,E}^{-1}$, it suffices to study the Fourier transform $\mathcal{F}_{{\widehat{G}},E}$. For this reason we do not find the concept of Fourier cotype in the commutative theory. However, for a non-commutative compact group $G$, the Fourier inversion theorem and the Pontrjagin duality theorem are no longer valid since the dual object ${\widehat{G}}$ is not even a group. These considerations explain why the study of the inverse operator $\mathcal{F}_{G,E}^{-1}$ should not be a trivial consequence of the analysis of the operator $\mathcal{F}_{G,E}$.
Let $E$ be an operator space and $1 \le p \le 2$. Arguing as in section $\ref{section4}$, we can deduce the relation $\mathcal{F}_{G,E}^{-1} ({\mathcal{L}}^p({\widehat{G}}) \otimes E) \subset L^{p'}(G)
\otimes E$. This follows from Kunze’s result for the inverse Fourier transform on compact groups (see [@Ku] or Lemma $\ref{H-Y}$ below). This motivates the following definition.
*Let $1 \le p \le 2$ and let $p'$ be the conjugate exponent of $p$. We say that the operator space $E$ has **Fourier cotype** $p'$ with respect to the compact group $G$ if the operator $\mathcal{F}_{G,E}^{-1}: {\mathcal{L}}^p({\widehat{G}}) \otimes E
\rightarrow L^{p'}(G) \otimes E$ can be extended to a completely bounded operator $$\Lambda_{G,E,p'}^2: {\mathcal{L}}_E^p({\widehat{G}}) \longrightarrow L_E^{p'}(G).$$ In that case, we shall denote by ${\mathcal{C}}_{p'}^2(E,G)$ the $cb$ norm of $\Lambda_{G,E,p'}^2$.*
*Now it is obvious that, for compact abelian groups, the notion of Fourier cotype is the completely bounded version of Milman’s notion of Fourier type with respect to the dual group ${\widehat{G}}$.*
Plancherel theorem for compact groups gives an explicit formula for the action of $\mathcal{F}_G^{-1}$ on ${\mathcal{L}}^2({\widehat{G}})$ and, by the natural embeddings, also on ${\mathcal{L}}^p({\widehat{G}})$ for $1 \le p \le 2$. It is obvious that this formula remains valid if we take tensor products. Namely, given $1 \le p \le 2$, the action of the operator $\mathcal{F}_{G,E}^{-1}$ on ${\mathcal{L}}^p({\widehat{G}}) \otimes E$ is given by $$A \in {\mathcal{L}}^p({\widehat{G}}) \otimes E \longmapsto \sum_{\pi \in {\widehat{G}}}
d_{\pi} \mbox{tr} (A^{\pi} \pi(\cdot)) \in L^{p'}(G) \otimes E.$$ Therefore, if we want our definition of Fourier cotype to be natural, we need affirmative answers for the following questions.
- *Does the operator $\Lambda_{G,E,p'}^2$ preserve the given explicit formula?* That is, if the operator space $E$ has Fourier cotype $p'$ with respect to $G$, we ask whether for all $A \in {\mathcal{L}}_E^p({\widehat{G}})$ we have $$\Lambda_{G,E,p'}^2(A) =
\sum_{\pi \in {\widehat{G}}} d_{\pi} \mbox{tr} (A^{\pi} \pi(\cdot)).$$ If $A
\in {\mathcal{L}}_E^p({\widehat{G}})$, it has a countable support $I_A =
\{\pi_k\}_{k=1}^{\infty} \subset {\widehat{G}}$. Then we define $A_n \in
{\mathcal{L}}^p({\widehat{G}}) \otimes E$ by the relations $A_n^{\pi} = A^{\pi}$ if $\pi = \pi_k$ for $1 \le k \le n$ and $A_n^{\pi} = 0$ otherwise. Denoting by $$f = \sum_{\pi \in {\widehat{G}}} d_{\pi} \mbox{tr} (A^{\pi}
\pi(\cdot)) \qquad \mbox{and} \qquad f_n = \sum_{\pi \in {\widehat{G}}}
d_{\pi} \mbox{tr} (A_n^{\pi} \pi(\cdot))$$ we obtain that $$\begin{aligned}
\|\Lambda_{G,E,p'}^2(A) - f\|_{L_E^{p'}(G)} & \le &
\|\Lambda_{G,E,p'}^2(A - A_n)\|_{L_E^{p'}(G)} + \|f -
f_n\|_{L_E^{p'}(G)} \\ & \le & C_{p'}^2(E,G) \|A -
A_n\|_{{\mathcal{L}}_E^p({\widehat{G}})} + \|f - f_n\|_{L_E^{p'}(G)}.\end{aligned}$$ The first term of the sum is arbitrarily small as $n$ tends to infinity. For the second term it is not difficult to check that the sequence $\{f_n\}_{n=1}^{\infty}$ is Cauchy. Thus, replacing this sequence if necessary by an appropriate subsequence, we can assume $\|f_{n_2} - f_{n_1}\|_{L_E^{p'}(G)} < 2^{-m}$ for all $n_1, n_2 \ge m$. Hence $$\|f - f_n\|_{L_E^{p'}(G)} \le
\sum_{k=n+1}^{\infty} \|f_k - f_{k-1}\|_{L_E^{p'}(G)} <
\sum_{k=n}^{\infty} \frac{1}{2^k}$$ and $\Lambda_{G,E,p'}^2(A) =
\displaystyle \sum_{\pi \in {\widehat{G}}} d_{\pi} \mbox{tr} (A^{\pi}
\pi(\cdot))$ as we wanted.
- *Does the operator $\Lambda_{G,E,p'}^2$ coincide with the inverse of the vector-valued Fourier transform?* That is, if the operator space $E$ has Fourier cotype $p'$ with respect to $G$, we ask whether for all $A \in {\mathcal{L}}_E^p({\widehat{G}})$ we have $$\mathcal{F}_{G,E} \circ \Lambda_{G,E,p'}^2 (A) = A.$$ Using the same notation as above we just need to see that $\widehat{f} = A$. Given $\pi \in {\widehat{G}}$ we take $n_{\pi}$ to be the smallest positive integer satisfying $\pi \neq \pi_k$ for $k \ge n_{\pi}$. Then it is obvious that $\widehat{f}(\pi) - A^{\pi} = (\widehat{f} -
\widehat{f}_n) (\pi)$ for all $n \ge n_{\pi}$ and therefore it is enough to estimate the entries of that matrix. Namely, $$\begin{aligned}
\big\| \big( (\widehat{f} - \widehat{f}_n) (\pi) \big)_{ij}
\big\|_E & \le & \int_G \|(f -f_n)(g)\|_E |\pi_{ji}(g)| \, d\mu(g)
\\ & \le & \|f - f_n\|_{L_E^{p'}(G)} \, \|\pi_{ji}\|_{L^p(G)} \\
& \le & {\mathcal{C}}_{p'}^2 (E,G) \, \|A - A_n\|_{{\mathcal{L}}_E^p({\widehat{G}})}\end{aligned}$$ which is arbitrarily small for large $n$.
\[CotypeInfinite\] We have ${\mathcal{C}}^2_{\infty}(E,G) =
1$ for every pair $(E,G)$.
*Proof*. By property $1$ of Theorem \[Schatten\] and a density argument, we have to see that for all $n \ge 1$, any family of vectors $A_{ij} \in {\mathcal{L}}^1({\widehat{G}}) \otimes E$ and almost all $g \in G$, we have $$\Big\| \Big( \,\ \sum_{\pi \in {\widehat{G}}} d_{\pi}
\mbox{tr} (A_{ij}^{\pi} \pi(g)) \,\ \Big) \Big\|_{S_n^{\infty}(E)}
\le \Big\| \Big( \,\ A_{ij} \,\ \Big)
\Big\|_{S_n^{\infty}({\mathcal{L}}_E^1({\widehat{G}}))}.$$ If we consider a vector $A
\in {\mathcal{L}}_E^1({\widehat{G}})$ as an element of $cb({\mathcal{L}}^{\infty}({\widehat{G}}), E)$ by the relation $$B \in {\mathcal{L}}^{\infty}({\widehat{G}}) \longmapsto \sum_{\pi \in {\widehat{G}}}
d_{\pi} \mbox{tr} (A^{\pi} B^{\pi}) \in E$$ then it is easy to see that, for $B_g \in {\mathcal{L}}^{\infty}({\widehat{G}})$ defined by $B_g^{\pi} =
\pi(g)$, we have $$\begin{aligned}
\Big\| \Big( \,\ \sum_{\pi \in {\widehat{G}}} d_{\pi} \mbox{tr} (A_{ij}^{\pi}
\pi(g)) \,\ \Big) \Big\|_{S_n^{\infty}(E)} & = & \Big\| \Big( \,\
\sum_{\pi \in {\widehat{G}}} d_{\pi} \mbox{tr} (A_{ij}^{\pi} \cdot) (B_g) \,\
\Big) \Big\|_{S_n^{\infty}(E)} \\ & \le & \Big\| \Big( \,\
\sum_{\pi \in {\widehat{G}}} d_{\pi} \mbox{tr} (A_{ij}^{\pi} \cdot) \,\ \Big)
\Big\|_{cb({\mathcal{L}}^{\infty}({\widehat{G}}),S_n^{\infty}(E))} \\ & \le & \Big\|
\Big( \,\ A_{ij} \,\ \Big) \Big\|_{S_n^{\infty}({\mathcal{L}}^1({\widehat{G}})
\otimes^{\wedge} E)}\end{aligned}$$ where the last inequality follows from the complete contraction given by ${\mathcal{L}}^1({\widehat{G}}) \otimes^{\wedge} E \rightarrow {\mathcal{L}}^1({\widehat{G}})
\otimes_{\mbox{{\tiny min}}} E \rightarrow
cb({\mathcal{L}}^{\infty}({\widehat{G}}),E)$. Finally, we get the desired relation by Corollary \[L-one\]. We have shown that ${\mathcal{C}}_{\infty}^2(E,G) \le
1$. The reverse inequality follows from Corollary \[LowerBound\] below. [ $\Box$ 0.2cm]{}
Let $1 \le p_1 \le p_2 \le 2$ and assume that the operator space $E$ has Fourier cotype $p'_2$ with respect to $G$. Then $E$ has Fourier cotype $p'_1$ with respect to $G$. Moreover we have ${\mathcal{C}}_{p'_1}^2(E,G) \le {\mathcal{C}}_{p'_2}^2(E,G)^{p_2'/p_1'}$.
Duality, $cb$ distance and some other topics {#section6}
============================================
Let $E$ be an operator space. The aim of this section is to study the Fourier type and cotype of some operator spaces related to $E$. We begin by stating the scalar-valued Hausdorff-Young inequality. Recall that we write $\,\ {{\mbox{\Large$\check{\raisebox{.5em}{}}$}}\!\!\!A}$ to denote $\mathcal{F}_G^{-1}(A)$.
\[Hausdorff-Young inequality\] \[H-Y\] Let $1 \le p
\le 2$ and let $p'$ be the conjugate exponent of $p$:
- If $f \in L^p(G)$, then $\widehat{f} \in {\mathcal{L}}^{p'}({\widehat{G}})$ and $\|\mathcal{F}_G\|_{cb(L^p(G),{\mathcal{L}}^{p'}({\widehat{G}}))} =1$.
- If $A \in {\mathcal{L}}^p({\widehat{G}})$, then $\,\ {{\mbox{\Large$\check{\raisebox{.5em}{}}$}}\!\!\!A} \in L^{p'}(G)$ and $\|\mathcal{F}_G^{-1}\|_{cb({\mathcal{L}}^p({\widehat{G}}),L^{p'}(G))} =1$.
Note that this statement of the inequality goes a bit further than Kunze’s original result since we are asserting that the Fourier transform is not only bounded but completely bounded. The proof is straightforward, first one checks that $\mathcal{F}_G$ is a complete contraction from $L^1(G)$ into ${\mathcal{L}}^{\infty}({\widehat{G}})$. But, since $L^1(G)$ is equipped with its max operator space structure, the $cb$ norm coincides with the operator norm, see Chapter $3$ [@ER2]. The same argument works to see that the inverse Fourier transform is a complete contraction from ${\mathcal{L}}^1({\widehat{G}})$ to $L^{\infty}(G)$, now $L^{\infty}(G)$ is equipped with its min operator space structure. These facts can also be justified as simple consequences of Propositions \[Type1\] and \[CotypeInfinite\]. Second, from the Plancherel theorem for compact groups, it is easy to check that $\mathcal{F}_G$ is a complete isometric isomorphism from $L^2(G)$ onto ${\mathcal{L}}^2({\widehat{G}})$. By complex interpolation the general case is obtained and, the fact that the $cb$ norm of the Fourier transform is not smaller than $1$ for any $1 \le p \le 2$ can be checked by testing with the constant function $1$.
Basic results
-------------
We begin by the simplest case. Namely, the Fourier type and cotype of the subspaces of $E$. The following result is a trivial consequence of property $1$ of Theorem \[Schatten\].
\[Subspace\] Let $F$ be a closed subspace of $E$, then we have the estimates ${\mathcal{C}}_p^1(F,G) \le {\mathcal{C}}_p^1(E,G)$ and ${\mathcal{C}}_{q'}^2(F,G) \le {\mathcal{C}}_{q'}^2(E,G)$ for any $1 \le p, q \le 2$.
\[LowerBound\] ${\mathcal{C}}_p^1(E,G) \ge 1$ and ${\mathcal{C}}_{q'}^2(E,G) \ge 1$ for any $1 \le p, q \le 2$.
Now we consider complex interpolation of operator spaces. The proof of the next result is also straightforward.
Let $1 \le p_0, p_1 \le 2$ and assume that $\{E_0, E_1\}$ is compatible for complex interpolation. Then ${\mathcal{C}}_{p_{\theta}}^1(E_{\theta},G) \le {\mathcal{C}}_{p_0}^1(E_0,G)^{1 -
\theta} {\mathcal{C}}_{p_1}^1(E_1,G)^{\theta}$ for $p_{\theta}^{-1} = (1 -
\theta) p_0^{-1} + \theta p_1^{-1}$. A similar result holds for the Fourier cotype.
Duality
-------
The following theorem can be rephrased by saying that Fourier type and cotype are dual notions.
\[Duality\] Let $E$ be an operator space, $1
\le p \le 2$ and $p'$ its conjugate exponent. Then
- $E$ has Fourier type $p$ with respect to a compact group $G$ if and only if $E^{\star}$ has Fourier cotype $p'$ with respect to $G$.
- $E$ has Fourier cotype $p'$ with respect to a compact group $G$ if and only if $E^{\star}$ has Fourier type $p$ with respect to $G$.
Moreover, we have ${\mathcal{C}}_p^1(E,G) = {\mathcal{C}}_{p'}^2(E^{\star},G)$ and ${\mathcal{C}}_p^1(E^{\star},G) = {\mathcal{C}}_{p'}^2(E,G)$.
*Proof*. We just prove the equality ${\mathcal{C}}_p^1(E,G) =
{\mathcal{C}}_{p'}^2(E^{\star},G)$ since the proof of the second identity is essentially the same. The case $p = 1$ follows from Propositions \[Type1\] and \[CotypeInfinite\], thus we assume that $1 < p
\le 2$.
*Step* 1. ${\mathcal{C}}_p^1(E,G) \ge {\mathcal{C}}_{p'}^2(E^{\star},G)$. By a density argument and property $1$ of Theorem \[Schatten\] we just need to check that the following inequality holds $$\Big\|
\Big( \,\ \sum_{\pi \in {\widehat{G}}} d_{\pi} \mbox{tr} (A_{ij}^{\pi}
\pi(\cdot)) \,\ \Big) \Big\|_{S_n^{p'}(L_{E^{\star}}^{p'}(G))} \le
{\mathcal{C}}_p^1(E,G) \ \ \Big\| \Big( \,\ A_{ij} \,\ \Big)
\Big\|_{S_n^{p'}({\mathcal{L}}_{E^{\star}}^p({\widehat{G}}))}$$ for any family $A_{ij}
\in {\mathcal{L}}^p({\widehat{G}}) \otimes E^{\star}$ ($1 \le i,j \le n$) and all $n
\ge 1$. But we have the completely isometric isomorphism $S_n^{p'}(L_{E^{\star}}^{p'}(G)) \simeq
L_{S_n^p(E)^{\star}}^{p'}(G)$. So for all $\varepsilon
> 0$ there exists $f^{\varepsilon} \in L_{S_n^p(E)}^p(G)$ of norm $1$ such that $$\begin{aligned}
\lefteqn{\Big\| \Big( \,\ \sum_{\pi \in {\widehat{G}}} d_{\pi} \mbox{tr}
(A_{ij}^{\pi} \pi(\cdot)) \,\ \Big)
\Big\|_{S_n^{p'}(L_{E^{\star}}^{p'}(G))}} \\ & \le & (1 +
\varepsilon) \, \Big| \int_G \mbox{tr} \Big[ \Big( \,\ \sum_{\pi
\in {\widehat{G}}} d_{\pi} \mbox{tr} (A_{ij}^{\pi} \pi(g)) \,\ \Big) \Big(
\,\ f_{ij}^{\varepsilon}(g) \,\ \Big) \Big] d \mu(g) \Big|\end{aligned}$$ and where $f_{ij}^{\varepsilon}$, the entries of $f^{\varepsilon}$, belong to $L^p(G) \otimes E$. If we denote by $\mathcal{I}$ the integral over $G$ written above, then we would like to prove that $$\mathcal{I} = \sum_{i,j=1}^n \sum_{\pi \in
{\widehat{G}}} d_{\pi} \ \ \int_G \big\langle \mbox{tr} (A_{ij}^{\pi}
\pi(g)), f_{ji}^{\varepsilon}(g) \big\rangle d \mu(g).$$ Taking into account that $A_{ij} \in {\mathcal{L}}^p({\widehat{G}}) \otimes E^{\star}$ and $f_{ij}^{\varepsilon} \in L^p(G) \otimes E$ it suffices to show that the expressions $$\begin{aligned}
\mathcal{I}_1 & = & \int_G \sum_{\pi \in {\widehat{G}}} d_{\pi} \mbox{tr}
(A^{\pi} \pi(g)) \,\ f(g) \,\ d \mu(g) \\ \mathcal{I}_2 & = &
\sum_{\pi \in {\widehat{G}}} d_{\pi} \int_G \mbox{tr} (A^{\pi} \pi(g)) \,\
f(g) \,\ d \mu(g)\end{aligned}$$ coincide for all $A \in {\mathcal{L}}^p({\widehat{G}})$ and all $f \in L^p(G)$. But this is an easy computation that we leave to the reader. In summary we obtain $$\begin{aligned}
\lefteqn{\Big\| \Big( \,\ \sum_{\pi \in {\widehat{G}}} d_{\pi} \mbox{tr}
(A_{ij}^{\pi} \pi(\cdot)) \,\ \Big)
\Big\|_{S_n^{p'}(L_{E^{\star}}^{p'}(G))}} \\ & \le & (1 +
\varepsilon) \, \Big| \sum_{i,j=1}^n \sum_{\pi \in {\widehat{G}}} d_{\pi}
\int_G \big\langle \mbox{tr} (A_{ij}^{\pi} \pi(g)),
f_{ji}^{\varepsilon}(g) \big\rangle d \mu(g) \Big| \\ & = & (1 +
\varepsilon) \, \Big| \sum_{i,j=1}^n \sum_{\pi \in {\widehat{G}}} d_{\pi}
\mbox{tr}\big( \langle A_{ij}^{\pi}, \widehat{\tau
(f_{ji}^{\varepsilon})}(\pi) \rangle \big) \Big| \\ & = & (1 +
\varepsilon) \, \Big| \mbox{tr} \Big[ \Big( \,\ A_{ij} \,\ \Big)
\Big( \,\ \widehat{\tau (f_{ij}^{\varepsilon})} \,\ \Big) \Big]
\Big|\end{aligned}$$ where $\tau(f)(g) = f(g^{-1})$. This step is concluded by the following inequality $$\begin{aligned}
\Big| \mbox{tr} \Big[ \Big( \,\ A_{ij} \,\ \Big) \Big( \,\
\widehat{\tau (f_{ij}^{\varepsilon})} \,\ \Big) \Big] \Big| & \le
& \Big\| \Big( \,\ A_{ij} \,\ \Big)
\Big\|_{S_n^{p'}({\mathcal{L}}_{E^{\star}}^p({\widehat{G}}))} \ \ \Big\| \Big( \,\
\widehat{\tau (f_{ij}^{\varepsilon})} \,\ \Big)
\Big\|_{S_n^p({\mathcal{L}}_E^{p'}({\widehat{G}}))} \\ & \le & {\mathcal{C}}_p^1(E,G) \ \ \Big\|
\Big( \,\ A_{ij} \,\ \Big)
\Big\|_{S_n^{p'}({\mathcal{L}}_{E^{\star}}^p({\widehat{G}}))}
\|f^{\varepsilon}\|_{S_n^p(L_E^p(G))}.\end{aligned}$$
*Step* 2. ${\mathcal{C}}_p^1(E,G) \le {\mathcal{C}}_{p'}^2(E^{\star},G)$. By the same reasons given in Step $1$, it suffices to check that $$\Big\|
\Big( \,\ \widehat{f}_{ij} \,\ \Big)
\Big\|_{S_n^{p'}({\mathcal{L}}_E^{p'}({\widehat{G}}))} \le {\mathcal{C}}_{p'}^2(E^{\star},G) \ \
\Big\| \Big( \,\ f_{ij} \,\ \Big) \Big\|_{S_n^{p'}(L_E^p(G))}$$ for any family $f_{ij} \in L^p(G) \otimes E$ ($1 \le i,j \le n$) and all $n \ge 1$. Given $\varepsilon > 0$, the complete isometry $$S_n^{p'}({\mathcal{L}}_E^{p'}({\widehat{G}})) \simeq {\mathcal{L}}_{S_n^{p'}(E)}^{p'}({\widehat{G}})$$ provides the existence of $\mathbf{A}^{\varepsilon} \in
{\mathcal{L}}_{S_n^p(E^{\star})}^p({\widehat{G}})$ of norm $1$ such that $$\Big\| \Big(
\,\ \widehat{f}_{ij} \,\ \Big) \Big\|_{S_n^{p'}({\mathcal{L}}_E^{p'}({\widehat{G}}))}
\le (1 + \varepsilon) \, \Big| \sum_{\pi \in {\widehat{G}}} d_{\pi} \mbox{tr}
\Big[ \Big( \,\ A_{ij}^{\varepsilon, \pi} \,\ \Big) \Big( \,\
\widehat{f}_{ij}(\pi) \,\ \Big) \Big] \Big|$$ and where $A_{ij}^{\varepsilon}$, the entries of $\mathbf{A}^{\varepsilon}$, belong to ${\mathcal{L}}^p({\widehat{G}}) \otimes E^{\star}$. If $\mathcal{S}$ denotes the sum written above, then we can argue as in Step $1$ to obtain $$\mathcal{S} = \sum_{i,j=1}^n \int_G \big\langle \sum_{\pi \in
{\widehat{G}}} d_{\pi} \mbox{tr} (A_{ij}^{\varepsilon, \pi} \pi(g)^{\star}),
f_{ji}(g) \big\rangle d \mu(g).$$ Therefore $$\begin{aligned}
\Big\| \Big( \,\ \widehat{f}_{ij} \,\ \Big)
\Big\|_{S_n^{p'}({\mathcal{L}}_E^{p'}({\widehat{G}}))} & \le & (1 + \varepsilon) \,
\Big| \sum_{i,j=1}^n \int_G \big\langle
\mathcal{F}_{G,E^{\star}}^{-1} (A_{ij}^{\varepsilon})(g),
f_{ji}(g^{-1}) \big\rangle d \mu(g) \Big| \\ & = & (1 +
\varepsilon) \, \Big| \mbox{tr} \Big[ \Big( \,\
\mathcal{F}_{G,E^{\star}}^{-1} (A_{ij}^{\varepsilon}) \,\ \Big)
\Big( \,\ \tau (f_{ij}) \,\ \Big) \Big] \Big| \\ & \le & (1 +
\varepsilon) \,\ \big\| \mathcal{F}_{G,E^{\star}}^{-1}
(\mathbf{A}^{\varepsilon}) \big\|_{S_n^p(L_E^p(G)^{\star})} \Big\|
\Big( \,\ f_{ij} \,\ \Big) \Big\|_{S_n^{p'}(L_E^p(G))} \\ & = & (1
+ \varepsilon) \,\ \big\| \mathcal{F}_{G,E^{\star}}^{-1}
(\mathbf{A}^{\varepsilon}) \big\|_{S_n^p(L_{E^{\star}}^{p'}(G))}
\Big\| \Big( \,\ f_{ij} \,\ \Big) \Big\|_{S_n^{p'}(L_E^p(G))} \\ &
\le & (1 + \varepsilon) \,\ {\mathcal{C}}_{p'}^2(E^{\star},G) \,\ \Big\|
\Big( \,\ f_{ij} \,\ \Big) \Big\|_{S_n^{p'}(L_E^p(G))}\end{aligned}$$ The proof is completed by taking $\varepsilon$ arbitrarily small. [ $\Box$ 0.2cm]{}
*There exists another possible approach to this result. Namely, $E$ has Fourier type $p$ if and only if the corresponding Fourier transform operator is completely bounded. But then, by Proposition $3.2.2$ of [@ER2], the adjoint operator is also completely bounded with the same $cb$ norm. Moreover, it can be checked that the adjoint coincides with the inverse of the Fourier transform for functions taking values in $E^{\star}$. This gives the first equality of Theorem \[Duality\]. The second equality follows in a similar fashion.*
${\mathcal{C}}_p^1(E,G) = {\mathcal{C}}_p^1(E^{\star
\star},G)$ and ${\mathcal{C}}_{p'}^2(E,G) = {\mathcal{C}}_{p'}^2(E^{\star \star},G)$.
The $cb$ distance
-----------------
There exists a natural analog in the category of operator spaces of the Banach-Mazur distance, due to Pisier. It is called the $cb$ distance and it is defined by $$d_{cb} (E_1,E_2) = \inf
\{\|u\|_{cb(E_1,E_2)} \|u^{-1}\|_{cb(E_2,E_1)}\}$$ where the infimum runs over all complete isomorphisms $u: E_1 \rightarrow
E_2$.
\[Local\] Let $E_1$ and $E_2$ be operator spaces and let $G$ be a compact group. Then the following inequalities hold for $1 \le p \le 2$ $$\begin{aligned}
{\mathcal{C}}_p^1(E_2,G) & \le & d_{cb}(E_1,E_2) \,\ {\mathcal{C}}_p^1(E_1,G) \\
{\mathcal{C}}_{p'}^2(E_2,G) & \le & d_{cb}(E_1,E_2) \,\ {\mathcal{C}}_{p'}^2(E_1,G) \\
{\mathcal{C}}_p^1(E_2,G) & \le & d_{cb}(E_1,E_2^{\star}) \,\
{\mathcal{C}}_{p'}^2(E_1,G) \\ {\mathcal{C}}_{p'}^2(E_2,G) & \le &
d_{cb}(E_1,E_2^{\star}) \,\ {\mathcal{C}}_p^1(E_1,G).\end{aligned}$$
*Proof*. The last two inequalities follow from the first two ones plus duality. Let us assume that the first inequality holds, then the second inequality is also an immediate consequence of Theorem \[Duality\] $$\begin{aligned}
{\mathcal{C}}_{p'}^2(E_2,G) & = & {\mathcal{C}}_p^1(E_2^{\star},G) \,\ \le \,\
d_{cb}(E_1^{\star},E_2^{\star}) \,\ {\mathcal{C}}_p^1(E_1^{\star},G) \\ & =
& d_{cb}(E_1^{\star},E_2^{\star}) \,\ {\mathcal{C}}_{p'}^2(E_1,G) \,\ = \,\
d_{cb}(E_1,E_2) \,\ {\mathcal{C}}_{p'}^2(E_1,G)\end{aligned}$$ where we have applied the identity $\|u\|_{cb(E_1,E_2)} =
\|u^{\star}\|_{cb(E_2^{\star},E_1^{\star})}$ to justify the equality $d_{cb}(E_1^{\star},E_2^{\star}) = d_{cb}(E_1,E_2)$, see [@ER2] for details. Therefore we will be done if we prove the validity of the first inequality. For that it suffices to see $$\Big\| \Big( \,\ \widehat{f}_{ij} \,\ \Big)
\Big\|_{S_n^{p'}({\mathcal{L}}_{E_2}^{p'}({\widehat{G}}))} \le \|u\|_{cb} \,\
\|u^{-1}\|_{cb} \,\ {\mathcal{C}}_p^1(E_1,G) \,\ \Big\| \Big( \,\ f_{ij} \,\
\Big) \Big\|_{S_n^{p'}(L_{E_2}^p(G))}$$ for any family $f_{ij} \in
L^p(G) \otimes E_2$ ($1 \le i,j \le n$), any complete isomorphism $u: E_1 \rightarrow E_2$ and all $n \ge 1$. But $$\begin{aligned}
\lefteqn{\Big\| \Big( \,\ \widehat{f}_{ij} \,\ \Big)
\Big\|_{S_n^{p'}({\mathcal{L}}_{E_2}^{p'}({\widehat{G}}))} = \Big( \sum_{\pi \in {\widehat{G}}}
d_{\pi} \Big\| \Big( \,\ \widehat{f}_{ij}(\pi) \,\ \Big)
\Big\|_{S_{d_{\pi}n}^{p'}(E_2)}^{p'} \Big)^{1/p'}} \\ & \le &
\|u\|_{cb} \,\ \Big( \sum_{\pi \in {\widehat{G}}} d_{\pi} \Big\|
(I_{M_{d_{\pi}n}} \otimes u^{-1}) \Big( \,\ \widehat{f}_{ij}(\pi)
\,\ \Big) \Big\|_{S_{d_{\pi}n}^{p'}(E_1)}^{p'} \Big)^{1/p'} \\ & =
& \|u\|_{cb} \,\ \Big\| \Big( \,\ \mathcal{F}_{G, E_1} \big(
(I_{L^p(G)} \otimes u^{-1}) (f_{ij}) \big) \,\ \Big)
\Big\|_{{\mathcal{L}}_{S_n^{p'}(E_1)}^{p'}({\widehat{G}})}
\\ & \le & \|u\|_{cb} \,\ {\mathcal{C}}_p^1(E_1,G) \,\ \Big\| \Big( \,\
(I_{L^p(G)} \otimes u^{-1}) (f_{ij}) \,\ \Big)
\Big\|_{S_n^{p'}(L_{E_1}^p(G))} \\ & \le & \|u\|_{cb} \,\
{\mathcal{C}}_p^1(E_1,G) \,\ \|I_{L^p(G)} \otimes u^{-1}\|_{cb} \,\ \Big\|
\Big( \,\ f_{ij} \,\ \Big) \Big\|_{S_n^{p'}(L_{E_2}^p(G))} \\ & =
& \|u\|_{cb} \,\ \|u^{-1}\|_{cb} \,\ {\mathcal{C}}_p^1(E_1,G) \,\ \Big\|
\Big( \,\ f_{ij} \,\ \Big) \Big\|_{S_n^{p'}(L_{E_2}^p(G))}.\end{aligned}$$ This completes the proof. [ $\Box$ 0.2cm]{}
We recall here that, if $\mathcal{OS}_n$ denote the class of all $n$-dimensional operator spaces, Pisier proved the estimate $d_{cb}(E,OH_n) \le \sqrt{n}$ for any operator space $E \in
\mathcal{OS}_n$. Here $OH_n$ denotes the $n$-dimensional operator Hilbert space $OH$, see [@P1]. Therefore, by taking $E_1 =
l^2(n)$ in Theorem \[Local\] and invoking the results of the next section, we get the following result.
We have ${\mathcal{C}}_2^1(E,G), \,\ {\mathcal{C}}_2^2(E,G) \le \sqrt{n}$ for any $E
\in \mathcal{OS}_n$.
Basic examples {#section7}
==============
We study here the Fourier type and cotype of Lebesgue spaces, Schatten classes and their vector-valued versions. We start with the statement of some inequalities of Minkowski type in the operator space setting.
If $1 \le p_1 \le p_2 \le \infty$ and the measure spaces $(\Omega_1, \mathcal{M}_1, \nu_1)$, $(\Omega_2, \mathcal{M}_2,
\nu_2)$ are $\sigma$-finite, then the classical Minkowski inequality for integrals asserts that the natural map $$L_{L^{p_2}(\Omega_2)}^{p_1}(\Omega_1) \longrightarrow
L_{L^{p_1}(\Omega_1)}^{p_2}(\Omega_2)$$ is contractive. The same happens if our functions $f: \Omega_1 \times \Omega_2 \rightarrow
E$ take values in a Banach space $E$. We are interested in the complete boundedness of this operator and some others in which we replace the Lebesgue spaces $L^p(\Omega)$ by the Schatten classes $S_n^p$. For this purpose, by complex interpolation, it suffices to check the cases $p_1 = p_2$ and $(p_1,p_2) = (1,\infty)$. The first case follows from the Fubini type results stated in Theorem \[Schatten\]. The second case reduces to see that the natural map $E_1 \otimes^{\wedge} (E_2 \otimes_{\mbox{{\tiny min}}} E_3)
\rightarrow (E_1 \otimes^{\wedge} E_2) \otimes_{\mbox{{\tiny
min}}} E_3$ is a complete contraction. The proof of this result can be found in Theorem $8.1.10$ of [@ER2]. In summary we can state the following results.
\[Quantized Minkowski inequalities\] \[Minkowski\] Let us consider an operator space $E$ and let $1 \le p_1 \le p_2
\le \infty$.
- *Lebesgue spaces*. Let $(\Omega_1,
\mathcal{M}_1, \nu_1)$ and $(\Omega_2, \mathcal{M}_2, \nu_2)$ be $\sigma$-finite measure spaces. Then the following natural map is a complete contraction $$L_{L_E^{p_2}(\Omega_2)}^{p_1}(\Omega_1)
\longrightarrow L_{L_E^{p_1}(\Omega_1)}^{p_2}(\Omega_2).$$
- *Schatten classes*. Let $k_1,
k_2 \ge1$, then the following natural map is a complete contraction $$S_{k_1}^{p_1}(S_{k_2}^{p_2}(E)) \longrightarrow
S_{k_2}^{p_2}(S_{k_1}^{p_1}(E)).$$
- *Combined results*. Let $(\Omega, \mathcal{M},
\nu)$ be a measure space and $k \ge 1$. Then the following natural maps are complete contractions $$S_k^{p_1}(L_E^{p_2}(\Omega))
\longrightarrow L_{S_k^{p_1}(E)}^{p_2}(\Omega) \ \ \ \ \
\mbox{and} \ \ \ \ \ L_{S_k^{p_2}(E)}^{p_1}(\Omega)
\longrightarrow S_k^{p_2}(L_E^{p_1}(\Omega)).$$
*The arguments sketched above in order to prove Theorem \[Minkowski\] need extra hypotheses. A different proof, without those unnecessary hypotheses, can be found in the Thesis [@Pa] of the second-named author.*
In the study of the Fourier type of a Banach space with respect to a locally compact abelian group, Andersson [@A] gave the following version of Minkowski inequality for regular measures. We recall that our notion of regular measure is the same as the one given in [@C].
\[Andersson\] \[Andersson\] Let $1 \le p_1 \le p_2
< \infty$ and assume that $(\Omega_1, \mathcal{M}_1, \nu_1)$ and $(\Omega_2, \mathcal{M}_2, \nu_2)$ are regular measure spaces. Let us denote by $H$ the space of functions $f: \Omega_1 \times
\Omega_2 \rightarrow {\mathbb{C}}$ such that $|f|$ is bounded lower semicontinuous and $\|f_{\omega_2}\|_{L^{p_1}(\Omega_1)}$ is bounded in $\Omega_2$. Then the following natural map is contractive $$L_{L^{p_2}(\Omega_2)}^{p_1}(\Omega_1) \cap H
\longrightarrow L_{L^{p_1}(\Omega_1)}^{p_2}(\Omega_2) \cap H.$$
Let us note that, if $(\Omega, \mathcal{M}, \nu)$ denotes a regular measure space and we take $\Omega_1 = G$ and $\Omega_2 =
\Omega$ in Proposition \[Andersson\], then the space $C_c(G
\times \Omega)$ of continuous functions with compact support, defined on $G \times \Omega$ and with values in ${\mathbb{C}}$, is contained in the space $H$. Hence, by the density of $C_c(G \times \Omega)$ in $L_{L^{p_2}(\Omega)}^{p_1}(G)$ and $L_{L^{p_1}(G)}^{p_2}(\Omega)$, we deduce that the natural map $$L_{L^{p_2}(\Omega)}^{p_1}(G) \longrightarrow
L_{L^{p_1}(G)}^{p_2}(\Omega)$$ is a contraction whenever $1 \le
p_1 \le p_2 < \infty$. Then, by the same arguments that we gave in the proof of Theorem \[Minkowski\], we conclude that we have in fact a complete contraction. Furthermore, the same happens if we take $\Omega_1 = \Omega$ and $\Omega_2 = G$. Therefore we have shown the validity of the following result, which we enunciate for vector-valued functions since its proof is analogous.
\[Regular\] Let $1 \le p_1 \le p_2
< \infty$ and assume that $E$ is an operator space, $G$ is a compact group and $(\Omega, \mathcal{M}, \nu)$ is a regular measure space. Then the following natural maps are complete contractions $$L_{L_E^{p_2}(\Omega)}^{p_1}(G) \longrightarrow
L_{L_E^{p_1}(G)}^{p_2}(\Omega) \qquad \mbox{and} \qquad
L_{L_E^{p_2}(G)}^{p_1}(\Omega) \longrightarrow
L_{L_E^{p_1}(\Omega)}^{p_2}(G).$$
\[BochnerLebesgue\] Let $1 \le p, q \le 2$ and assume that $E$ is an operator space having Fourier type $p$ and Fourier cotype $q'$ with respect to a compact group $G$. Let $(\Omega, \mathcal{M}, \nu)$ be a regular or $\sigma$-finite measure space. Then
- $L_E^r(\Omega)$ has Fourier type $p$ with respect to $G$ for all $p \le r \le p'$.
- $L_E^s(\Omega)$ has Fourier cotype $q'$ with respect to $G$ for all $q \le s \le q'$.
Moreover, ${\mathcal{C}}_p^1(L_E^r(\Omega),G) = {\mathcal{C}}_p^1(E,G)$ and ${\mathcal{C}}_{q'}^2(L_E^s(\Omega),G) = {\mathcal{C}}_{q'}^2(E,G)$.
*Proof*. We start by proving the relation ${\mathcal{C}}_p^1(L_E^r(\Omega),G) = {\mathcal{C}}_p^1(E,G)$. For $p = 1$ we just need to apply Proposition \[Type1\]. Thus we assume that $1 < p
\le 2$. The inequality ${\mathcal{C}}_p^1(L_E^r(\Omega),G) \ge {\mathcal{C}}_p^1(E,G)$ follows from Proposition \[Subspace\] and, by complex interpolation, it then suffices to see that ${\mathcal{C}}_p^1(L_E^r(\Omega),G) \le {\mathcal{C}}_p^1(E,G)$ for $r = p$ and $r =
p'$. For $r = p$ we observe that the natural map $$L_{{\mathcal{L}}_E^{p'}({\widehat{G}})}^p(\Omega) \longrightarrow
{\mathcal{L}}_{L_E^p(\Omega)}^{p'}({\widehat{G}})$$ is a complete contraction. The proof of this fact is similar to that of Theorem \[Minkowski\]. In particular we have $$\begin{aligned}
\Big\| \Big( \,\ \widehat{f}_{ij} \,\ \Big)
\Big\|_{S_n^p({\mathcal{L}}_{L_E^p(\Omega)}^{p'}({\widehat{G}}))} & \le & \Big\| \Big(
\,\ \widehat{f}_{ij} \,\ \Big)
\Big\|_{L_{S_n^p({\mathcal{L}}_E^{p'}({\widehat{G}}))}^p(\Omega)} \\ & \le &
{\mathcal{C}}_p^1(E,G) \,\ \Big\| \Big( \,\ f_{ij} \,\ \Big)
\Big\|_{S_n^p(L_{L_E^p(\Omega)}^p(G))}.\end{aligned}$$ For $r = p'$ we use Theorem \[Minkowski\] or Lemma \[Regular\], depending on the measure space $(\Omega,
\mathcal{M}, \nu)$, to get the desired relation $$\begin{aligned}
\Big\| \Big( \,\ \widehat{f}_{ij} \,\ \Big)
\Big\|_{S_n^{p'}({\mathcal{L}}_{L_E^{p'}(\Omega)}^{p'}({\widehat{G}}))} & \le &
{\mathcal{C}}_p^1(E,G) \,\ \Big\| \Big( \,\ f_{ij} \,\ \Big)
\Big\|_{L_{S_n^{p'}(L_E^p(G))}^{p'}(\Omega)} \\ & \le &
{\mathcal{C}}_p^1(E,G) \,\ \Big\| \Big( \,\ f_{ij} \,\ \Big)
\Big\|_{S_n^{p'}(L_{L_E^{p'}(\Omega)}^p(G))}.\end{aligned}$$ The proof of the inequality ${\mathcal{C}}_{q'}^2(L_E^s(\Omega),G) \le
{\mathcal{C}}_{q'}^2(E,G)$ is analogous. [ $\Box$ 0.2cm]{}
*The proof of Theorem \[BochnerLebesgue\] for scalar-valued Lebesgue spaces is much simpler. Namely, one only has to see that $L^2(\Omega)$ has Fourier type $2$ and then the result follows by duality and complex interpolation with the trivial cases $p = 1$ and $p = \infty$. But the case $p = 2$ is a simple consequence of Plancherel theorem on compact groups.*
It is well known that the dual of $L_E^p(\Omega)$ is not in general $L_{E^{\star}}^{p'}(\Omega)$. However it is so when the dual $E^{\star}$ possesses the Radon Nikodym property $RNP$. In [@P2] Pisier developed an operator space version of the Radon Nikodym property which he called $ORNP$. The following corollary, which is a very simple consequence of Theorems \[Duality\] and \[BochnerLebesgue\], shows that both spaces have the same Fourier type and cotype even if $E^{\star}$ does not satisfy the $ORNP$.
Let $1 \le p, q \le 2$ and assume that $E$ is an operator space having Fourier type $p$ and Fourier cotype $q'$ with respect to a compact group $G$. Let $(\Omega, \mathcal{M}, \nu)$ be a regular or $\sigma$-finite measure space. Then we have
- ${\mathcal{C}}_q^1(L_E^s(\Omega)^{\star},G) =
{\mathcal{C}}_q^1(L_{E^{\star}}^{s'}(\Omega),G)$ for all $q \le s \le q'$.
- ${\mathcal{C}}_{p'}^2(L_E^r(\Omega)^{\star},G) =
{\mathcal{C}}_{p'}^2(L_{E^{\star}}^{r'}(\Omega),G)$ for all $p \le r \le
p'$.
We now study the Fourier type and cotype of Schatten classes. We will denote by $S^p$ the infinite-dimensional Schatten class of exponent $p$. The definition and properties of the vector-valued version of $S^p$ are similar to the finite-dimensional case, see Chapter $1$ of [@P2]. We omit the proof of the following result since the arguments to be used can be found in the proof of Theorem \[BochnerLebesgue\].
\[PisierSchatten\] Let $1 \le p, q \le 2$ and assume that $E$ is an operator space having Fourier type $p$ and Fourier cotype $q'$ with respect to a compact group $G$. Then
- $S^r(E)$ has Fourier type $p$ with respect to $G$ for all $p \le r \le p'$.
- $S^s(E)$ has Fourier cotype $q'$ with respect to $G$ for all $q \le s \le q'$.
Moreover, ${\mathcal{C}}_p^1(S^r(E),G) = {\mathcal{C}}_p^1(E,G)$ and ${\mathcal{C}}_{q'}^2(S^s(E),G) = {\mathcal{C}}_{q'}^2(E,G)$.
*We already know that the Fourier type and cotype become stronger conditions on the pair $(E,G)$ as $p$ and $p'$ approach $2$. This gives rise to the notions of sharp Fourier type and cotype exponents. The problem of finding the sharp exponents of a given operator space is highly non-trivial even for the simplest case of Lebesgue spaces or Schatten classes. Part of this problem is solved in [@GMP]. Namely, if $1 \le p \le 2$ and $(\Omega,
\mathcal{M}, \nu)$ is not the union of finitely many $\nu$-atoms, then we show that $L^p(\Omega)$ has sharp Fourier type $p$ with respect to any compact semisimple Lie group. By duality we also get that $L^{p'}(\Omega)$ has sharp Fourier cotype $p'$ for those groups. By the nature of $\Omega$ and Proposition \[Subspace\] we have $$\mathcal{C}_q^1(L^p(\Omega),G) \ge \lim_{n \rightarrow
\infty} \,\ \mathcal{C}_q^1(l^p(n),G)$$ for $1 \le p < q \le 2$. Moreover, Theorem \[Local\] gives $\mathcal{C}_q^1(l^p(n),G) \le
n^{1/p - 1/q}$. The main result of [@GMP] asserts that there exists a positive constant $\mathcal{K}(G,q)$, such that $\mathcal{K}(G,q) \,\ n^{1/p - 1/q} \le \mathcal{C}_q^1(l^p(n),G)
\le n^{1/p - 1/q}$ for all $n \ge 1$ and any compact semisimple $G$. The constant $\mathcal{K}(G,q)$ can be defined as $$\mathcal{K}(G,q) = \inf_{n \ge 1} \sup \left\{
\frac{\|\widehat{f}\|_{\mathcal{L}^{q'}({\widehat{G}})}}{\|f\|_{L^q(G)}}: \,\
f \ \ \mbox{central}, \ \ f \in L^q(G), \ \ \mbox{supp}(f) \subset
\mathcal{U}_n \right\}$$ where $\{\mathcal{U}_n: n \ge 1\}$ denotes a neighborhood basis at the identity of $G$. The interesting point lies in the inequality $\mathcal{K}(G,q) > 0$ which constitutes a local variant of the Hausdorff-Young inequality on $G$ with parameter $q$. The proof obtained for this local inequality is based upon the semisimplicity of $G$ since it uses the very well-developed theory of representations on such kind of groups. The need to use these algebraic techniques forced us to present the proof of this result in a separate work, see [@GMP].*
[10]{} <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">M.E. Andersson</span>, On the vector valued Hausdorff-Young inequality, *Ark. Mat.* $36$ ($1998$) 1-30. <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">D.P. Blecher and V.I. Paulsen</span>, Tensor Products of Operator Spaces, *J. Funct. Anal.* $99$ ($1991$) 262-292. <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">J. Bourgain</span>, A Hausdorff-Young inequality for $B$-convex Banach spaces, *Pacific J. Math.* $101$ ($1982$) 255-262. <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">J. Bourgain</span>, Vector-valued Hausdorff-Young inequality and applications, *Geometric aspects of functional analysis* (eds J. Lindenstrauss and V.D. Milman), Lecture Notes in Mathematics $1317$ (Springer, Berlin, $1988$), pp. 239-249. <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">D.L. Cohn</span>, *Measure Theory* (Birkhäuser, Boston, $1980$). <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">J. Dixmier</span>, Formes linéaires sur un anneau d’operateurs, *Bull. Soc. Math. France* $81$ ($1953$) 9-39. <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">E.G. Effros and Z.J. Ruan</span>, A New Approach to Operator Spaces, *Canad. Math. Bull.* $34$ ($1991$) 329-337. <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">E.G. Effros and Z.J. Ruan</span>, *Operator Spaces*, London Math. Soc. Monogr. $23$, (Oxford Univ. Press, New York, $2000$). <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">G.B. Folland</span>, *A Course in Abstract Harmonic Analysis*, Stud. Adv. Math. (CRC Press, Boca Raton, $1995$). <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">J. García-Cuerva, K. Kazarian, V. Kolyada and J.L. Torrea</span>, Vector-valued Hausdorff-Young inequality and applications, *Russian Math. Surveys* ($3$) $53$ ($1998$) 435-513. <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">J. García-Cuerva, K. Kazarian and V. Kolyada</span>, Paley type inequalities for orthogonal series with vector-valued coefficients, *Acta Mat. Hungarica* $90$ (2001) 151-183. <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">J. García-Cuerva, J.M. Marco and J. Parcet</span>, Sharp Fourier type and cotype with respect to compact semisimple Lie groupsTrans. Amer. Math. Soc. 355 (2003), 3591-3609. <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">J. García-Cuerva and J. Parcet</span>, Quantized orthonormal systems: A non-commutative Kwapień theorem, *Studia Math.* $155$ ($2003$) 273-294. <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">H. König</span>, On Fourier coefficients of vector-valued functions, *Math. Nachr.* $152$ ($1991$) 215-227. <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">R.A. Kunze</span>, $L_p$ Fourier transforms on locally compact unimodular groups, *Trans. Amer. Math Soc.* $89$ ($1958$) 519-540. <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">S. Kwapień</span>, Isomorphic characterizations of inner product spaces by orthogonal series with vector valued coefficients, *Studia Math.* $44$ ($1972$) 583-595. <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">M. Milman</span>, Complex interpolation and geometry of Banach spaces, *Ann. Mat. Pura Appl.* $136$ ($1984$) 317-328. <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">J. Parcet</span>, *Análisis armónico no conmutativo y geometría de espacios de operadores*. Ph.D. Thesis (2003). <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">J. Peetre</span>, Sur la trasnformation de Fourier des fonctions à valeurs vectorielles, *Rend. Sem. Mat.*, Univ. Padova, $42$ ($1969$) 15-26. <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">G. Pisier</span>, The Operator Hilbert Space OH, Complex Interpolation and Tensor Norms, *Mem. Amer. Math. Soc.* $122$ ($1996$) 1-103. <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">G. Pisier</span>, Non-Commutative Vector Valued $L_p$-Spaces and Completely $p$-Summing Maps, *Astérisque* (Soc. Math. France) $247$ ($1998$) 1-111. <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Z.J. Ruan</span>, Subspaces of $C^{\star}$-algebras, *J. Funct. Anal.* $76$ ($1988$) 217-230. <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">I.E. Segal</span>, An extension of Plancherel’s formula to separable unimodular groups, *Ann. of Math.* $52$ ($1950$) 272-292. <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">I.E. Segal</span>, A noncommutative extension of abstract integration, *Ann. of Math.* $57$ ($1953$) 401-457.
\
${}$\
`[email protected]`\
`[email protected]`
[^1]: 2000 [*Mathematics Subject Classification*]{}: 43A77, 46L07.
[^2]: Research supported in part by the TMR Network ‘Harmonic Analysis’.
[^3]: Research supported in part by Project BFM 2001/0189, Spain.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: |
Orlicz spaces are generalizations of Lebesgue spaces. The sufficient and necessary conditions for generalized Hölder’s inequality in Lebesgue spaces and in weak Lebesgue spaces are well known. The aim of this paper is to present sufficient and necessary conditions for generalized Hölder’s inequality in Orlicz spaces and in weak Orlicz spaces, which are obtained through estimates for characteristic functions of balls in ${{\mathbb R}}^n$.
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">2010 Mathematics Subject Classification.</span> Primary 26D15; Secondary 46B25, 46E30.
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Keywords and phrases.</span> Generalized Hölder’s inequality, Orlicz spaces, Weak Orlicz spaces.
address:
- '${}^{1}$Analysis and Geometry Group, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences, Bandung Institute of Technology, Jl. Ganesha 10, Bandung 40132, Indonesia'
- '${}^{2}$Department of Mathematics Education, Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia, Jl. Dr. Setiabudi 229, Bandung 40154, Indonesia.'
- '${}^{3}$Analysis and Geometry Group, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences, Bandung Institute of Technology, Jl. Ganesha 10, Bandung 40132, Indonesia'
- '${}^{A}$*Permanent Address*: Department of Mathematics, Hasanuddin University, Jl. Perintis Kemerdekaan KM 10, Makassar 90245, Indonesia'
- '${}^{4}$Analysis and Geometry Group, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences, Bandung Institute of Technology, Jl. Ganesha 10, Bandung 40132, Indonesia'
author:
- 'Ifronika${}^{1}$'
- 'A.A. Masta${}^{2}$'
- 'M. Nur${}^{3,A}$'
- 'H. Gunawan${}^{4}$'
title: 'Generalized Hölder’s Inequality in Orlicz Spaces'
---
[^1]
Introduction and Preliminaries
==============================
Orlicz spaces are generalizations of Lebesgue spaces which were introduced by Z.W. Birnbaum and W. Orlicz in 1931 [@Orlicz]. Let us first recall the definition of Young function, Orlicz spaces, and weak Orlicz spaces. A function $\Phi:[0,\infty)\to [0,\infty)$ is called *a Young function* if $\Phi$ is convex, left-continuous, $\Phi(0) = 0$, and $\lim \limits_{t\to\infty}
\Phi(t) = \infty$.
Let $\Phi$ be a Young function, we define *the Orlicz space* $L_\Phi({{\mathbb R}}^n)$ to be the set of measurable functions $f : {{\mathbb R}}^n \rightarrow \mathbb{R}$ such that $$\int_{{{\mathbb R}}^n} \Phi ( a|f(x)|) dx < \infty$$ for some $a > 0$. The Orlicz space $L_\Phi({{\mathbb R}}^n)$ is a Banach space with respect to the norm $$\| f \|_{L_\Phi({{\mathbb R}}^n)} := \inf \left\{ {b>0:
\int_{{{\mathbb R}}^n}\Phi \left(\frac{|f(x)|}{b} \right) dx \leq1}\right\}$$ (see [@Christian; @Luxemburg]). Note that, if we take an arbitrary $f \in L_\Phi({{\mathbb R}}^n)$, then there exists $b >0$ such that $\int_{{{\mathbb R}}^n} \Phi \Bigl(\frac{|f(x)|}{b}\Bigr) dx \leq 1$. If $\Phi(t) := t^p$ for some $ 1 \leq p < \infty$ then $L_\Phi({{\mathbb R}}^n)=L^p(\mathbb{R}^n)$. Thus, the Orlicz space $L_\Phi({{\mathbb R}}^n)$ can be viewed as a generalization of Lebesgue space $L^p(\mathbb{R}^n)$.
On the other hand, for $\Phi$ is a Young function, *the weak Orlicz space* $wL_{\Phi}(\mathbb{R}^n)$ is the set of measurable functions $f : \mathbb{R}^n \rightarrow \mathbb{R} $ such that $$\| f \|_{wL_\Phi(\mathbb{R}^n)} := \inf \left\{ {b>0:
\mathop {\sup }\limits_{t > 0} \Phi(t) \Bigl| \Bigl\{ x \in \mathbb{R}^n : \frac{|f(x)|}{b} > t \Bigr\}
\Bigr| \leq1}\right\} < \infty.$$
[Remark]{}. Note that $\| \cdot \|_{wL_\Phi(\mathbb{R}^n)}$ defines a quasi-norm in $wL_{\Phi}(\mathbb{R}^n)$, and that $(wL_{\Phi}(\mathbb{R}^n),\| \cdot \|_{wL_\Phi(\mathbb{R}^n)})$ forms a quasi-Banach space (see [@Bekjan; @Yong]).
The relation between Orlicz spaces and weak Orlicz spaces is clear, as presented in the following theorem.
\[theorem:1\][@Yong] Let $\Phi$ be a Young function. Then $L_{\Phi}(\mathbb{R}^n) \subset wL_{\Phi}(\mathbb{R}^n)$ with $$\| f \|_{wL_\Phi(\mathbb{R}^n)} \leq \| f \|_{L_\Phi(\mathbb{R}^n)},$$for every $f\in L_\Phi(\mathbb{R}^n)$.
The study of Orlicz spaces and weak Orlicz spaces were widely investigated during last decades, see [@Kufner; @Ning; @Luxemburg; @Lech; @Masta1; @Oneil]. In 1965, O’Neil [@Oneil] obtained sufficient and necessary conditions for the Hölder’s inequality in Orlicz spaces, as in the following theorem.\
\[theorem:1.1\] Let $\Phi_i$ be Young functions and $ \Phi_{i}^{-1}(s)=\inf \{r \geq 0 :
\Phi_i (r) > s \}$ for $i=1,2,3$. Then the following statements are equivalent:
There exists a constant $C>0$ such that for all $ t \geq 0$ we have $$\Phi_{1}^{-1}(t)\Phi_{2}^{-1}(t) \leq C \Phi_{3}^{-1}(t).$$
[(2)]{} There exists a constant $C>0$ such that for all $s, t \ge 0$, $$\Phi_{3} \Bigl(\frac{st}{C}\Bigr) \leq \Phi_1(s) +\Phi_2(t).$$
[(3)]{} There exists a constant $M>0$ such that $$\| f g \|_{L_{\Phi_3}({{\mathbb R}}^n)} \leq M\| f\|_{L_{\Phi_1}({{\mathbb R}}^n)}
\| g\|_{L_{\Phi_2}({{\mathbb R}}^n)}$$ for every $f \in L_{\Phi_1}({{\mathbb R}}^n)$ and $g \in L_{\Phi_2}({{\mathbb R}}^n)$.
[(4)]{} For every $f \in L_{\Phi_1}({{\mathbb R}}^n)$ and $g \in L_{\Phi_2}({{\mathbb R}}^n)$, then $fg \in L_{\Phi_3}({{\mathbb R}}^n)$.
In 2016, Masta *et al.* [@Masta2] obtained sufficient and necessary conditions for the generalized Hölder’s inequality in Lebesgue spaces. Related result about sufficient and necessary conditions for the generalized Hölder’s inequality can be found in [@Ifro].
Motivated by these results, the purpose of this study is to get the sufficient and necessary conditions for the generalized Hölder’s inequality in Orlicz spaces and extend the results to weak Orlicz spaces.
The rest of this paper is organized as follows. The main results are presented in Sections 2. In Section 2, we state the sufficient and necessary conditions for generalized Hölder’s inequality in Orlicz spaces as Theorem \[theorem:2.1\]. An analogous result for the weak Orlicz spaces is stated as Theorem \[theorem:3.1\].
To prove our results, we pay attention to the characteristic functions of balls in $\mathbb{R}^n$ and the following lemmas.
\[lemma:2.2\] [@Christian] Let $\Phi$ be a Young function and $f \in L_{\Phi}(\mathbb{R}^n)$. If $0 <
\| f \|_{L_\Phi(\mathbb{R}^n)} <\infty$, then $\int_{\mathbb{R}^n}\Phi\left(
\frac{|f(x)|}{\| f \|_{L_\Phi(\mathbb{R}^n)}} \right) dx \leq 1 $. Furthermore, $\| f \|_{L_\Phi(\mathbb{R}^n)} \leq 1 $ if only if $\int_{\mathbb{R}^n}\Phi(|f(x)|) dx
\leq 1.$
\[lemma:1.1\][@Masta1] Let $\Phi$ be a Young function. If $ \Phi^{-1}(s):=\inf \{r \geq 0 :
\Phi (r) > s \}$, then we have the following properties:
$\Phi^{-1}(0) = 0$.
[(2)]{} $ \Phi^{-1}(s_1) \leq \Phi^{-1}(s_2)$ for $s_1 \leq s_2$.
[(3)]{} $\Phi (\Phi^{-1}(s)) \leq s \leq \Phi^{-1}(\Phi(s))$ for $0 \leq s <
\infty$.
\[lemma:2.4\][@Yong; @Masta1] Let $\Phi$ be a Young function, $a\in\mathbb{R}^n$, and $r>0$. Then $$\| \chi_{B(a,r)} \|_{L_\Phi(\mathbb{R}^n)}= \frac{1}{\Phi^{-1}(\frac{1}
{|B(a,r)|})},$$ where $|B(a,r)|$ denotes the volume of open ball $B(a,r)$.
Results and Discussion
======================
The following theorem presents sufficient and necessary conditions for generalized Hölder’s inequality in Orlicz spaces.
\[theorem:2.1\] Let $m\geq 2$. If $\Phi$ and $\Phi_i$ are Young functions for $i=1,\dots, m$, then the following statements are equivalent:
There exists a constant $C>0$ such that $$\prod\limits_{i=1}^m \Phi_{i}^{-1}(t) \leq C \Phi^{-1}(t)$$ for every $ t \geq 0$.
[(2)]{} There exists a constant $C>0$ such that for all $t_i \ge 0$, $i = 1,\cdots,m$, $$\Phi \left( \frac{\prod\limits_{i=1}^m t_i}{C}\right) \leq \sum_{i=1}^{m} \Phi_i(t_i).$$
[(3)]{} There exists a constant $M>0$ such that $$\left\Vert \prod\limits_{i=1}^m f_i \right\Vert_{L_{\Phi}(\mathbb{R}^n)}\leq M \prod\limits_{i=1}^m
\| f_i \|_{L_{\Phi_i}(\mathbb{R}^n)},$$ for every $f_i\in L_{\Phi_i}(\mathbb{R}^n)$, $i=1,\dots,m$.
[(4)]{} For every $f_i \in L_{\Phi_i}(\mathbb{R}^n)$, then $\prod\limits_{i=1}^m f_i \in L_{\Phi}(\mathbb{R}^n)$.
($(1) \Rightarrow (2)$) Suppose that (1) hold. Since $\Phi$ is a Young function and using Lemma \[lemma:1.1\] we have $$t_i \leq \Phi_{i}^{-1}\Bigl(\Phi_{i}(t_i)\Bigr)\leq \Phi_{i}^{-1}\Bigl(\sum\limits_{i=1}^{m}\Phi_i(t_i)\Bigr)$$ for $i = 1,\cdots,m$. Hence $$\prod\limits_{i=1}^{m} t_i\leq \prod\limits_{i=1}^{m}\Phi_{i}^{-1}\Bigl(\sum\limits_{i=1}^{m}\Phi_i(t_i)\Bigr) \leq C \Phi^{-1}\Bigl(\sum\limits_{i=1}^{m}\Phi_i(t_i)\Bigr).$$
Because $\Phi$ is increasing and by Lemma \[lemma:1.1\] (3), we have $$\Phi\Bigl(\frac{1}{C}\prod\limits_{i=1}^{m} t_i \Bigr) \leq \Phi\Bigl(\Phi^{-1}\Bigl(\sum\limits_{i=1}^{m}\Phi_i(t_i)\Bigr)\Bigr) \leq \sum\limits_{i=1}^{m}\Phi_i(t_i).$$
($(2) \Rightarrow (3)$). Suppose that (2) hold. Let $f_i$ be an element of $L_{\Phi_i}(\mathbb{R}^n)$. By Lemma \[lemma:2.2\], we have $$\int_{\mathbb{R}^n}\Phi_{i} \Bigl(\frac{|f_{i}(x)|}{\|f_i\|_{L_{\Phi_i}(\mathbb{R}^n)}} \Bigr) dx \leq1,$$ for every $i=1,\dots,m$. On the other hand, we have $$\begin{aligned}
\int_{\mathbb{R}^n}\Phi\Bigl( \frac{1}{mC}\prod\limits_{i=1}^{m} \frac{|f_{i}(x)|}{\|f_i\|_{L_{\Phi_i}(\mathbb{R}^n)}}\Bigr) dx &\leq \frac{1}{m} \int_{\mathbb{R}^n}\Phi\Bigl( \frac{1}{C}\prod\limits_{i=1}^{m} \frac{|f_{i}(x)|}{\|f_i\|_{L_{\Phi_i}(\mathbb{R}^n)}}\Bigr) dx \\
&\leq \frac{1}{m} \sum\limits_{i=1}^{m} \int_{\mathbb{R}^n}\Phi_{i}\Bigl(\frac{|f_{i}(x)|}{\|f_{i}\|_{L_{\Phi_i}(\mathbb{R}^n)}}\Bigr) dx \leq 1.
\end{aligned}$$
By definition of $\| \cdot \|_{L_{\Phi}(\mathbb{R}^n)}$, we conclude that $$\left\|\prod\limits_{i=1}^{m} f_{i}\right\|_{L_{\Phi}(\mathbb{R}^n)} \leq mC \prod\limits_{i=1}^{m} \|f_{i}\|_{L_{\Phi_i}(\mathbb{R}^n)}.$$
($(3) \Leftrightarrow (4)$). Next, it is easy to prove that (3) implies (4). Now, suppose that (4) holds, then there exists $ \alpha >0$ such that $$\int_{\mathbb{R}^n}\Phi \Biggl(\frac{\prod\limits_{i=1}^{m}|f_{i}(x)|}{\alpha} \Biggr) dx \leq1.$$
By setting $M := \frac{\alpha}{\prod\limits_{i=1}^{m}\|f_i\|_{L_{\Phi_i}(\mathbb{R}^n)}} >0$, we have $$\int_{\mathbb{R}^n}\Phi \Biggl(\frac{\prod\limits_{i=1}^{m}|f_{i}(x)|}{M\prod\limits_{i=1}^{m}\|f_i\|_{L_{\Phi_i}(\mathbb{R}^n)}} \Biggr) dx = \int_{\mathbb{R}^n}\Phi \Biggl(\frac{\prod\limits_{i=1}^{m}|f_{i}(x)|}{\alpha} \Biggr) dx \leq1.$$
By definition of Orlicz-norm we have $\left\Vert \prod\limits_{i=1}^m f_i \right\Vert_{L_{\Phi}(\mathbb{R}^n)}\leq M \prod\limits_{i=1}^m
\| f_i \|_{L_{\Phi_i}(\mathbb{R}^n)}$.\
($(3)\Rightarrow (1)$). Suppose that (3) holds. Take an arbitrary open ball $B_0:=B(0,r_0)$ for $r_0>0$. Observe that $\|\chi_{B_0}\|_{L_{\Phi}(\mathbb{R}^n)}
= \left\|\prod\limits_{i=1}^{m}\chi_{B_0}\right\|_{L_{\Phi}(\mathbb{R}^n)}$. By using Lemma \[lemma:2.4\] we have $$\frac{1}{\Phi^{-1} \Big(\frac{1}{|B_0|} \Bigr)} =\|\chi_{B_0}\|_{L_{\Phi}(\mathbb{R}^n)} \leq M \prod\limits_{i=1}^{m} \|\chi_{B_0}\|_{L_{\Phi_i}(\mathbb{R}^n)} = M \prod\limits_{i=1}^{m}\frac{1}{\Phi^{-1}_i \Big(\frac{1}{|B_0|} \Bigr)}$$ for every open ball $B_0 \subseteq \mathbb{R}^n$. Since $r_0>0$ is arbitrary, we get $$\prod\limits_{i=1}^{m}\Phi_{i}^{-1}(t)\leq C \Phi^{-1}(t)$$ for every $t \geq 0$.
[Remark]{}. For $m=2$ Theorem \[theorem:2.1\] reduces to Theorem \[theorem:1.1\]. Note that, for $ m=1$ Theorem \[theorem:2.1\] may be viewed as inclusion properties of Orlicz spaces in [@Lech; @Masta1].
\[corollary:2.1\] Let $m\geq 2$. If $1 \leq p, p_i < \infty$ for $i=1,\dots, m$, then the following statements are equivalent:
$\sum_{i=1}^{m} \frac{1}{p_i} = \frac{1}{p}$.
[(2)]{} $\left\Vert \prod\limits_{i=1}^m f_i \right\Vert_{L^{p}(\mathbb{R}^n)}\leq \prod\limits_{i=1}^m
\| f_i \|_{L^{p_i}(\mathbb{R}^n)},$ for every $f_i\in L^{p_i}(\mathbb{R}^n)$, $i=1,\dots,m$.
[(3)]{} For every $f_i \in L^{p_i}(\mathbb{R}^n)$, then $\prod\limits_{i=1}^m f_i \in L^{p}(\mathbb{R}^n)$.
The proof that $(1)$ and $(2)$ are equivalent can be found in [@Ifro]. Next, by setting $\Phi(t):=t^p$ and $\Phi_i(t):=t^{p_i}$ for $ 1\leq p, p_i < \infty$ in the Theorem \[theorem:2.1\], we have $ (2)$ and $(3)$ are equivalent.
For weak Orlicz spaces, we also have the sufficient and necessary conditions for generalized Hölder’s inequality. To prove the result, we use the following lemmas.
\[lemma:1.6\] If $ f \in wL_{\Phi}(\mathbb{R}^n)$, then $$\mathop {\sup }\limits_{t > 0} \Phi(t)\Bigl| \Bigl \{ x \in \mathbb{R}^n : \frac{|f(x)|}{\| f \|_{wL_{\Phi}(\mathbb{R}^n)} + \epsilon } > t \Bigr \} \Bigr| \leq1$$ for every $\epsilon > 0$.
Let $f\in wL_{\Phi} (\mathbb{R}^{n})$. Take an arbitrary $\epsilon > 0$, then there exists $b_{\epsilon} > 0$ such that $b_{\epsilon} \leq \| f \|_{wL_{\Phi}(\mathbb{R}^n)} + \epsilon$ and $$\mathop {\sup }\limits_{t > 0}\Phi(t)\Bigl| \Bigl\{ x \in \mathbb{R}^n : \frac{|f(x)|}{b_{\epsilon} } > t \Bigr\} \Bigr|\leq1.$$
Since $\frac{|f(x)|}{b_{\epsilon}} \geq \frac{|f(x)|}{\| f \|_{wL_{\Phi}(\mathbb{R}^n)} + \epsilon}$, we have
$$\Phi(t)\Bigl|\Bigl\{ x \in \mathbb{R}^n : \frac{|f(x)|}{\| f \|_{wL_{\Phi}(\mathbb{R}^n)}+\epsilon} > t \Bigr\} \Bigr| \leq \Phi(t)\Bigl| \Bigl\{ x \in \mathbb{R}^n : \frac{|f(x)|}{b_{\epsilon} } > t \Bigr\}\Bigl| \leq 1$$ for every $t > 0$.
By taking supremum over $t>0$, we conlude that $$\mathop {\sup }\limits_{t > 0} \Phi(t) \Bigl| \Bigl\{ x \in \mathbb{R}^n : \frac{|f(x)|}{\|f\|_{wL_{\Phi}(\mathbb{R}^n)} + \epsilon } > t \Bigr\} \Bigr| \leq1$$ for every $\epsilon > 0$.
\[lemma:1.7\][@Yong; @Masta1] Let $\Phi$ be a Young function, $a\in\mathbb{R}^n$, and $r>0$. Then $$\| \chi_{B(a,r)} \|_{wL_\Phi(\mathbb{R}^n)} = \frac{1}{\Phi^{-1}(\frac{1}
{|B(a,r)|})},$$ where $|B(a,r)|$ denotes the volume of $B(a,r)$.
\[lemma:1.8\] If $ f \in wL_\Phi(\mathbb{R}^n)$, then there exists $ \alpha >0$ such that $$\mathop {\sup }\limits_{t > 0} \Phi(t)\left| \left\lbrace x \in \mathbb{R}^n : \frac{|f(x)|}{\alpha} > t \right\rbrace \right| \leq1.$$
We leave the proof of Lemma \[lemma:1.8\] to the reader. Finaly, we come to the generalized Hölder’s inequality in weak Orlicz spaces as follows.
\[theorem:3.1\] Let $m\geq 2$. If $\Phi$ and $\Phi_i$ are Young functions for $i=1,\dots, m$, then the following statements are equivalent:
There exists a constant $C>0$ such that $$\prod\limits_{i=1}^m \Phi_{i}^{-1}(t) \leq C \Phi^{-1}(t)$$ for every $ t \geq 0$.
[(2)]{} There exists a constant $C >0$ such that for all $t_i \ge 0$, $$\Phi \left( \frac{\prod\limits_{i=1}^m t_i}{C}\right) \leq \sum_{i=1}^{m} \Phi_i(t_i).$$
[(3)]{} There exists a constant $M>0$ such that $$\left\Vert \prod\limits_{i=1}^m f_i \right\Vert_{wL_{\Phi}(\mathbb{R}^n)}\leq M \prod\limits_{i=1}^m
\| f_i \|_{wL_{\Phi_i}(\mathbb{R}^n)},$$ for every $f_i\in wL_{\Phi_i}(\mathbb{R}^n)$, $i=1,\dots,m$.
[(4)]{} For every $f_i \in wL_{\Phi_i}(\mathbb{R}^n)$, then $\prod\limits_{i=1}^m f_i \in wL_{\Phi}(\mathbb{R}^n)$.
As before, we have that (1) and (2) are equivalent. We shall prove that (2) implies (3) and (3) implies (1). Suppose that (2) hold. Let $f_i \in wL_{\Phi_i}(\mathbb{R}^n)$. By Lemma \[lemma:1.6\], we have $$\Phi_{i} (t)\Bigl| \Bigl\{ x \in \mathbb{R}^n : \frac{|f_i(x)|}{\| f_i \|_{wL_{\Phi_i}(\mathbb{R}^n)} + \frac{\| f_i \|_{wL_{\Phi_i}(\mathbb{R}^n)}}{k}} > t \Bigr\} \Bigr| \leq1,$$ for every $ k \in \mathbb{N}$.
Define $A_{\Phi}(t):=\Phi(t)\left| \left\lbrace x \in \mathbb{R}^n : \frac{\prod\limits_{i=1}^{m}|f_{i}(x)|}{mC\prod\limits_{i=1}^{m}(1+\frac{1}{k})\|f_i\|_{wL_{\Phi_i}(\mathbb{R}^n)}} > t \right\rbrace \right|$.
Next by setting $ t_0 := \frac{t mC\prod\limits_{i=1}^{m}(1+\frac{1}{k})\|f_i\|_{wL_{\Phi_i}(\mathbb{R}^n)}}{\prod\limits_{i=1}^{m}|f_{i}(x)|}$, we have $$\begin{aligned}
A_{\Phi}(t)& = \Phi \left( \frac{\prod\limits_{i=1}^{m}(t_0)^{\frac{1}{m}}|f_{i}(x)|}{mC\prod\limits_{i=1}^{m}(1+\frac{1}{k})\|f_i\|_{wL_{\Phi_i}(\mathbb{R}^n)}}\right)|\{ x \in \mathbb{R}^n : 1 > t_0 \}| \\
& \leq \frac{1}{m}\Phi \left( \frac{\prod\limits_{i=1}^{m}(t_0)^{\frac{1}{m}}|f_{i}(x)|}{C\prod\limits_{i=1}^{m}(1+\frac{1}{k})\|f_i\|_{wL_{\Phi_i}(\mathbb{R}^n)}}\right)|\{ x \in \mathbb{R}^n : 1 > t_0 \}| \\
& \leq \frac{1}{m} \left(\sum\limits_{i=1}^{m} \Phi_{i}\Bigl(\frac{(t_0)^{\frac{1}{m}}|f_{i}(x)|}{(1+\frac{1}{k})\|f_{i}\|_{wL_{\Phi_i}(\mathbb{R}^n)}}\Bigr)\right)|\{ x \in \mathbb{R}^n : 1 > t_0 \}| .\\
\end{aligned}$$
On the other hand,
$$\begin{aligned}
\Phi_{i}\Bigl(\frac{(t_0)^{\frac{1}{m}}|f_{i}(x)|}{(1+\frac{1}{k})\|f_{i}\|_{wL_{\Phi_i}(\mathbb{R}^n)}}\Bigr)&| \{ x \in \mathbb{R}^n : 1 > t_0 \}|\\
& = \Phi_{i}(t_i)\Bigl| \Bigl\{ x \in \mathbb{R}^n : \Bigl(\frac{|f_i(x)|}{(1+\frac{1}{k})\|f_i\|_{wL_{\Phi_i}(\mathbb{R}^n)}} \Bigr)^m > t_i^m \Bigr\} \Bigr| \\
& = \Phi_{i}(t_i)\Bigl| \Bigl\{ x \in \mathbb{R}^n : \frac{|f_i(x)|}{(1+\frac{1}{k})\|f_i\|_{wL_{\Phi_i}(\mathbb{R}^n)}} > t_i \Bigr\}\Bigr| \\
& \leq 1,
\end{aligned}$$
where $ t_i := \frac{t_0^{\frac{1}{m}}|f_i(x)|}{(1+\frac{1}{k})\|f_i\|_{wL_{\Phi_i}(\mathbb{R}^n)}}$ for $i = 1, \cdots, m$.\
This show that
$$\begin{aligned}
A_{\Phi}(t)& = \Phi \left( \frac{\prod\limits_{i=1}^{m}(t_0)^{\frac{1}{m}}|f_{i}(x)|}{mC\prod\limits_{i=1}^{m}(1+\frac{1}{k})\|f_i\|_{wL_{\Phi_i}(\mathbb{R}^n)}}\right)|\{ x \in \mathbb{R}^n : 1 > t_0 \}| \\
& \leq \frac{1}{m} \Phi \left( \frac{\prod\limits_{i=1}^{m}(t_0)^{\frac{1}{m}}|f_{i}(x)|}{C\prod\limits_{i=1}^{m}(1+\frac{1}{k})\|f_i\|_{wL_{\Phi_i}(\mathbb{R}^n)}}\right)|\{ x \in \mathbb{R}^n : 1 > t_0 \}| \\
& \leq \frac{1}{m}\left(\sum\limits_{i=1}^{m} \Phi_{i}\Bigl(\frac{(t_0)^{\frac{1}{m}}|f_{i}(x)|}{(1+\frac{1}{k})\|f_{i}\|_{wL_{\Phi_i}(\mathbb{R}^n)}}\Bigr)\right)|\{ x \in \mathbb{R}^n : 1 > t_0 \}| \\
&\leq 1.
\end{aligned}$$
Since $ t > 0$ is an arbitrary positive real number, we get $$\mathop {\sup }\limits_{t > 0} \Phi(t)\left| \left\lbrace x \in \mathbb{R}^n : \frac{\prod\limits_{i=1}^{m}|f_{i}(x)|}{mC\prod\limits_{i=1}^{m}(1+\frac{1}{k})\|f_i\|_{wL_{\Phi_i}(\mathbb{R}^n)}} > t \right\rbrace \right| \leq1.$$
By definition of $\| \cdot \|_{ wL_{\Phi}(\mathbb{R}^n)}$, we have $$\left\|\prod\limits_{i=1}^{m} f_{i}\right\|_{ wL_{\Phi}(\mathbb{R}^n)} \leq mC (1+\frac{1}{k})^{m}\prod\limits_{i=1}^{m} \|f_{i}\|_{wL_{\Phi_i}(\mathbb{R}^n)}.$$
For $ k \rightarrow \infty$, we have $(1+\frac{1}{k})^{m} \rightarrow 1$. Hence we conclude that $$\left\|\prod\limits_{i=1}^{m} f_{i}\right\|_{ wL_{\Phi}(\mathbb{R}^n)} \leq mC\prod\limits_{i=1}^{m} \|f_{i}\|_{wL_{\Phi_i}(\mathbb{R}^n)}.$$
($(3) \Leftrightarrow (4)$). Next, it is easy to see that (3) implies (4). Now, supppose that (4) holds, by using Lemma \[lemma:1.8\], there exists $ \alpha >0$ such that $$\mathop {\sup }\limits_{t > 0} \Phi(t)\left| \left\lbrace x \in \mathbb{R}^n : \frac{\prod\limits_{i=1}^{m}|f_{i}(x)|}{\alpha} > t \right\rbrace \right| \leq1.$$
By setting $M := \frac{\alpha}{\prod\limits_{i=1}^{m}\|f_i\|_{wL_{\Phi_i}(\mathbb{R}^n)}} >0$, we have
$$\mathop {\sup }\limits_{t > 0} \Phi(t)\left| \left\lbrace x \in \mathbb{R}^n : \frac{\prod\limits_{i=1}^{m}|f_{i}(x)|}{M\prod\limits_{i=1}^{m}\|f_i\|_{wL_{\Phi_i}(\mathbb{R}^n)}} > t \right\rbrace \right| = \mathop {\sup }\limits_{t > 0} \Phi(t)\left| \left\lbrace x \in \mathbb{R}^n : \frac{\prod\limits_{i=1}^{m}|f_{i}(x)|}{\alpha} > t \right\rbrace \right| \leq1.$$
By definition of $\|\cdot\|_{wL_{\Phi}(\mathbb{R}^n)}$, we have $\left\Vert \prod\limits_{i=1}^m f_i \right\Vert_{wL_{\Phi}(\mathbb{R}^n)}\leq M \prod\limits_{i=1}^m
\| f_i \|_{wL_{\Phi_i}(\mathbb{R}^n)}$. Thus (2) implies (3).
Suppose now that (3) holds. Take an arbitrary open ball $B_0:=B(0,r_0)$ for $r_0>0$. Observe that $\|\chi_{B_0}\|_{wL_{\Phi}(\mathbb{R}^n)}= \left\|\prod\limits_{i=1}^{m}\chi_{B_0}\right\|_{wL_{\Phi}(\mathbb{R}^n)}$. By using Lemma \[lemma:1.7\], we have
$\frac{1}{\Phi^{-1} \Big(\frac{1}{|B_0|} \Bigr)}=\|\chi_{B_0}\|_{wL_{\Phi}(\mathbb{R}^n)}
\leq M \prod\limits_{i=1}^{m} \|\chi_{B_0}\|_{wL_{\Phi_i}(\mathbb{R}^n)}
= M \prod\limits_{i=1}^{m}\frac{1}{\Phi^{-1}_i \Big(\frac{1}{|B_0|} \Bigr)}$
for every open ball $B_0 \subseteq \mathbb{R}^n$. Since $r_0>0$ is arbitrary, we get $$\prod\limits_{i=1}^{m}\Phi_{i}^{-1}(t)\leq M \Phi^{-1}(t)$$ for every $t \geq 0$. Hence (3) implies (1), and we are done.
\[corollary:2.2\] Let $m\geq 2$. If $1 \leq p, p_i < \infty$ for $i=1,\dots, m$, then the following statements are equivalent:
$\sum_{i=1}^{m} \frac{1}{p_i} = \frac{1}{p}$.
[(2)]{} $\left\Vert \prod\limits_{i=1}^m f_i \right\Vert_{wL^{p}(\mathbb{R}^n)}\leq \prod\limits_{i=1}^m
\| f_i \|_{wL^{p_i}(\mathbb{R}^n)},$ for every $f_i\in wL^{p_i}(\mathbb{R}^n)$, $i=1,\dots,m$.
[(3)]{} For every $f_i \in wL^{p_i}(\mathbb{R}^n)$, then $\prod\limits_{i=1}^m f_i \in wL^{p}(\mathbb{R}^n)$.
The proof that $(1)$ and $(2)$ can be found in [@Ifro]. Next, by setting $\Phi(t) =t^p$ and $\Phi_i(t)=t^{p_i}$ for $ 1\leq p, p_i < \infty$ in the Theorem \[theorem:3.1\], we have $ (2)$ and $(3)$ are equivalent.
Concludings Remarks
===================
We have shown sufficient and necessary conditions for the generalized Hölder’s inequality in Orlicz spaces and in weak Orlicz spaces. From Theorems \[theorem:2.1\] and \[theorem:3.1\], we see that both generalized Hölder’s inequality in Orlicz spaces and in weak Orlicz spaces are equivalent to the same condition, namely $\prod\limits_{i=1}^m \Phi_{i}^{-1}(t) \leq C\Phi^{-1}(t)$.
[9]{}
F. Avram and L. Brown, “A generalized Hölder’s inequality and a generalized Szego theorem”, *Proc. Amer. Math. Soc.* **107**-3 (1989), 687–695.
T.N. Bekjan, Z. Chen, P. Liu, and Y. Jiao, “Noncommutative weak Orlicz spaces and martingale inequalities”, *Studia Math.* **204**-3 (2011), 195–212.
W.S. Cheung, “Generalizations of Hölder’s inequality”, *Int. J. Math. Math. Sci.* **26**-1 (2001), 7–10.
Ifronika, M. Idris, A.A. Masta, and H. Gunawan, “Generalized Hölder’s inequality in Morrey spaces”, to appear in Matematički Vesnik.
Y. Jiao, “Embeddings between weak Orlicz martingale spaces”, *J. Math. Appl.* **378** (2011), 220–229.
A. Kufner, O. John, and S. Fucik, *Function Spaces*, Noordhoff International Publishing, Czechoslovakia, 1977.
C. Léonard, “Orlicz spaces”, preprint. \[http://cmap.polytechnique.fr/$\sim$leonard/ papers/orlicz.pdf, accessed on August 17, 2015.\]
N. Liu and Y. Ye, “Weak Orlicz space and its convergence theorems”, *Acta Math. Sci. Ser. B* [**30**]{}-5 (2010), 1492–1500.
W.A.J. Luxemburg, *Banach Function Spaces*, Thesis, Technische Hogeschool te Delft, 1955.
L. Maligranda, *Orlicz Spaces and Interpolation*, Departamento de Matemática, Universidade Estadual de Campinas, 1989.
A.A. Masta, H. Gunawan, and W. Setya-Budhi, “Inclusion property of Orlicz and weak Orlicz spaces”, *J. Math. Fund. Sci*. **48**-3 (2016), 193–203.
A.A. Masta, H. Gunawan, and W. Setya-Budhi, “An inclusion property of Orlicz-Morrey spaces”, *J. Phys.: Conf. Ser.*, **893** 012015 (2017), 1–8.
W. Orlicz, *Linear Functional Analysis (Series in Real Analysis Volume 4)*, World Scientific, Singapore, 1992.
R. O’Neil, “Fractional integration in Orlicz spaces. I.”, *Trans. Amer. Math. Soc.* **115** (1965), 300–328.
M.M. Rao and Z.D. Ren, *Theory of Orlicz spaces, volume 146 of Monographs and Textbooks in Pure and Applied Mathematics*, Marcel Dekker, Inc., New York, 1991.
R. Welland, “Inclusion relations among Orlicz spaces”, *Proc. Amer. Math. Soc*. [**17**]{}-1 (1966), 135–139.
[^1]: The first and fourth authors are supported by P3MI Program 2018. The second author is supported by Hibah Disertasi Doktor 2018.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'As a necessary preliminary step toward geophysically significant extrapolations, we study the scale effects in internal wave attractors in the linear and nonlinear regimes. We use two geometrically similar experimental set-ups, scaled to factor 3, and numerical simulations (a spectral element method, based on Nek5000 open solver) for a range of parameters [~~~~]{} is typically accessible in laboratory. In the linear regime, we recover the classic viscous scaling for the beam width, which is not affected by variations of the amplitude of the input perturbation. In the nonlinear regime, we show that the scaling of the width-to-length ratio of the attractor branches is intimately related with the energy cascade from large-scale energy input to dissipation. We present results for the wavelength, amplitude and width of the beam as a function of time and as a function of the amplitude of the forcing.'
author:
- 'C. Brouzet$^1$, I.N. Sibgatullin$^{1,2}$, E.V. Ermanyuk$^{1,3,4}$, S. Joubaud$^1$, T. Dauxois$^1$'
title: Scale effects in internal wave attractors
---
Introduction
============
Physical effects scale differently with size. In experimental fluid mechanics, the role of molecular viscosity is strongly exaggerated at the laboratory scale as compared to large-scale flows. This effect is particularly significant in geo- and astrophysical fluid mechanics owing to the size gap of several orders of magnitude between the real objects and their laboratory counterparts [@SommeriaDidelle2009]. To unveil the key features of geo- and astrophysical flows, the modern laboratory experiments [~~~~]{} exploration of strongly forced regimes (see e.g. [@GLS2016; @LeBarsCefronLeGal2015; @BSMPSE2006; @VPBOP2010]). Under strong forcing, the purely viscous mechanism of momentum transfer by thermal molecular motion is replaced by momentum transfer due to vortices and/or waves. Accordingly, scaling laws and similarity relations clearly defined for laminar regimes are replaced by more complicated ones [@BC1998], which are closer to large-scale reality but still not readily extrapolated to geo- and astroscales [@GLS2016].
Internal waves in a uniformly stratified fluid obey a highly specific dispersion relation [~~~~]{} reads $\sin \theta= \pm\,\Omega_0$, where $\theta$ is the angle between the phase (respectively group) velocity vector and the vertical [(resp. horizontal)]{} direction, $\Omega_0=\omega_0/N$ is the forcing frequency normalized by the buoyancy frequency $N=[(-g/\bar{\rho})({\rm d}\rho/{\rm d}z)]^{1/2}$, with $g$ the gravity acceleration, $\rho (z)$ the density distribution along the vertical coordinate $z$ and $\bar{\rho}$ a reference value [@MowbrayRarity1967]. [Note that the $z$-axis points upwards, as shown in Fig. \[fig:setup\]]{}. This dispersion relation does not contain any length scale and admits the wave propagation in form of oblique wave beams. In some cases, the cross-beam structure of internal waves can be prescribed by specific motion of a rigid boundary [@MMMGPD2010]. However, more typically, the [*a priori*]{} unknown scaling of the cross-beam structure with the key parameters of the problem represents an issue of central interest. Indeed, in an ideal (nonviscous) uniformly stratified fluid, there is no mechanism preventing singular behavior for certain geometrical settings, with infinitely high energy density at characteristic lines. The “healing" of these singularities requires certain assumptions on the energy-dissipation mechanism, which can either be linear (purely viscous) or involve highly nonlinear processes of vorticity generation, wave breaking, wave-wave and wave-current interactions, streaming, etc.
An important case is precisely a consequence of the dispersion relation. Internal waves [~~~~]{} a very specific reflection law: the angle between the internal-wave beam and the vertical must be conserved when the beam is reflected at a rigid boundary. This provides a geometric reason for strong variation of the beam width (focusing or defocusing) upon reflection at a slope [@DauxoisYoung1999]. It is noteworthy that at nearly critical slopes (i.e. when the wave beam slope is close to the topographic slope), numerical simulations reveal the transition to turbulence [@GayenSarkar2010]. The transition occurs at moderate values of the Reynolds number [~~~~]{}, however, are higher than those typically accessible in the laboratory setups. Thus, the local energy losses due to wave reflection at a slope in the ocean and in the laboratory are likely to be governed by different scalings.
The role of molecular viscosity on the structure of internal wave beams has been studied in some detail for oscillations of isolated bodies of simple geometry in a uniformly stratified fluid of infinite extent [@HurleyKeady1997]. Due to viscous effects, the singularities along characteristic lines tangent to the surface of the body [@Hurley1997] are replaced by interior shear layers merging into a single beam evolving with distance toward a self-similar solution [@ThomasStevenson1972]. [~~~~]{}olution [@HurleyKeady1997] has been shown to hold experimentally with high accuracy at the laboratory scale [@Sutherlandetal1999]. However, its extrapolation to oceanographic scales can hardly be justified: in the case of a body comparable to a significant bottom topography, the decay rate of internal waves is too low to dissipate the energy of internal tides at reasonable distance even if a significant turbulent viscosity (an order of magnitude higher than the molecular one) is used for estimates [@VEF2011]. This simple example implies that, at the ocean scale, the decay of internal-wave energy is governed by an energy cascade with yet unknown scaling properties.
In closed two-dimensional fluid domains filled with linearly stratified fluid, the focusing of internal waves usually prevails, leading to convergence of internal wave rays toward closed loops, the internal wave attractors [@MaasLam1995]. Owing to similarity of the dispersion relation, a similar effect occur[~~~~]{} for inertial waves[~~~~]{}, where a special attention has been drawn to spherical liquid shells due to their relevance to the structure of celestial bodies [@Stewartson1971; @Stewartson1972]. The concept of interior shear layers has been successfully applied to regularize the singularities at characteristic lines, leading to [~~~~]{} energy density at the attractor loops both in the cases of internal and inertial waves [@RGV2001; @RVG2002; @HBDM2008; @GSP2008]. Since attractors are usually considered in a closed fluid domain, there should be a balance between the energy injection into the domain at global scale and the dissipation at small scales. In this relation, the purely viscous dissipation in interior shear layers represents an important “prototype problem", with possible extension to a variety of dissipative mechanisms [@Ogilvie2005]. The solution of this problem yields a scaling for the equilibrium width of the attractor branches, which is set by the balance between the geometric focusing and a particular dissipative mechanism or a combination of such mechanisms. In the linear regime, the experimental results in nominally two-dimensional problems can be significantly “contaminated" by the effect of dissipation at lateral walls of the test tank, which can represent a non-negligible fraction of the total dissipation [@BrouzetJFM2016]. The interplay of the viscous losses in interior boundary layers, at lateral walls, and zones of the wave-beam reflections is considered in [@BeckebanzeJFM2017], along with the associated scalings. In the nonlinear regime, the energy transfer to small scales in unstable attractors operates via a cascade of triadic interactions [@SED2013; @BrouzetEPL2016; @BrouzetJFM2016; @BrouzetJFM2017]. A qualitatively similar nonlinear regime has been revealed in [@JouveOgilvie2014] for inertial wave attractors. The calculations presented in [@JouveOgilvie2014] demonstrate that the width of attractor branches increases for larger forcing.
In the present paper, we explore the scale effect in internal wave attractors in the linear and nonlinear regimes, both experimentally and numerically, for a range of parameters [~~~~]{}typically accessible in laboratory. The scaling of the width-to-length ratio of the attractor branches is intimately related with the energy cascade from large-scale energy input to dissipation. We consider this study as a necessary preliminary step toward geophysically significant extrapolations. The wave attractors are considered in a classic trapezoidal geometric setting [@MBSL1997]. We use the experimental setup described in [@SED2013; @BrouzetEPL2016; @BrouzetJFM2016; @BrouzetJFM2017] and its scaled (to a factor 3) version to reveal the nonlinear scale effects. In view of the effects due to viscous losses at lateral walls [@BeckebanzeJFM2017], we performed also two-dimensional simulations, with a version of the computer code used in [@BrouzetEPL2016; @BrouzetJFM2016], which demonstrate the universality of results for the beam’s width under appropriate scaling for a range of parameters typically accessible in experiments. Quantitatively similar results are expected for sufficiently wide test tanks. In Section \[Experimental and numerical setups\], we describe the experimental setups and the numerical method. In section \[Scaling in stable attractor\], we present the experimental results for stable wave attractors, emphasizing interior shear layers. In Section \[Scaling in unstable attractors: a signature of triadic resonance instability\], we consider [experimental and numerical]{} unstable attractors emphasizing the role of the triadic resonance instability in setting the wavelength and the amplitude. Conclusions are presented in Section \[Conclusion\].
Experimental and numerical setups {#Experimental and numerical setups}
=================================
Experimental setup
------------------
![Geometric configuration of the experimental set-ups, with the wave generator prescribing the motion of the vertical wall, and the sloping wall inclined at an angle $\alpha$ with respect to the vertical. The sloping wall delimits the trapezoidal domain with the working length $L$ and the depth $H$.\[fig:setup\]](fig1-eps-converted-to.pdf){width="50.00000%"}
In this work, we use two experimental setups. Both setups have the geometric configuration shown in Fig. \[fig:setup\]. The small setup [@SED2013; @BrouzetEPL2016; @BrouzetJFM2016; @BrouzetJFM2017] has the rectangular test tank of size length $\times$ height$\times$ width $= 80\times 42.5 \times 17.5~$ cm$^{3}$, with a typical working depth $H=30$ cm, while the large setup has the test tank of size $200\times 100 \times 17.4~$cm$^{3}$, with a typical working depth $H=90$ cm. The tanks are filled with an uniformly stratified fluid using the conventional double-bucket technique. Salt is used as a stratifying agent and the resulting density profile is linear. The sloping wall, which delimits the trapezoidal fluid domain of length $L$ (measured along the bottom), is slowly inserted into the fluid after the end of the filling procedure.
In both setups, the input forcing is introduced by a generator spanning the total fluid depth installed parallel to the vertical end wall. The time-dependent vertical profile of the generator is prescribed in the form of half-wave of a cosine function $$\zeta(z,t)=a\sin(\omega_{0} t) \cos(\pi z/H),
\label{generator}$$ where $a$ and $\omega_{0}$ are the amplitude and frequency of oscillations, respectively. In [the small]{} setup, we use the generator described in [@GostiauxEF2007; @MMMGPD2010; @JMOD2012], which reproduces the profile in discrete form by the horizontal motion of a stack of $47$ plates. The width of the plates is $3$ cm smaller than the width of the test tank due to the presence of supporting frame housing the plates. In [the large]{} setup, we use a generator, which reproduces the prescribed profile by motion of a flexible plate simply supported in the middle and clamped at the upper and lower ends to horizontal translating supports undergoing harmonic oscillations in anti-phase. The amplitude of these oscillations, $a$, can be easily varied with small increments in a sufficiently wide range (typically between $0$ and $6$ mm), to explore the nonlinear effects. The flexible plate is sealed at the sides to avoid water exchanges between the two faces of the plate. With this arrangement, the forcing is applied to the whole width of the fluid domain.
The whole field measurement of the density-gradient perturbations is performed with the synthetic schlieren (SyS) technique [@Sutherlandetal1999; @DHS2000] from the field of local displacements of a background random dot pattern observed through the stratified fluid. The distortion of the dot pattern is recorded at the frame rate of $2$ fps by a computer-controlled video AVT (Allied Vision Technologies) Stingray camera with CCD matrix of $1388 \times 1038$ pixels or Pike camera with CCD matrix of $2452 \times 2054$ pixels, placed at a distance from the test tank [of]{} $165$ cm [for the small setup]{} and $250$ cm [for the large setup]{}. Conversion of images into the fields of density-gradient perturbations is performed using a cross-correlation PIV algorithm with subpixel resolution [@FinchamDelerce2000] in combination with the basic relations for SyS [@Sutherlandetal1999; @DHS2000]. The temporal resolution of the measurements is (typically) around 20 fields per wave period. The spatial resolution of the field of the density-gradient perturbations is about $3$ and $9$ mm in each direction for the small and large setups, respectively. [[~~~~]{} is found sufficient to resolve the fine details of the internal wave field.]{} The subsequent processing allowing the separation of different components of the internal wave field is performed with the help of Fourier and Hilbert filtering [@MGD2008] similar to [@SED2013; @BrouzetEPL2016; @BrouzetJFM2016; @BrouzetJFM2017].
In the present paper, we discuss mostly the experiments performed in the large tank in the linear and nonlinear regimes. Table \[tab:series\_exp\] contains the forcing amplitude of the experiments, the regime observed and the symbols used to plot the data. The experimental data obtained in the small tank, similar to those described in [@SED2013; @BrouzetEPL2016; @BrouzetJFM2016; @BrouzetJFM2017], are used in Section III for cross-comparison with the data obtained in the large tank in the linear regime.
Experiments $a$ \[mm\] Stability Symbols
------------- ------------ ----------- ------------------
$1$ $0.7$ Stable Green pentagons
$2$ $1.5$ Stable Magenta hexagons
$3$ $2.2$ Stable Blue circles
$4$ $2.9$ Unstable Cyan triangles
$5$ $3.7$ Unstable not plotted
$6$ $4.4$ Unstable Red squares
$7$ $5.1$ Unstable not plotted
$8$ $5.8$ Unstable Black diamonds
: Experiments performed in the large tank, with always the same geometrical parameters: $H=92.3$ cm, $L=145.5$ cm, $\alpha=27.4^{\circ}$ and $\Omega_0=0.57$ leading consequently to $(d,\tau)=(0.34,1.81)$. [These notations are introduced in section \[Scaling in stable attractor: theory\].]{} The symbols used to plot the wavelength, width and amplitude of the beam in Figs. \[fig:etablissement\_attracteur\_stable\], \[fig:width\_evolution\] and \[fig:wave\_length\_TRI\] are detailed in the right column. Note that two experiments (numbers $5$ and $7$) have not been plotted for the sake of clarity.[]{data-label="tab:series_exp"}
Numerical setup
---------------
For the numerical computations, we employ the spectral element method [@FischerRonquist1994; @Fischer1997; @FischerMullen2001]. The numerical implementation of the method, based on Nek5000 open solver, is known as a robust tool of direct numerical simulations of geo- and astrophysical flows involving highly nonlinear and non-trivial long-term dynamics (see e.g. [@Favieretal2014; @Favieretal2015]). In application to internal wave attractors, the method has been thoroughly tested by cross-comparison with the experimental results [@BrouzetJFM2016]. In particular, the cross-comparison demonstrated a very good qualitative and quantitative agreement between numerical experimental data, including the nonlinear regimes with well-developed instability. The full system of equations being solved consists of the Navier-Stokes equation in the Boussinesq approximation, the continuity equation and the equation for the transport of salt. We impose the no-slip boundary condition at rigid walls and stress-free condition at free surface. Forcing is applied at the vertical wall by prescribing the profile of the horizontal velocity which reproduces the motion of the generator .
The meshes used in calculations for 3D modeling of turbulent flows consist of 50 thousands to half-million elements. To study 2D flows with moderate supercriticality, as in this paper, we used meshes up to 5 thousand elements, with 8 to 10-order polynomial decomposition within each element. Time discretization is set to $10^{-4}$ to $10^{-5}$ of the external forcing period. We refer the interested reader to [@BrouzetJFM2016] for additional details.
The present paper reports the results of 2D numerical simulations for a set of geometrically similar setups, which differ only in scale. The 2D [~~~~]{} allowed to exclude the energy losses due to friction at the lateral walls [@BeckebanzeJFM2017] and to study the effect of triadic instability on scaling of the wave-beam width in isolation.
Scaling in stable attractor: interior shear layers {#Scaling in stable attractor}
==================================================
Theoretical preliminaries {#Scaling in stable attractor: theory}
-------------------------
The configurations of internal wave attractors in a fluid domain of particular geometry can be found by ray tracing [@MaasLam1995; @MBSL1997]. Plotting the rate of convergence of [the ]{}wave rays toward the limiting cycles in [~~~~]{} $(d,\tau)$ , where $d=1-(2H/L) \tan \alpha$ and $\tau=(2H/L) \sqrt{1/\Omega_0^2-1}$ for the particular case of trapezoidal geometry [@MBSL1997], reveals [~~~~]{}triangular domains corresponding to high convergence, which is typical for simple $(n,m)$-type wave attractors. Here, $n$ and $m$ correspond to the number of ray reflections the attractor makes at the vertical and horizontal walls of the trapezoidal domain. In what follows, we restrict our attention to the simplest case of a $(1,1)$ attractor depicted in Fig. \[fig:virtual\_source\]. The closed parallelogram (shown by dashed lines delimited by the trapezoidal boundary of the fluid domain in Fig. \[fig:virtual\_source\]) represents a singular “skeleton" given by ray tracing.
![Ray tracing prediction (dashed line) for an attractor with $(d,\tau)=(0.2,1.6)$. The slope is represented by the thick solid black line. The virtual point source is indicated by the black dot, at the right of the slope. It emits a beam, whose width scales to the power $1/3$ with the distance from the source. Branches [~~~~]{} until the focusing reflection on the slope. \[fig:virtual\_source\]](fig2-eps-converted-to.pdf){width="50.00000%"}
Different models have been developed to explain the realistic structure of the attractor beams in a real viscous fluid [@GSP2008; @HBDM2008; @JouveOgilvie2014]. The beam formed by the branches of the attractor can be seen as a beam emitted by a virtual point source, located behind the focusing reflection [@GSP2008; @JouveOgilvie2014] as illustrated in Fig. \[fig:virtual\_source\]. The beam then represents an interior shear layer, which has [~~~~]{} width $\sigma$ that scales as the distance from the virtual source to the power $1/3$, in agreement with self-similar solution [@ThomasStevenson1972]. The distance $c$ between the focusing reflection and the virtual point source is set by this scaling law and the geometry of the attractor. Introducing $\xi$ as a coordinate along the “skeleton" of the attractor measured from the focusing reflection, we have for the beam width $$\sigma(\xi) \propto (\xi+c)^{1/3}.
\label{eq:sigma}$$ On the other hand, the beam widths before and after reflection are related to the focusing parameter $\gamma$ so that $$\gamma=\frac{\sigma(L_p)}{\sigma(0)},
\label{eq:gamma}$$ where $L_p$ is the perimeter of the attractor. Using equations (\[eq:sigma\]) and (\[eq:gamma\]), one has $$c=\frac{L_p}{\gamma^3-1}.$$ Following [@GSP2008], in our notations, we can write for the beam width normalized by the perimeter the following scaling $$\frac{\sigma(\xi)}{L_p} = C \left(1-\Omega_0^2\right)^{-1/6} \left(\frac{\nu}{N L_p^2}\right)^{1/3}\left(\frac{\xi+c}{L_p}\right)^{1/3}.
\label{eq:scaling_width}$$ The implications of this scaling to geometrically similar setups and to geophysically signifiant scales are discussed below.
Experiments with stable attractors in the linear regime
-------------------------------------------------------
### Definition of the wavelength, the width and the amplitude of the beam\[branch\_wavelength\_width\]
The wave number and the width of the attractor are measured using experiments performed in the small and large tanks with SyS as a visualization technique. The data processing is similar to [@SED2013; @BrouzetJFM2016; @BrouzetJFM2017]. The different branches of the attractor are separated using Hilbert filtering in frequency and in space [@MGD2008]. The branches are numbered from $1$ to $4$ in the direction of the energy propagation, with the branch $1$ starting at the focusing reflection. The results obtained for all branches are similar. Below we discuss in detail the measurements performed in branch $1$. The filtered horizontal and vertical gradient density fields are combined to the transverse density gradient field, $\partial \rho' / \partial \eta_1$, where $\eta_1$ is the transverse coordinate perpendicular to $\xi_{1}$ and $\rho'$ the density perturbation with respect to the initial linear density profile. Th[~~~~]{} field is plotted in Fig. \[fig:explication\_coupe\](a). A cut, plotted as a dashed black line, is made through branch $1$. Along this cut, one gets the real signal, its modulus (amplitude) and also the phase. These quantities are plotted as a function of the distance $\eta_1$, in Figs. \[fig:explication\_coupe\](b) and (d). The amplitude of the beam $|\partial \rho' / \partial \eta_1|$ is defined as the maximum of the modulus, at $\eta_1=0$. The phase is related to the wave-vector by $\vec{k}=-\overrightarrow\nabla{\phi}{=k\overrightarrow{e_\eta}}$, since the wave-vector is perpendicular to the beam. When unwrapping the phase, one can apply a linear fit in the vicinity of the maximum wave amplitude to estimate the slope. This estimate yields the peak wave number $k_{\textrm{peak}}$[~~~~]{} [~~~~]{}the Fourier spectrum of the [~~~~]{} signal, shown on panel (c). The width of the branches is defined as the width at half maximum [~~~~]{} the distance between the two vertical dashed black lines, surrounding the maximum of the amplitude in $\eta_1=0$ cm, on panels (b) and (d). . The width depends of course on the definition taken, which, however, affects only the constant $C$ in the scaling (\[eq:scaling\_width\]).
### Formation and decay of attractors in the linear regime\[linear\_wavelength\]
Experiments [@HBDM2008] and numerical simulations [@GSP2008] have already given the evolution of the wave number of the branches of the attractor as a function of time, using spectra made from a cut through branch 1. These studies have been done during the decay of the attractor, once the forcing has been stopped. Here we demonstrate a typical linear scenario of the transient behavior of the wave attractor. The steady-state scaling is described in more detail in the next paragraph. Experiments have been performed in the large tank in order to follow the branch 1 of an attractor during the growth, the stationary state and the decay of the attractor. The amplitude of the wave generator has been changed between the different experiments, to study the effect of forcing on the evolution of the branches. Two series of experiments have been performed, using the same filling of the tank. The second series has been carried on the [~~~~]{}day [~~~~]{} the first series. This ensures that all experiments have exactly the same geometry, the same stratification and the same forcing frequency. The operational point in $(d,\tau)$-space is fixed at $(d,\tau)=(0.34,1.81)$. Experiments of the first series are growth and decay experiments, with different amplitudes of forcing. This means that the wave generator is started at the beginning of the experiment, the attractor grows until it reaches the steady state and then the wave generator is stopped. Data are collected continuously during the three phases, until the fluid in the tank comes back to rest. Experiments of the second series are only growth experiments, with different forcing amplitudes. In this section, we discuss only the experimental results obtained for stable attractors. Experiments with unstable attractors at large forcing amplitudes are presented in section IV.
Typical growth, steady state and decay are shown in Fig. \[fig:growth\_decay\_branch1\], using the time-history of the horizontal density gradient field in a point located on branch 1. The amplitude starts to grow until the attractor reaches a steady-state regime around $40\,T_0$. This steady-state regime is maintained, until the wave generator is stopped at $t=73\,T_0$. Then, the attractor decays and no motion is observed after $t=115\,T_0$.
In order to measure the peak wave number and width of branch $1$ as a function of time, the analysis presented in Fig. \[fig:explication\_coupe\] has been performed on several images, using always the same oblique cut. The complete evolution in time of the wavelength $\lambda$, defined as $\lambda=2\pi/k_{\textrm{peak}}$, is shown in Fig. \[fig:etablissement\_attracteur\_stable\](a), for three experiments with different amplitudes of the wave generator. The amplitudes are $a=0.7$ (green), $1.5$ (magenta) and $2.1$ mm (blue). The attractors are stable for these amplitudes. One can first note that the attractor wavelength is totally independent of the amplitude of the wave generator at any time, because all the three curves are superimposed. Secondly, one can see how the attractor set-up [~~~~]{} to decrease the wavelengths. Indeed, the wave generator injects a very large vertical wavelength, typically of $184$ cm, which is equal to two times the height of the large tank. While the waves reflect on the slope, the energy is focused and the wavelengths are smaller and smaller until a steady state is reached[~~~~]{} the focusing is balanced by the viscous broadening. The ratio between the injected scale and the scale of the attractor in the steady state is found to be around $13.5$. This value is larger than $9$, which is the value of the same ratio reported for a small tank attractor experiment [@SED2013] in the focusing linear regime. Thus, the large tank allows an energy transfer through a larger range of scales than the small tank. Once the wave generator has been stopped, there is no more large injected wavelength and the slope focuses the waves into smaller and smaller wavelength until all the energy is damped by viscosity.
The influence of the amplitude of the wave generator can be seen in Fig. \[fig:etablissement\_attracteur\_stable\](b), showing the transverse density gradient field amplitude $|\partial \rho' / \partial \eta_1|$ as a function of time, for the same three different experiments as in Fig. \[fig:etablissement\_attracteur\_stable\](a). The larger the amplitude of the wave generator, the larger the amplitude reached by the steady state. Thus, for stable attractors, all the energy emitted by the wave generator is focused into an attractor with the same geometrical characteristics. The only difference is that the amplitude varies with the one of the wave generator. Figure \[fig:etablissement\_attracteur\_stable\](c) shows the normalized version of the curves presented in Fig. \[fig:etablissement\_attracteur\_stable\](b). Each curve is now divided by the maximum of amplitude, reached during the steady state. All curves collapse well, showing that the process is purely linear: only the competition between the focusing and viscous broadening matters, while the amplitude of the wave generator affects only the amplitude of the branches.
### Relation between the beam width and the wavelength\[width\_amplitude\_time\]
[Figure \[fig:width\_evolution\](a) shows the evolution of the width $\sigma$ of the branch $1$ as a function of time, for the same three experiments as in Fig. \[fig:etablissement\_attracteur\_stable\]. The curves collapse well as for the wavelength[~~~~]{}, presented in Fig. \[fig:etablissement\_attracteur\_stable\](a). During the growth and the steady state of the attractor, the behavior of the width is very similar to the one of the wavelength. Nevertheless, after the stop of the wave-maker, the width of branch $1$ increases slightly while the wavelength decreases. The width-over-wavelength ratio gives an idea of the number of wavelengths that are present in the width of the branch. This ratio is plotted, as a function of time, in Fig. \[fig:width\_evolution\](b). During the growth, this ratio slightly decays but one can consider that the ratio is more or less constant during the growth and the steady state. This means that there is only one wavelength in the width of the branch during these two phases. This is consistent with Figs. \[fig:explication\_coupe\](a) and (b). Once the wave-maker has been stopped, this ratio increases drastically. Indeed, the wavelength decreases a lot, due to focusing, while the width of the beam slightly increases. This shows that there [~~~~]{} more wavelengths [~~~~]{}present in the width of the branch, as the attractor decays.]{}
Figure \[fig:width\_evolution\] highlights that, in the linear regime, the wavelength and the width of the attractor branches have the same behavior, when the attractor is growing or in a steady state. Thus, this indicates that they scale similarly, as given in equation (\[eq:scaling\_width\]) for the width.
### Scaling in the linear steady-state regime
Let us now consider in more details the scaling for the width of the attractor in the linear steady-state regime given by equation (\[eq:scaling\_width\]). Figure \[fig:comparison\_tank\] shows a comparison between two attractors, one in the small tank and the other one in the large tank , both observed using SyS. The two attractors have reasonably close $(d,\tau)$ parameters but different scales. The horizontal and vertical scales of the trapezoid in panel (a) are approximately $3$ times smaller than the ones in panel (b). Thus, plotting these two attractors with the same dimension in Fig. \[fig:comparison\_tank\] is equivalent to normalize them. The horizontal density gradient fields are represented after filtering in frequency around $\omega_0$ and a normalization by the maximal amplitude of the branch $1$. Therefore the colorbar is the same for the two attractors and lies in the range $[0-1]$. According to equation (\[eq:scaling\_width\]), the width of the small tank attractor (panel (a)) appears larger than the width of the large tank attractor (panel (b)). The width measurements made by cutting branch $1$ of both attractors at the same [distance from the virtual point source]{}, show that the ratio $\sigma/L_p$ is $4.55 \times 10^{-2}$ for the small tank attractor and $2.25 \times 10^{-2}$ for the large tank attractor. There is nearly a factor $2$ between these ratios. The model described in [@GSP2008] and given in equation (\[eq:scaling\_width\]) predicts that $\sigma/L_p\propto L_p^{-2/3}$, with all other parameters being fixed. Therefore, the ratio between $\sigma/L_p$ of the large and small attractors should be equal to the ratio of the perimeters, equal to $3$, to the power $2/3$: $3^{2/3}=2.0800...\approx 2$. Thus, the width measurements are in reasonably good agreement with the model described in [@GSP2008]. The energy losses in the boundary layers at the longitudinal walls of the test tank introduce a correction to (\[eq:scaling\_width\]) as discussed in [@BeckebanzeJFM2017]. Leaving the latter issue aside, let us discuss the extrapolation of (\[eq:scaling\_width\]) to geophysical scales.
If we consider the experimental set-up scaled with the ocean depth, which is around $4000$ m, the perimeter $L_p$ is approximately equal to $10000$ m. In the ocean, the buoyancy frequency is in between $10^{-4}$ and $10^{-3}$ rad/s. Scaling (\[eq:scaling\_width\]) predicts an attractor with the beam width $\sigma$ of a few meters. For a lake of $100$ m depth and a buoyancy frequency of $10^{-3}$ rad/s, the beam width $\sigma$ is less than one meter. The confinement of all the energy in such narrow beams does not seem realistic. Thus, one can assume that attractors in oceans or lakes should obey a different scaling, where nonlinearities play an important role. This is discussed in the next section.
Scaling in unstable attractors: a signature of triadic resonance instability {#Scaling in unstable attractors: a signature of triadic resonance instability}
============================================================================
Theoretical preliminaries {#theoretical-preliminaries}
-------------------------
The mechanism of instability in wave attractors is similar to the classic concept of triadic resonance instability (TRI) [@SED2013]. TRI is best studied for the idealized case, with a monochromatic in time and space carrier wave as a basic state which feeds two secondary waves via nonlinear resonant interactions. The resonance occurs when temporal condition for frequencies $$\Omega_{1}+\Omega_{2}=\Omega_{0}$$ and spatial condition for wave vectors $$\vec{k}_{1}+\vec{k}_{2}=\vec{k}_{0}$$ are satisfied, where subscripts 0, 1 and 2 refer to the primary, and two secondary waves, respectively. In a wave attractor, the wave beams serve as a primary wave, and the resonance conditions are satisfied with a good accuracy [@SED2013], thereby providing a consistent physical framework to the observed phenomena. The [~~~~]{}resonance is [~~~~]{} [@KoudellaStaquet2006; @BDJO2013], with the effect of finite wave-beam width involved [@KarimiAkylas2014; @BSDBOJ2014]. The latter is important since the subharmonic waves can serve as an energy sink only if they can extract substantial energy from the primary wave before leaving the beam [@BSDBOJ2014; @Dauxoisetal2018]. If the energy injection into the wave attractor is large, secondary waves can reach a large amplitude and therefore be also unstable on a faster time scale, generating a cascade of triadic interactions transferring energy to small scales where the viscous dissipation becomes significant. Since secondary waves provide a more powerful mechanism of momentum flux from the primary wave than the molecular viscosity alone, one can expect, in the nonlinear regime , the broadening of wave beams in attractors. In that aspect, the role of the cascade of triadic interactions is conceptually similar to the role of turbulent viscosity. The broadening of the wave beams for a larger energy input is observed in numerical calculations for inertial wave attractors performed in [@JouveOgilvie2014]. In experiments performed with a small set-up [@SED2013; @BrouzetEPL2016; @BrouzetJFM2016; @BrouzetJFM2017], the effect is weak due to viscous effects [@BeckebanzeJFM2017]. However, it is fully present in the upscaled set-up used in the present work. Below, we describe quantitative measurements of the length of the primary wave in internal wave attractors in the nonlinear regime. Additionally, we perform 2D numerical simulations demonstrating the universality of results in the studied range of parameters.
Experiments with unstable attractors\[branch\_size\_TRI\]
---------------------------------------------------------
For stable attractors, the size of the beam is directly linked with the geometry and the focusing, as shown in the previous section. Below, we reveal the effect of forcing on the scaling of the beam wavelength and wave amplitude. As in the previous section, the experiments are carried out in the large tank, with the SyS visualization technique, with systematic variation of the wave generator amplitude $a$ beyond the stability threshold. The geometrical parameters and stratification are fixed so that $(d,\tau)=(0.34,1.81)$. [Note that the curves of the beam width of unstable attractors are not shown here but, as for stable attractors, they are similar to the ones of the wavelength.]{}
The wavelength $\lambda$ and the amplitude $|\partial \rho' / \partial \eta_1|$ of branch $1$ are measured as described in section \[branch\_wavelength\_width\], after frequency and space filtering. Thus, the presence of the TRI does not disturb the measurements of the wavelength and the amplitude of the primary wave (attractor beam) because the wave fields oscillating at other frequencies than $\Omega_0$ do not appear in the filtered data. Figure \[fig:wave\_length\_TRI\] shows the time history of the horizontal density gradient field (a) at a point located on the branch $1$ for the unstable attractor with $a=4.4$ mm (see Exp. $6$ in Table \[tab:series\_exp\]) and the time-histories of wavelength (b) and wave amplitude (c) at different values of $a$. Since, in the linear regime, the data for the wavelengths collapse onto a single curve (see Fig. \[fig:etablissement\_attracteur\_stable\]), for the sake of clarity, we plot the average of these data as a function of time in Fig. \[fig:wave\_length\_TRI\](b), using a solid black line. Let us focus on Exp. 6 of Table \[tab:series\_exp\], plotted using red squares. One can see that the wavelength of this unstable attractor follows the universal curve until $30\,T_0$, the time corresponding to the onset of TRI in panel (a). This means that, before the start of the instability, the attractor experiences the linear geometric focusing following the scenario described in previous section. After $30\,T_0$, the wavelength of the unstable attractor departs from the universal curve for linear regime (solid black line). In Fig. \[fig:wave\_length\_TRI\](c), where the amplitude of branch $1$ is plotted as a function of time, one can see that the amplitude of the attractor reaches a maximum around $30\,T_0$, when the instability starts. Thus, through linear focusing, all the energy injected by the wave generator is focused into the attractor and the amplitude increases until the TRI threshold is reached. After $t=30\,T_0$, when the amount of energy focused into the branch $1$ is too high, the instability starts. This brings the attractor to a larger wavelength, which appears constant with time beyond a transient growth, after roughly $50\,T_0$. The amplitude of the attractor decays until it reaches a plateau, around $50\,T_0$. The duration of transients for the wavelength and amplitude after the onset of TRI is nearly the same. Thus, TRI balances the geometrical focusing by transferring a part of energy of the primary wave into the secondary waves. Consequently, the width of the branch $1$ increases as compared to the linear case.
The two other unstable experiments (Exps. $4$ and $8$ with cyan triangles and black diamonds) exhibit a behavior similar to Exp. $6$ (red squares). As can be seen in Fig. \[fig:wave\_length\_TRI\](b), the larger the amplitude of the wave generator, the earlier the wavelength curve departs from the linear scenario and the earlier the maximum of the amplitude is reached. For the fully developed nonlinear regime, i.e. after the transient following the onset of TRI, the larger the amplitude of the wave generator, the larger the wavelength of the primary wave. In the studied range of parameters, the amplitudes of the unstable attractors seem to reach saturation around the same value, independent of the amplitude of the wave generator as seen in \[fig:wave\_length\_TRI\](c). After the transient, the final values of the wavelength and the amplitude are respectively denoted $\lambda_f$ and $|\partial \rho' / \partial \eta_1|_f$.
The final values for the wavelengths and the amplitudes are plotted as a function of the amplitude of the wave generator $a$ in Figs. \[fig:psi\_VS\_a\](a) and (b). The values are determined by averaging the wavelengths or the amplitudes between $50$ and $75\,T_0$. For Fig. \[fig:psi\_VS\_a\], the eight experiments of Table \[tab:series\_exp\] (three stable and five unstable) have been used. Among the five unstable ones, only three have been plotted in Fig. \[fig:wave\_length\_TRI\], for the sake of clarity (see Table \[tab:series\_exp\]). Nevertheless, the extra-two unstable experiments (numbered $5$ and $7$) exhibit very similar characteristics as the ones presented in Fig. \[fig:wave\_length\_TRI\]. Figures \[fig:psi\_VS\_a\](a) and (b) summarize the steady states reached by the attractors. When the amplitude of the wave generator is low, there is no TRI: the wavelength is constant and independent of $a$ while the amplitude increases with $a$. When the amplitude of the wave generator is large, TRI appears: the wavelength increases with $a$ while the amplitude is constant and independent of $a$. Note that for the upper bound of the range of amplitude studied in experiments the value of $\lambda_{f}$ is roughly twice higher than at the lower bound. Laminar scaling suggest that the width of the wave beam is proportional to $\nu^{1/3}$. Thus, a comparable increase of the beam width in linear case would require an artificial “turbulent" viscosity $8$ times higher than the molecular one.
Numerical simulations in 2D setting\[numerics\]
-----------------------------------------------
As already mentioned, the scaling for the beam width in experiments is obscured by the effect of viscous losses at lateral walls [@BeckebanzeJFM2017]. The numerical calculations presented in [@BrouzetJFM2016] show that in a test tank of width $17$ cm and working depth $30$ cm about 25% of energy dissipation occur in boundary layers at lateral walls. To clarify the scaling laws in linear and nonlinear regimes, we performed a series of numerical calculations in a purely 2D setting for geometrically similar set-ups [~~~~]{} are characterized by $H/L=0.625$, $\alpha=27^{\circ}$, $\Omega=0.575$, $N=0.822$ rad/s. e consider three values of the water depth $H=30$, $46$ and $92$ cm, and a range of amplitudes of the wave generator $a$ from $0.4$ to $4$ mm. [~~~~]{}Figure \[fig:2Dnumerics\] presents the numerical data for the
.
non-dimensional wavelength $\lambda_{f}/H$ in [~~~~]{} and the ratio between the non-dimensional density gradient $$|\partial \tilde{\rho'} / \partial \tilde{\eta_1}|_f\equiv \frac{|\partial \rho' / \partial \eta_1|_f }{\bar{\rho}N^2/g}$$ and the dimensionless amplitude of wave generator $A$ in [~~~~]{}[~~~~]{} [~~~~]{} It can be seen that all the data collapse reasonably well on a common master curve, which has a horizontal branch corresponding to the linear scaling and a sloping branch corresponding to the nonlinear scaling due to the onset of TRI. [~~~~]{} Therefore, in the studied range of fluid depth which corresponds to typical values reached in experimental facilities, the behavior of wave attractors is universal, and the critical value of forcing corresponding to the transition from linear to nonlinear regime for geometrically similar configurations can be found by rescaling the data from a single experiment. It is worth noting that, in the nonlinear regime, the width of the wave beams increases roughly linearly with the amplitude of forcing, [~~~~]{} implies that an extrapolation of the linear scaling to the nonlinear regime would require an artificial turbulent viscosity proportional to the cube of the forcing amplitude. This illustrates the efficiency of TRI in the transfer of momentum from the primary wave beam.
[~~~~]{} that in sufficiently wide experimental tanks, where the effect of viscous losses at lateral walls in the total energy balance is negligible, the results of our 2D calculations should be in a good quantitative agreement with the experimental data. There is a possibility that, in large-scale experiments or at natural conditions, one may observe the development of a 3D instability similar to [@GayenSarkar2010], with [~~~~]{} implications to scaling. However, this issue is beyond the scope of the present study.
Conclusions {#Conclusion}
===========
In absence of dissipation , internal (inertial) wave attractors in ideal fluids stratified in density (angular momentum) exhibit singular behavior. In particular, internal wave attractors in 2D problem represent closed linear loops, where the energy density is infinite. The regularization of this problem has been based on the concept of interior shear layers, which removes the singularity and yields the scaling for the equilibrium width of the attractor beams [@RGV2001; @RVG2002; @HBDM2008; @GSP2008]. In the linear viscous model, this scaling predicts that the beam width is proportional to the $1/3$ power of the kinematic viscosity and the distance along the beam. Importantly, the equilibrium beam width corresponds to the balance between injection and dissipation of energy in the confined fluid domain. Therefore, the beam width is sensitive to the particular dissipative mechanism operating in the system.
In the present paper, we report experimental and numerical results on the linear and nonlinear scaling in wave attractors. We use two geometrically similar experimental set-ups, scaled to factor 3, with a classic trapezoidal geometry of the fluid domain filled with a uniformly stratified fluid. In the linear regime, we recover the classic viscous scaling for the beam width, which is not affected by variations of the amplitude of the input perturbation. Note that the viscous scaling assumed by the concept of interior shear layers is not exact in a typical experimental set-up due to energy losses at lateral walls as discussed in [@BeckebanzeJFM2017]. As the input perturbation increases beyond a given threshold, we observe the onset of triadic resonance instability, which replaces the viscous transfer of momentum by a more efficient mechanism involving the flux of momentum due to secondary waves emanating from the primary wave beam. In this nonlinear regime, the beam width increases linearly with the amplitude of the input perturbation. The growth of the beam width can be qualitatively interpreted as the effect of fictitious “turbulent" viscosity which increases as the forcing amplitude with a power $3$.
Numerical 2D simulations performed in the present study yield a similar behavior, which is also in qualitative agreement with an apparent broadening of wave beams at large forcing in inertial wave attractors [@JouveOgilvie2014]. The numerical simulations have been performed for three geometrically similar set-ups, in the range of fluid depth between $0.3$ and $1$ m corresponding to typical experimental conditions. We show that under the appropriate scaling, the results for the beam width are universal with a reasonable accuracy both in linear and nonlinear regimes.
Future research can be pursued in several directions. At large scales, there is a yet unexplored possibility of 3D instability in a nominally 2D problem [@GayenSarkar2010]. At strong forcing, some mixing in wave attractors may occur as described in [@BrouzetEPL2016; @BrouzetJFM2017], motivating further research on scaling of “turbulent" vertical diffusivity for highly nonlinear regimes. Exploration of highly nonlinear regimes for wave attractors in spherical shells [@MaasHarlander2007; @RieutordValdettaro2010; @BaruteauRieutord2013] may also present an interesting line for further research.
This work was supported by the LABEX iMUST (ANR-10-LABX-0064) of Université de Lyon, within the program “Investissements d’Avenir” (ANR-11-IDEX-0007) operated by the French National Research Agency (ANR), and also supported by Ministry of Education and Science of Russia (RFMEFI60714X0090, grant number 14.607.21.0090). DNS were performed on the supercomputer Lomonosov of Moscow State University. This work has been achieved thanks to the resources of PSMN from ENS de Lyon. E. V. E. gratefully acknowledges [~~~~]{} as a Marie Curie incoming fellow at Laboratoire de physique ENS de Lyon[~~~~]{}.
, [New perspectives in turbulence: scaling laws, asymptotics, and intermittency]{}, [*SIAM Rev.*]{} [**40**]{}(2), 265–291 (1998).
, [Inertial waves in a differentially rotating spherical shell.]{} [*J. Fluid Mech.*]{} [**719**]{}, 47–81 (2013)
, [Damping of quasi-2D internal wave attractors by rigid wall friction]{}, [*J. Fluid Mech.*]{} [**???**]{}, ???–??? (in preparation).
, [Experimental study of parametric subharmonic instability for internal plane waves]{}, [*J. Fluid Mech.*]{} [**723**]{}, 1–20 (2013).
, [Finite-size effects in parametric subharmonic instability]{}, [*J. Fluid Mech.*]{} [**759**]{}, 739–750 (2014).
, [The effects of boundary turbulence on canyon flows forced by periodic along-shelf currents]{}, [*J. Fluid Mech.*]{} [**723**]{}, 1–20 (2006).
, [Energy cascade in internal wave attractors]{}, [*EPL.*]{} [**113**]{}, 44001 (2016).
, [Internal wave attractors examined using laboratory experiments and 3D numerical simulations]{}, [*J. Fluid Mech.*]{} [**793**]{}, 109–131 (2016).
, [Internal wave attractors: different scenarios of instability]{}, [*J. Fluid Mech.*]{} [**811**]{}, 544–568 (2017).
, [Whole field density measurements by ’synthetic’ schlieren]{}, [*Exp. Flu.*]{} [**28**]{}, 322–335 (2000).
, [Near-critical refection of internal waves]{}, [*J. Fluid Mech.*]{} [**390**]{}, 271–295 (1999).
, [Instabilities of internal wave beams]{}, [*Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech.*]{} (2018)
, [Non-linear evolution of tidally forced inertial waves in rotating fluid bodies]{}, [*Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.*]{} [**439**]{}(1), 845–860 (2014).
, [Generation and maintenance of bulk turbulence by libration-driven elliptical instability]{}, [*Phys. Fluids*]{} [**27**]{}, 066601 (2015).
, [Advanced optimization of correlation imaging velocimetry algorithms]{}, [*Exp. Fluids.*]{} [**29**]{}(S), S13–S22 (2000).
, [An overlapping Schwarz method for spectral element solution of the incompressible Navier–Stokes equations]{}, [*J. Comput. Phys.*]{} [**133**]{}, 84–101 (1997).
, [Filter-based stabilization of spectral element methods]{}, [*C.R. Acad. Sci. Paris. Ser. I—Analyse Numer.*]{} [**332**]{}, 265–270 (2001).
, [Spectral element methods for large scale parallel Navier—Stokes calculations]{}, [*Comp. Methods in Appl. Mech. and Engineering*]{} [**116 (1-4)**]{}, 69–76 (1994).
, [Turbulence during the generation of internal tide on a critical slope]{}, [*Phys. Rev. Lett.*]{} [**104**]{}, 218502 (2010)
, [A novel internal waves generator]{}, [*Experiments in Fluids*]{} [**42**]{},123–130 (2007).
, [Numerical simulation of a two-dimensional internal wave attractor]{}, [*J. Fluid Mech.*]{} [**614**]{}, 1–14 (2008).
, [High-Reynolds number Taylor-Couette turbulence]{}, [*Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech.*]{} [**48**]{}, 53–80 (2016).
, [Observations on the wavenumber spectrum and evolution of an internal wave attractor]{}, [*J. Fluid Mech.*]{} [**598**]{}, 373–382 (2008).
, [The generation of internal waves by vibrating elliptic cylinders. Part 1. Inviscid solution]{}, [*J. Fluid Mech.*]{} [**351**]{}, 105–118 (1997).
, [The generation of internal waves by vibrating elliptic cylinders. Part 2. Approximate viscous solution]{}, [*J. Fluid Mech.*]{} [**351**]{}, 119–138 (1997).
, [Experimental parametric subharmonic instability in stratifed fuids]{}, [*Phys. Fluids*]{} [**24(4)**]{}, 041703 (2012).
, [Direct numerical simulations of an inertial wave attractor in linear and nonlinear regimes]{}, [*J. Fluid Mech.*]{} [**745**]{}, 223–250 (2014).
, [Parametric subharmonic instability of internal waves: locally confined beams versus monochromatic wave trains]{}, [*J. Fluid Mech.*]{} [**757**]{}, 381–402 (2014).
, [Instability mechanisms of a two-dimensional progressive internal gravity wave]{}, [*J. Fluid Mech.*]{} [**548**]{}, 165–196 (2006).
, [Flows Driven by libration, precession and tides]{}, [*Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech.*]{} [**47**]{}, 163–193 (2015)
, [Observations of an internal wave attractor in a confined stably stratified fluid]{}, [*Nature*]{} [**388**]{}, 557–561 (1997).
, [Equatorial wave attractors and inertial oscillations.]{} [*J. Fluid Mech.*]{} [**570**]{}, 44–67 (2007)
, [Geometric focusing of internal waves]{}, [*J. Fluid Mech.*]{} [**300**]{}, 1–41 (1995).
, [Refection and diffraction of internal waves analysed with the Hilbert transform]{}, [*Phys. Fluids*]{} [**20(8)**]{}, 086601 (2008).
, [New wave generation.]{} [*J. Fluid Mech.*]{} [**657**]{}, 308–334 (2010)
, [A theoretical and experimental investigation of the phase configuration of internal waves of small amplitude in a density-stratified fluid]{}, [*J. Fluid Mech.*]{} [**28**]{}, 1–16. (1967).
, [Wave attractors and the asymptotic dissipation rate of tidal disturbances]{}, [*J. Fluid Mech.*]{} [**543**]{}, 19–44 (2005).
, [Inertial waves in a rotating spherical shell: attractors and asymptotic spectrum]{}, [*J. Fluid Mech.*]{} [**435**]{}, 103–144 (2001).
, [Viscous dissipation by tidally forced inertial modes in a rotating spherical shell.]{} [*J. Fluid Mech.*]{} [**643**]{}, 363–394 (2010)
, [Analysis of singular inertial modes in a spherical shell: the slender toroidal shell model.]{} [*J. Fluid Mech.*]{} [**463**]{}, 345–360 (2002).
, [Nonlinear fate of internal waves attractors]{}, [*Physical Review Letters.*]{} [**110**]{}, 234501 (2013).
, [Laboratory modelling of athmospheric dynamical processes]{}, [*Eur. Phys. J. Conferences.*]{} [**1**]{}, 101–111 (2009).
, [On trapped oscillations of a rotating fluid in a thin spherical shell]{}, [*Tellus*]{} [**23**]{}, 506–510 (1971).
, [On trapped oscillations of a rotating fluid in a thin spherical shell II.]{} [*Tellus*]{} [**24**]{}, 283–287 (1972).
, [Visualization and measurement of internal waves by ’synthetic’ schlieren. Part 1. Vertically oscillating cylinder]{}, [*J. Fluid Mech.*]{} [**390**]{}, 93–126 (1999).
, [A similarity solution for viscous internal waves]{}, [*J. Fluid Mech.*]{} [**54**]{}, 495–506 (1972).
, [Laboratory dynamo experiments]{}, [*Space Sci. Rev.*]{} [**152**]{}, 543–564 (2010).
, [Internal wave generation by oscillation of a sphere, with application to internal tides]{}, [*J. Fluid Mech.*]{} [**666**]{}, 308–357 (2011).
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'We present results on the radiation drag exerted by an isotropic and homogenous background of ${\rm {Ly{\alpha}}}$ photons on neutral gas clouds orbiting within H[ii]{} regions around Population III stars of different masses. The Doppler shift causes a frequency difference between photons moving in the direction of the cloud and opposite to it resulting in a net momentum loss of the cloud in the direction of motion. We find that half of the angular momentum of gas with $v_{\theta} \lesssim 20~{\rm km\;s^{-1}}$ near ($r \lesssim 3~\rm kpc$) a Population III star of $120~{M_{\odot}}$ at $z=20$ is lost within $\sim 10^{6}~\rm yr$. The radiation drag is a strong function of cloud velocity that peaks at $v \sim 20\ {\rm km\;s^{-1}}$ reflecting the frequency dependence of the photon cross section. Clouds moving with velocities larger than $\sim 100~{\rm km\;s^{-1}}$ loose their angular momentum on time scales of $\sim 10^{8}\; \rm yr$. At lower redshifts radiation drag becomes inefficient as the ${\rm {Ly{\alpha}}}$ photon density in H[ii]{} regions decreases by a factor $(1+z)^{3}$ and angular momentum is lost on time scales $\gtrsim 10^{8}~\rm yr$ even for low velocity clouds. Our results suggest that a sweet spot exists for the loss of angular momentum by radiation drag for gas clouds at $z > 10$ and with $ v \sim 20 \ {\rm km\;s^{-1}}$. Comparison to dynamical friction forces acting on typical gas clouds suggest that radiation drag is the dominant effect impacting the orbit. We propose that this effect can suppress the formation of extended gas discs in the first galaxies and help gas accretion near galactic centres and central black holes.'
author:
- |
Hidenobu Yajima$^{1, 2, 3}$[^1] and Sadegh Khochfar$^{1}$\
$^{1}$ SUPA[^2], Institute for Astronomy, University of Edinburgh, Royal Observatory, Edinburgh, EH9 3HJ, UK\
$^{2}$Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics, Pennsylvania State University, 525 Davey Lab, University Park, PA 16802, USA\
$^{3}$Institute for Gravitation and the Cosmos, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA 16802, USA\
date: 'Accepted ?; Received ??; in original form ???'
---
\[firstpage\]
radiative transfer – galaxies: formation – galaxies: evolution –cosmology: dark ages, reionization, first stars
Introduction
============
Unraveling the evolution from Population III (Pop III) stars to the first galaxies is an open issue. The key to gain insight into this transition is to understand how gas is accreted onto proto-galaxies and its ability to conserve angular momentum or not. The latter has direct impact on the formation of possible discs [@Pawlik11; @Romano-Diaz11], star formation [@Khochfar11] or feeding of black hole seeds [@DiMatteo12; @Agarwal12; @Agarwal13] .
In this study, we investigate the angular momentum loss of accreted gas clouds around Pop III stars due to radiation drag by ${\rm {Ly{\alpha}}}$ photons. In an isotropic radiation field, moving gas is exerted to stronger radiation pressure along opposite sites with respect to the moving direction due to the Doppler shift. A similar effect on dust is classically known as the Poynting-Robertson effect [@Poynting1903; @Robertson37] and used to explain angular momentum loss of dust in the solar system.
The effect of the radiation drag on primordial gas clouds in the early universe was studied analytically [@Loeb93] and numerically [@Umemura93]. @Loeb93 and @Umemura93 focused on the radiation drag exerted by the cosmic microwave background and suggested angular momentum of gas could efficiently be lost at $z \sim 200$, resulting in supermassive stars under the assumption that stellar source cause cosmic reionization, and that the CMB photons can efficiently be scattered by free electrons.
However, current theoretical work shows Pop III stars form at $z \sim 15-20$ followed by the first galaxies at $z\sim 10-15$ [e.g., @Bromm11]. The CMB is therefore no longer a possible source for efficient radiation drag on primordial gas.
In this paper we revisit the effects of radiation drag, in contrast to earlier work focusing on ${\rm {Ly{\alpha}}}$ radiation fields produced by Pop III stars. Unlike in the case for CMB photons, the number density of ${\rm {Ly{\alpha}}}$ photons from Pop III stars can be much higher because they can be locally trapped within H[ii]{} regions by scattering on their borders. In addition, the cross section near the line centre is quite high $\sim 10^{-14}~\rm cm^{2}$ [@Verhamme06], which is $\sim 10$ orders of magnitude higher than the Thomson scattering cross section. As a result, the orbiting gas clouds in the ${\rm {Ly{\alpha}}}$ radiation fields experience numerous scattering events and are subject to a drag force. However, unlike Compton scattering of continuum radiation, scattering of ${\rm {Ly{\alpha}}}$ photons is very sensitive to the velocity of the cloud. The Doppler shift of the line centre and the strong frequency dependence of the cross section may lead to an only small drag force. In this letter, we study the effect of radiation drag on accreted gas clouds under different physical conditions such as e.g., different stellar masses of Pop III stars, redshifts, and initial velocities of infalling clouds.
Our paper is organized as follows. We describe our model and method to calculate the radiation drag in Section \[sec:model\]. In Section \[sec:result\], we show the velocity evolution of test gas particles, and show the dependence on stellar mass and redshift. Finally, in Section \[sec:summary\], we summarize our main conclusions and discuss limitations of our model.
Model {#sec:model}
=====
Based on the current standard cold dark matter paradigm, halos grow via merging and accretion. High-density gas entering the H[ii]{} regions around Pop III stars, which exceeds the virial radius of the halo [@Abel07], can stay neutral due to self-shielding [e.g., @Yajima12a], but experience numerous scatter events with ${\rm {Ly{\alpha}}}$ photons [@Dijkstra12; @Laursen13]. The critical density required for such clouds to stay neutral via self-shielding in the vicinity of the Pop III star depends on the flux of stellar radiation seen by these clouds. Following @Umemura12 we can estimate the threshold density via, $${\dot{N}_{\rm Ion}^{\gamma}}\frac{\pi r_{\rm c}^{2}}{ 4 \pi D^{2}} < \frac{4 \pi r_{\rm c}^{3}}{3} \alpha_{\rm B} n_{\rm c}^{2},
\label{eq:ion}$$ where ${\dot{N}_{\rm Ion}^{\gamma}}$ is the ionizing photon emissivity of the star, and $\alpha_{\rm B}$ is the recombination coefficient to all excited levels of hydrogen [@Hui97], $D$ is the distance between the star and the gas cloud, $n_{\rm c}$ is the hydrogen number density of the cloud and $r_{\rm c}$ its radius. In this work, we assume that the gas temperature is $10^{4}~\rm K$ in the H[ii]{} region with $\alpha_{\rm B} = 2.6 \times 10^{-13}~\rm cm^{-3} \; s^{-2}$ [@Hui97]. The left-side of the above equation is the maximum incident photon number, while the right-hand side is the total recombination rate in an ionized cloud. Using typical parameters and rearranging the threshold density for self-shielding is given by, $$n_{\rm th} = 8.9 \times10^{-2}~{\rm cm^{-3}} \left( \frac{{\dot{N}_{\rm Ion}^{\gamma}}}{10^{50}~ \rm s^{-1}} \right)^{\frac{1}{2}} \left( \frac{D}{\rm 1~kpc} \right)^{-1} \left( \frac{r_{\rm c}}{\rm 100~pc} \right)^{-\frac{1}{2}}.
\label{eq:ionthresh}$$
The above relation approximates the limiting case of an ionizing front (I-front) not being able to sweep through a neutral gas cloud. Once equilibrium between ionization and recombinations in the cloud is reached, the I-front stalls and ionization balance gives ${\dot{N}_{\rm Ion}^{\gamma}}\pi r_{\rm c}^{2} / (4 \pi D^{2}) = V_{\rm HII} \alpha_{\rm B} n_{\rm c}^{2}$, where $V_{\rm HII}$ is the volume of the ionized region. Taking the volume-weighted neutral fraction $(\chi_{\rm HI})$ of the cloud as $1-(V_{\rm HII}/V_{\rm c})$ with $V_{\rm c} = 4 \pi r_{\rm c}^{3} / 3$ as the total volume of the cloud, the neutral fraction becomes $\chi_{\rm HI} = 1- \frac{3 {\dot{N}_{\rm Ion}^{\gamma}}}{16 \pi \alpha_{\rm B} D^{2} r_{\rm c} n_{\rm c}^{2}}$. A cloud of $r_{\rm c} = 100~\rm pc$ with densities larger than $0.13~\rm cm^{-3}$ will stay mostly neutral $\chi_{\rm HI} \ge 0.5$ at a distance $D=1~\rm kpc$ from a star with ${\dot{N}_{\rm Ion}^{\gamma}}=10^{50}~\rm s^{-1}$. This estimate is lower than in the case of ionization equilibrium under the optically thin approximation and same neutral fraction everywhere in the cloud, i.e., ${\dot{N}_{\rm Ion}^{\gamma}}\sigma_{\rm Ion} \chi_{\rm HI} / (4 \pi D^{2}) = \alpha_{\rm B} n_{\rm c} (1-\chi_{\rm HI})^{2}$ where $\sigma_{\rm Ion} = 6.3 \times 10^{-18}~\rm cm^{2}$ is the ionization cross section [@Osterbrock06]. Under this approxmation the above cloud becomes $\chi_{\rm HI} \ge 0.5$ at densities $ \ge 40.7~\rm cm^{-3}$. However, in realistic situations the ionizing flux diminishes in the cloud and the neutral fraction can be much higher than the estimation under the optically thin approximation and typically deviates from this approximation at $n_{\rm c} \gtrsim 0.01~\rm cm^{-3}$ [@Yajima12a; @Rahmati13], suggesting this estimate to be an upper limit on the density. In addition, the equation \[eq:ionthresh\] can be converted to a column density threshold by multiplying $2r_{\rm c}$, i.e., $N_{\rm th} = 5.5 \times 10^{19} ~{\rm cm^{-2}}~({\dot{N}_{\rm Ion}^{\gamma}}/10^{50}~{\rm s^{-1}})(D/1~{\rm kpc})^{-1}(r_{\rm c}/100~{\rm pc})^{1/2}$. A cloud of $N_{\rm th} = 5.5 \times 10^{19} ~{\rm cm^{-2}}$ corresponds to a typical Lyman limit system [@Prochaska10], and is mostly optically thick to external UV radiation as shown in recent cosmological simulations [@Faucher11; @Rahmati13a]. Hence, clouds with $n > n_{\rm th}$ are self-shielded against stellar radiation which is also supported by recent radiative-hydrodynamics simulations [@Susa06b; @Umemura12]. To estimate whether infalling gas clouds at these high redshifts can indeed stay neutral we consider the case of a cloud in a mini halo being accreted at $z=20$. Its mean density is $\sim 18\pi^{2}$ times that of the background [@Bryan98], or $n_{\rm H}=1.9\times10^{-7} \times (1+20)^{3} \times 18\pi^{2} = 0.3~\rm cm^{-3}$. This is larger than the estimated threshold assuming a Pop III star of $120~ {M_{\odot}}$ as the central source, and predicts neutral infall. Further support comes from simulations by @Abel07 who show that a gas cloud accreted along a cosmic filament does survive photoevaporation even at a distance of 50 pc from the star [see also @Umemura12]. On the other hand, the threshold density is sensitive to the separation to the star. If clouds enter the virial radius, within the life time of stars ($\sim 3$ Myr), for a virial radius of $D \sim 70$ pc (corresponding to a dark matter halo of $\sim 10^{5}~{M_{\odot}}$ at $z=20$) the threshold density gets $n_{\rm th} = 1.3~\rm cm^{-3}$ which is larger than the mean density of the halo. It is therefore likely that some fraction of the infalling clouds, in particular those that come closest to the star on a short time scale, are destroyed due to the photoevaporation [see also @Hasegawa09a; @Susa09].
Even after the death of the central star in a H[ii]{} region, ${\rm {Ly{\alpha}}}$ photons are produced over a recombination timescale ($\tau \sim 6 \times10^{7}~\rm yr$ at z=20), and can be trapped in the residual H[ii]{} region. As well as ${\rm {Ly{\alpha}}}$ photons, ionizing photons are also emitted by recombination from a halo. The total power of ionizing photons from a halo by recombination is similar to that by stellar sources [e.g., @Raicevic13] leaving infalling clouds neutral due to self-shielding. The recombination time scale of gas in haloes is much smaller than that of the inter-galactic medium (IGM), $\tau \sim 6\times10^{5}$ yr terminating ionizing photons from a halo at almost the same time when the central star dies. Although the production of ionizing photons from the IGM is continuing its emissivity is small due to its low density. At this stage, even lower-density accreted gas can stay neutral because there is no strong ionizing photon contribution and interact with the abundant ${\rm {Ly{\alpha}}}$ photons.
${\rm {Ly{\alpha}}}$ photons interacting along the direction of motion have larger energies than those opposite to it due to the Doppler shift. This leads to a net momentum loss and drag force in the direction of motion of $\Delta P \sim 2\times h\nu_{0}(v/c^2)$ , where $\nu_{0}=2.466\times10^{15}~\rm Hz$ is the frequency of the line centre. Figure \[fig:img\] shows the schematic view of our model. The drag force is proportional to the number density of ${\rm {Ly{\alpha}}}$ photons locked up within the H[ii]{} region. In the following paragraphs we derive estimates for the number density of ${\rm {Ly{\alpha}}}$ photons.
We estimate the size of H[ii]{} regions assuming a uniform inter-galactic medium (IGM) around Pop III stars and neglect the clumpiness of the IGM which has been shown in numerical simulations to be small and $\lesssim 3$ [@Pawlik09b; @Paardekooper13]. This leads to an estimate of the size of the H[ii]{} region in equilibrium based on the Str[ö]{}mgren sphere analysis [@Stromgren39] : $$R_{\rm S} = \left( \frac{3\dot{N}_{\rm Ion}^{\gamma}{f_{\rm esc}}}{4\pi \alpha_{\rm B} n_{\rm H}^{2}(z)} \right)^{\frac{1}{3}},$$ where $R_{\rm S}$ is the radius of the Str[ö]{}mgren sphere, ${\dot{N}_{\rm Ion}^{\gamma}}$ is the ionizing photon emissivity of stars, ${f_{\rm esc}}$ is the escape fraction of ionizing photons from the halo. For small haloes hosting Pop III stars, most of the gas can easily evaporate due to photo-ionization and a large fraction of ionizing photon can escape [@Whalen04; @Kitayama04]. Note however, that estimates for ${f_{\rm esc}}$ can vary significantly with halo and stellar mass [@Kitayama04; @Yoshida07], and are somewhat dependent on the resolution of the simulation [@Yajima11; @Rahmati13]. Here we assume ${f_{\rm esc}}= 0.5$ which is supported by recent simulations [@Abel07; @Paardekooper13]. The recombination time scale is of order $10^{7}-10^{8}~\rm yr$ and as such longer than the life time of massive Pop III stars resulting in the ionization front being within $R_{\rm S}$ during the life time of the star [@Spitzer78], $$R_{\rm I} = R_{\rm S} \left( 1 - {\rm exp}(-t_{\rm life}/\tau_{\rm rec})\right)^{1/3},$$ where $t_{\rm life}$ is life time of the star, $\tau_{\rm rec} \sim 1/\alpha_{\rm B} n_{\rm H}$ is the recombination time-scale, and $ R_{\rm I}$ is the radius of the ionization front. About 0.68 of ionizing photons emitted from stars are converted to ${\rm {Ly{\alpha}}}$ photons via recombinations [@Osterbrock06]. A large fraction of these ${\rm {Ly{\alpha}}}$ photons is scattered at the outer H[i]{} layer [@Verhamme06; @Dijkstra08] and locked inside the H[ii]{} region, leading to a significant increase in their number density [@Yajima12g]. We estimate the total number of ${\rm {Ly{\alpha}}}$ photons in H[ii]{} regions as $$\label{nlya}
N_{{\rm {Ly{\alpha}}}} \sim 0.68 \times (1 - {f_{\rm esc}}) \times {\dot{N}_{\rm Ion}^{\gamma}}\times {t_{\rm trap}},$$ where $t_{\rm trap}$ is the trapping time of ${\rm {Ly{\alpha}}}$ photons in the H[ii]{} region. Here, as a fiducial model, we assume for simplicity that ${t_{\rm trap}}= {t_{\rm life}}$. This model implies that absorbed ionizing photons in haloes convert to ${\rm {Ly{\alpha}}}$ photons via the recombination process and are then stocked in the ionized region. The drag force ${F_{\rm drag}}$ is proportional to the number density of ${\rm {Ly{\alpha}}}$ photons and thus ${F_{\rm drag}}\propto (1-{f_{\rm esc}})/{f_{\rm esc}}$ because the ionized regions become smaller as $V_{\rm HII} \propto {f_{\rm esc}}$ and the total ${\rm {Ly{\alpha}}}$ photon number increases with $N_{{\rm {Ly{\alpha}}}} \propto (1-{f_{\rm esc}})$. Hence, ${F_{\rm drag}}$ increases as the ${f_{\rm esc}}$ decreases, while the volume of the trapped ${\rm {Ly{\alpha}}}$ radiation field becomes smaller. The frequency of ${\rm {Ly{\alpha}}}$ photons changes during each scattering event. Typically after an average of $N_{\rm scat} \sim 0.9 \tau_{0}$ scattering events [@Harrington73], the ${\rm {Ly{\alpha}}}$ photon frequency changes to frequencies with low cross sections and they escape from the previously optically thick medium. In the case of outflowing gas like the IGM, only photons at longer wavelength than $\nu_{0}$ can travel for long distances [@Loeb99; @Laursen09a; @Yajima12b]. On the other hand, for circumgalactic gas that is infalling only photons at shorter wavelengths can escape from the local region [@Yajima12f]. If we consider an outflow paralleling the Hubble flow, the optical depth for the IGM is $\tau_{0} \sim10^{6}$. Under such circumstances ${\rm {Ly{\alpha}}}$ photons are efficiently scattered at the outer H[i]{} layer [@Verhamme06; @Dijkstra08; @Yajima13b]. The trapping time of ${\rm {Ly{\alpha}}}$ photons (${t_{\rm trap}}$) in H[ii]{} regions can be much longer than the life time of Pop III stars $\sim 10^{6}~\rm yr$ [@Schaerer02] by ${t_{\rm trap}}\sim 0.9 \tau_{0} \times 2R_{\rm I} / {\rm c} \gtrsim 10^{10}~\rm yr$, here we use $R_{\rm I} \sim 2.9 ~\rm kpc$ representative for a Pop III star with 120 ${M_{\odot}}$ at $z=20$. Hence, all emitted ${\rm {Ly{\alpha}}}$ photons from haloes can be locked within the H[ii]{} region. This estimate is an upper limit, as some fraction can enter into the H[i]{} layer and escape. Please note that even after a star dies, the recombination processes in the residual H[ii]{} region keeps producing ${\rm {Ly{\alpha}}}$ and ionizing photons. The total number of ${\rm {Ly{\alpha}}}$ photons continues increase during this time due to the trapping effect, while ionizing photons are destroyed via absorption by hydrogen and recombination to excited levels. In this work we use a constant value for the density of ${\rm {Ly{\alpha}}}$ photons based on Eq.\[nlya\]. However, the trapping time becomes shorter in the recombining IGM. @Adams75 derived the trapping time in spherical uniform and plane-parallel clouds. He showed $t_{\rm trap} \sim 15 t_{\rm cross}$ for $3 <{\rm log}\tau_{0} < 6$, where $\tau_{0}$ is the optical depth of the ${\rm {Ly{\alpha}}}$ line centre and $t_{\rm cross}$ is the crossing time of photons through a system of size $L$, i.e., $t_{\rm cross} = L / \rm c$. To account for this we also study cases with lower photon densities with ${t_{\rm trap}}= 15{t_{\rm cross}}$ with ${t_{\rm cross}}= 2R_{\rm I} / \rm c$. The number density of ${\rm {Ly{\alpha}}}$ photons in the H[ii]{} is then estimated by $n_{{\rm {Ly{\alpha}}}} = N_{{\rm {Ly{\alpha}}}} / V_{\rm HII} = 3 N_{{\rm {Ly{\alpha}}}} / 4\pi R_{\rm I}^{3}$. In our model we assumes a spherical symmetric H[ii]{} region. Depending on the environment and physical situation, geometries in general can vary from highly non-symmetric [@Abel07] to spherical [@Yoshida07]. However, the number density of ${\rm {Ly{\alpha}}}$ photons is dominated by the ionizing photon emissivity from the central star and the volume of H[ii]{} region as explained above. It is not sensitive to the detailed shape of the H[ii]{} region. We further assume a homogeneous ${\rm {Ly{\alpha}}}$ radiation field in the H[ii]{} region. In practice, since ${\rm {Ly{\alpha}}}$ photons are emitted from high-density gas within the halo, the ${\rm {Ly{\alpha}}}$ photon density increases towards the halo. However, due to the photon trapping effect and the associated scattering of Lyman-alpha photons into random directions within the H[ii]{} region, the cumulative number of ${\rm {Ly{\alpha}}}$ photons is much higher than the in situ emission from the halo and the ${\rm {Ly{\alpha}}}$ radiation field becomes highly homogeneous.
For conveniency, in what follows we introduce a variable $x \equiv (\nu - \nu_{0})/\Delta\nu_{\rm D}$, where $\Delta\nu_{\rm D} = [2k_{\rm B}T/(m_{\rm p}c^{2})]^{1/2}\nu_{0}$. The intensity can then be expressed as, $$I(x) = I_{0} H(a, x),$$ where $$I_{0} = \frac{n_{{\rm {Ly{\alpha}}}} {\rm c}}{ 4\pi \int dx H(a,x)},$$ and $a=\Delta\nu_{\rm L}/(2\Delta\nu_{\rm D})$ is the relative line width with the natural line width $\Delta\nu_{\rm L}=9.936\times10^{7}~\rm Hz$, and $H(a,x)$ is the Voigt function [@Verhamme06], $$H(a, x) = \frac{a}{\pi} \int_{-\infty}^{+\infty} \frac{e^{-y^{2}}}{(x-y)^{2} + a^{2}} dy
\sim \begin{cases}
e^{-x^{2}} & {\rm if} ~{\rm |x| < x_{\rm c}}\\
\frac{a}{\sqrt{\pi} x^{2}}
& {\rm if} ~{\rm |x| > x_{\rm c}},
\end{cases}$$ where $x_{\rm c}$ is the boundary frequency between a central resonant core and the power-law “damping wings”. We use the fitting formula by @Tasitsiomi06 which can reproduce the Voigt function smoothly even at $x \sim x_{\rm c}$. During each scattering event, the frequency of ${\rm {Ly{\alpha}}}$ photons changes. However, when the optical depth of the IGM is high, a very small fraction of ${\rm {Ly{\alpha}}}$ photons at the wing part of the distribution can escape from local regions. Hence, the line profile in H[ii]{} region stays a Voigt function. Furthermore, the propagation of I-front does not accompany high-velocity motion of gas [@Yoshida07]. Therefore, the line profile of ${\rm {Ly{\alpha}}}$ photons is not significantly affected by the I-front propagation.
In the rest frame of the gas, the radiation field is not isotropic due to the Doppler shift of photons, resulting in a net drag force. By considering the anisotropic radiation pressure [@Dijkstra08], the radiation drag in the ${\rm {Ly{\alpha}}}$ radiation field is estimated as $${F_{\rm drag}}= \frac{4\pi}{\rm c} \int dx \sigma(x) K(x),$$ where $$K(x) = \int d\mu\; \mu I(x),$$ with $\mu \equiv {\rm cos}\theta$. The cross section is estimated by $\sigma(x) = 1.04\times10^{-13} T_{4}^{-1/2} H(a,x)/\sqrt{\pi}$ [@Verhamme06].
The change in velocity for a gas cloud due to this drag is then $dV / dt = - {F_{\rm drag}}$. In what follows we will show results for the velocity evolution of gas clouds around a Pop III star of $120~{M_{\odot}}$ at $z=20$ as a fiducial case, and study cases with different masses and redshifts. For simplicity we will refer to velocity and angular momentum below and not separately distinguish between tangential and radial velocities, and momentum and angular momentum, respectively, as the ${\rm {Ly{\alpha}}}$ field is isotropic and homogenous.
![ Schematic view of our model. The high-density region of ${\rm {Ly{\alpha}}}$ photons is generated by recombinations in the H[ii]{} region. Gas can feel higher ${\rm {Ly{\alpha}}}$ radiation pressure to the opposite of the moving direction due to the Doppler shift, resulting in the radiation drag. []{data-label="fig:img"}](img2.eps)
Results {#sec:result}
=======
Figure \[fig:frad\_v\] shows ${F_{\rm drag}}$ as a function of gas velocity. The drag force ${F_{\rm drag}}$ is roughly proportional to the cross section and energy difference due to the Doppler shift, both of which are functions of the relative velocity with respect to the background radiation field. The energy difference of photons by Doppler shift is proportional to $\sim x$, $\Delta E \propto x$. Hence, if $x \ll 1$, and $\sigma \propto e^{-x^{2}} \sim 1 - x^{2}$, as a result, ${F_{\rm drag}}\propto x \propto v$. On the other hand, if $x \gg 1$, $\sigma \propto x^{-2}$, hence ${F_{\rm drag}}\propto x^{-1} \propto v^{-1}$. Therefore, the ${\rm {Ly{\alpha}}}$ radiation drag has a peak near $x \sim 1$. In comparison, radiation drag due to the Compton scattering of continuum radiation is simply proportional to the gas velocity [@Umemura93]. Furthermore, although the absolute value of ${F_{\rm drag}}$ changes with stellar mass and redshift due to the change in the number density of ${\rm {Ly{\alpha}}}$ photons, the functional shape does not. The shape depends only on the temperature of the gas from which ${\rm {Ly{\alpha}}}$ photons are emitted. In this work, we assume $T=10^{4}~\rm K$, as a result the peak is at $V = 17~{\rm km\;s^{-1}}$. With increasing temperature, the peak position moves to slightly larger velocities. However, the dependence on temperature is not significant in the range of $10^{4} \le T \le 3\times10^{4}~\rm K$ which is the typical temperature of H[ii]{} region. For $T=10^{4}~\rm K$ and $n_{\rm Ly\alpha}=2.5\times10^{-3}~\rm cm^{-3}$ (the case of $M_{\rm PopIII}=120~{M_{\odot}}$ at $z=20$), we can roughly fit the drag force by ${F_{\rm drag}}= 0.4\times10^{-32} {\rm erg\;cm^{-1}}(v/1~{\rm km\;s^{-1}})$ if $v < 17~{\rm km\;s^{-1}}$, and ${F_{\rm drag}}= 0.4\times10^{-31} {\rm erg\;cm^{-1}}(v/20~{\rm km\;s^{-1}})^{-1}$ if $v > 17~{\rm km\;s^{-1}}$. For different number densities $n_{\rm Ly\alpha}$ the drag force can be estimated scaling these fits linearly with the number density.
![ Radiation drag as a function of velocity of gas clouds around a Pop III star of $120~{M_{\odot}}$ at $z=20$. Dotted lines show virial velocities of $10^{5}, 10^{6}$ and $10^{7}~{M_{\odot}}$ halos at $z=20$. []{data-label="fig:frad_v"}](frad_v.eps)
The initial mass function of Pop III stars is still under debate, it likely depends on the environment of the formation site. Recently, @Hirano13 carried out a large set of cosmological hydrodynamics simulations following 100 Pop III stars forming, and suggested that the mass of Pop III stars might range from $ \sim 10 $ to $\sim 1000~{M_{\odot}}$. To account for this uncertainty, we here calculate ${F_{\rm drag}}$ around Pop III stars for a range of masses with the ionizing photon emissivities and life times of Pop III stars taken from @Schaerer02. The velocity evolution of gas clouds around Pop III stars of $15, 40, 120$ and $400~{M_{\odot}}$ at $z=20$ are shown in Figure \[fig:v\_mass\]. Different line types represent different initial velocities of clouds. As shown in the Figure, there is no clear difference in the velocity evolution for different stellar masses. Since luminosity is linearly proportional to stellar mass and the effective temperature for the stars considered here is almost constant at $T\sim10^{5}~\rm K$ [@Bromm01], the ionizing photon emissivity linearly increases with stellar mass ${\dot{N}_{\rm Ion}^{\gamma}}\propto M_{\rm PopIII}$. As shown in equation (1) and (2), $V_{\rm HII} = R_{\rm S}^{3} [1-{\rm exp}(-{t_{\rm life}}/\tau_{\rm rec})] \sim R_{\rm S}^{3} ({t_{\rm life}}/\tau_{\rm rec}) \propto {\dot{N}_{\rm Ion}^{\gamma}}{t_{\rm life}}$. Therefore, $n_{{\rm {Ly{\alpha}}}} \propto {\dot{N}_{\rm Ion}^{\gamma}}{t_{\rm life}}/ V_{\rm HII} = \rm const$ and hence the ${\rm {Ly{\alpha}}}$ radiation drag does not depend on stellar mass.
Clouds with ${V_{\rm Init}}=10~{\rm km\;s^{-1}}$ loose half of their angular momentum at $t = 1.0\times10^{6}~\rm yr$, and move with $V = 0.1~{\rm km\;s^{-1}}$ at $t=6.0\times10^{6}~\rm yr$. Gas clouds with ${V_{\rm Init}}=20$ and $30~{\rm km\;s^{-1}}$ are beyond the peak in ${F_{\rm drag}}$ but have somewhat higher drag forces acting on them than those at $V=10~{\rm km\;s^{-1}}$. These clouds pass through the peak of ${F_{\rm drag}}$ in their velocity evolution, and hence the time-averaged ${F_{\rm drag}}$ is higher than that of clouds starting out at ${V_{\rm Init}}=10~{\rm km\;s^{-1}}$. As a consequence, although their initial angular momenta are higher, the time scale required to reach $V=0.1~{\rm km\;s^{-1}}$ is only slightly larger to that of ${V_{\rm Init}}=10~{\rm km\;s^{-1}}$. For gas with ${V_{\rm Init}}=100~{\rm km\;s^{-1}}$, the velocity evolution is very slow, and becomes $V=0.1~{\rm km\;s^{-1}}$ at $t = 6.6\times10^{7}~\rm yr$ which is comparable to the recombination time scale at $z=20$. After recombination of the IGM, the mean free path of ${\rm {Ly{\alpha}}}$ photons becomes much shorter, and their frequency can quickly change to the red wing part, resulting in an escape from the local region and a drop in the number density of ${\rm {Ly{\alpha}}}$ photons. In effect only gas with ${V_{\rm Init}}\lesssim 100~{\rm km\;s^{-1}}$ loose a significant fraction of its angular momentum.
The circular velocities of dark matter haloes of $10^{6}$ and $10^{7}~{M_{\odot}}$ at $z=20$ are corresponding to $5.4$ and $11.6~{\rm km\;s^{-1}}$ respectively. The peak velocity of ${F_{\rm drag}}$ is corresponding to haloes with circular velocity of $3 \times 10^{7}~{M_{\odot}}$ at $z=20$ and $9\times10^{7}~{M_{\odot}}$ at $z=10$. In the current standard scenario, Pop III stars form in mini-halos of $\sim 10^{6}~{M_{\odot}}$ at $z\sim20$ [e.g., @Yoshida08], subsequently evolving into the first galaxies with $\sim 10^{8}~{M_{\odot}}$ at $z \sim 10$ [e.g., @Wise12a] via gas accretion and mergers. Given that the time scale associated with the loss of angular momentum is shorter than the dynamical time scale at $z=20$ we expect this effect to impact the growth from the first stars to the first galaxies.
Please note that we here assume a uniform IGM density field in which the photon drag takes place. This is justified outside the virial radius of the halo. We have neglected the interaction within the virial radius which is subject to complex geometry and physical state of the gas. However, the size of the H[ii]{} region is $\sim 10$ times larger than the typical virial radius ($V_{\rm Halo}/V_{\rm HII} \sim 10^{-3}$), and most of the angular momentum will be lost during the phase outside the virial radius.
![ Time evolution of the gas velocity of a neutral gas cloud in a ${\rm {Ly{\alpha}}}$ radiation field generated around Pop III stars at $z=20$. Different line types represent different initial velocities of the cloud. Vertical dotted lines are life times of stars and a recombination time scale at $z=20$.[]{data-label="fig:v_mass"}](v_mass.eps)
As well as having a wide range of stellar mass, Pop III stars can form at various redshifts [@Wise12a]. Figure \[fig:v\_z\] shows the velocity evolution at different redshifts. With decreasing redshift, ${F_{\rm drag}}$ decreases, resulting in slower velocity change. The Hydrogen number density of the IGM increases with redshift as $(1+z)^{3}$, resulting in $R_{\rm S} \propto (1+z)^{-2}$. In addition, with decreasing gas density, the recombination time scale becomes larger, $\tau_{\rm rec} \sim 1/(\alpha_{\rm B}n_{\rm H}(z))$ leading to $R_{\rm I} = R_{\rm S} (1-{\rm exp}(-{t_{\rm life}}/\tau_{\rm rec}))^{1/3} \sim R_{\rm S}({t_{\rm life}}/\tau_{\rm rec})^{1/3} \propto n_{\rm H}^{-1/3} \propto (1+z)^{-1}$. As a result, ${F_{\rm drag}}$ changes with redshift as $(1+z)^{3}$ because of $n_{{\rm {Ly{\alpha}}}} \propto V_{\rm HII}^{-1}$. At $z=7$, it takes $1.2 \times 10^{8}~\rm yr$ until a cloud with ${V_{\rm Init}}= 10~{\rm km\;s^{-1}}$ slows down to $0.1~{\rm km\;s^{-1}}$, which is longer than the recombination time scale. This effectively limits the ${\rm {Ly{\alpha}}}$ photon drag to high redshifts $(z > 7)$ even for ${V_{\rm Init}}\lesssim 10~{\rm km\;s^{-1}}$.
In this work, our model assumes H[ii]{} regions are surrounded by a neutral IGM, however, H[ii]{} bubbles in the IGM can overlap with each other at later redshifts. In this case the distance that ${\rm {Ly{\alpha}}}$ photons travel to residual H[i]{} boundaries is much larger and the scattering cross section is lower due to the Hubble flow. For example, @Iliev06a show the size of overlapping H[ii]{} bubbles around galaxies can be $\gtrsim 10~\rm Mpc$. Hence, as H[ii]{} bubbles overlap, the relative velocity of the H[i]{} boundary is much larger than the typical velocity width of the ${\rm {Ly{\alpha}}}$ line. At this point most of ${\rm {Ly{\alpha}}}$ photons escape from the large H[ii]{} bubble without scattering, and the ${\rm {Ly{\alpha}}}$ radiation drag is no longer effective.
![ Time evolution of gas cloud velocities in ${\rm {Ly{\alpha}}}$ radiation field surrounding a Pop III star of $120~{M_{\odot}}$ at different redshifts. Vertical dotted lines are a life time of star and a recombination time scale at $z=20$. []{data-label="fig:v_z"}](v_z.eps)
To gain further insight into the effect of the trapping time onto the ${\rm {Ly{\alpha}}}$ photon drag, we consider that after the death of stars, ionized hydrogen starts to recombine within H[ii]{} regions. Once the neutral fraction increases, the mean free path of ${\rm {Ly{\alpha}}}$ photons become shorter as a result of which they can quickly move to energies in the wing of the line profile (Eq. 7) and escape, resulting in smaller trapping times. @Adams75 showed the mean trapping times from optically-thick clouds with uniform density are ${t_{\rm trap}}\sim 15{t_{\rm cross}}$. We investigate the impact of the different trapping time on the momentum loss using ${t_{\rm trap}}= 15{t_{\rm cross}}$ with ${t_{\rm cross}}= 2R_{\rm I} / \rm c$. Figure \[fig:v\_shade\] shows the velocity evolution of gas around Pop III stars at $z=20$. The boundaries of the shaded regions indicates the velocity evolutions with $t_{\rm trap} = t_{\rm life}$ and $t_{\rm trap} = 15 t_{\rm cross}$. In the case of $120~{M_{\odot}}$, ${F_{\rm drag}}$ is lower than that of the fiducial model with $t_{\rm trap} = t_{\rm life}$ by a factor ${t_{\rm life}}/ (15{t_{\rm cross}}) = 8.9$. As a result the velocity of the gas reduces only slowly. The velocity of gas clouds with ${V_{\rm Init}}=10~{\rm km\;s^{-1}}$ becomes half at $t=0.9\times10^{7}~\rm yr$ and $0.1~{\rm km\;s^{-1}}$ at $t=5.6\times10^{7}~\rm yr$ for $120~{M_{\odot}}$. For high-velocity gas of ${V_{\rm Init}}=50~{\rm km\;s^{-1}}$, the velocity evolution is even slower, and the velocity becomes $0.1~{\rm km\;s^{-1}}$ at $t=1.3\times10^{8}~\rm yr$.
In addition, as shown in Figure \[fig:v\_shade\], the velocity evolution in the case of $t_{\rm trap} = 15 t_{\rm cross}$ significantly depends on stellar mass. With decreasing stellar mass, ${F_{\rm drag}}$ becomes lower and hence the velocity evolution gets slower. This is because, $R_{\rm I} \propto N_{\rm Ion}^{1/3}$, and $V_{\rm HII} \propto R_{\rm I}^{3}$ and ${t_{\rm trap}}\propto R_{\rm I}$, as a result, ${F_{\rm drag}}\propto {\dot{N}_{\rm Ion}^{\gamma}}R_{\rm I} / V_{\rm HII}= M_{\rm PopIII}^{1/3}$. For a $400~{M_{\odot}}$ star a gas cloud with ${V_{\rm Init}}=10~{\rm km\;s^{-1}}$ looses half of initial angular momentum at $t = 5.0\times10^{6}~\rm yr$ and becomes $V=0.1~{\rm km\;s^{-1}}$ at $t=3.0\times10^{7}~\rm yr$. On the other hand, for a $15~{M_{\odot}}$ star, it takes $9.5\times10^{7}~\rm yr$ until the initial velocity of $10~{\rm km\;s^{-1}}$ reduces to half that, and $5.8\times10^{8}~\rm yr$ until it is $0.1~{\rm km\;s^{-1}}$.
![ Time evolution of gas cloud velocity in a ${\rm {Ly{\alpha}}}$ radiation field around Pop III stars at $z=20$. The upper and lower values in the shaded regions correspond to the cases of $t_{\rm trap} = 15\times t_{\rm cross}$ and $t_{\rm trap} = t_{\rm life}$ respectively, where $t_{\rm trap}$ is the trapping time of ${\rm {Ly{\alpha}}}$ photons, $t_{\rm cross}$ is the crossing time of the system, and $t_{\rm life}$ is life time of the host star. Dotted lines are life times of stars and a recombination time scale at $z=20$. []{data-label="fig:v_shade"}](v_shade.eps)
Figure \[fig:half\] shows the time by which gas has lost half of its initial velocity (${t_{\rm half}}$). Depending on the situations, ${t_{\rm half}}$ changes, and ranges between $ \sim 1\times10^{6}$ to $\sim 2\times 10^{7}$ yr for $V \lesssim 20~\rm {\rm km\;s^{-1}}$. For $V \lesssim 20~\rm {\rm km\;s^{-1}}$, ${t_{\rm half}}$ is almost constant, because ${F_{\rm drag}}$ is roughly proportional to $V$. For ${V_{\rm Init}}> 20~{\rm km\;s^{-1}}$, ${t_{\rm half}}$ steeply increases with the initial velocity, it becomes $\sim 1~\rm Gyr$ at ${V_{\rm Init}}\gtrsim 100~{\rm km\;s^{-1}}$ and becomes larger than the recombination time scale. After recombination, ${\rm {Ly{\alpha}}}$ photons can quickly escape from local regions, resulting in a smaller trapping time. Therefore, for ${V_{\rm Init}}\gtrsim 100~{\rm km\;s^{-1}}$, our estimation of ${F_{\rm drag}}$ at $t > t_{\rm rec}$ should be considered an upper limit, and the time scale should be longer.
![ Time scale until the initial velocity becomes half. Different line types are corresponding to different situations. Solid, dot and dash line represent the models for $M_{\rm PopIII}=120~{M_{\odot}}$ at $z=20, 10$ and $7$ respectively. Long dash line shows the model for $M_{\rm PopIII}=120~{M_{\odot}}$ at $z=20$ with a photon trapping time of 15 times the crossing time. []{data-label="fig:half"}](half.eps)
DISCUSSION & SUMMARY {#sec:summary}
====================
In this paper, we have investigated the effect of radiation drag due to ${\rm {Ly{\alpha}}}$ scattering on accreted neutral gas clouds around first stars. We find that half of the angular momentum of gas with $v_{\rm c} \lesssim 10~\rm km\;s^{-1}$ near a Pop III star of $120~{M_{\odot}}$ at $z=20$ is lost within $\sim 10^{6}~\rm yr$. Due to the sensitivity of the scattering cross section to gas velocities, the ${\rm {Ly{\alpha}}}$ radiation drag (${F_{\rm drag}}$) declines strongly for gas clouds with velocities $\gtrsim 20~{\rm km\;s^{-1}}$. For initial gas cloud velocities of $100~{\rm km\;s^{-1}}$, more than half of the angular momentum can be kept for $5.1\times 10^{7}~\rm yr$ against the radiation drag. For our fiducial model with ${t_{\rm trap}}={t_{\rm life}}$, ${F_{\rm drag}}$ does not depend on stellar mass. On the other hand, ${F_{\rm drag}}$ is sensitive to redshift. At decreasing redshifts, due to larger sizes of H[ii]{} regions, the number density of ${\rm {Ly{\alpha}}}$ photon decreases. Consequently, ${F_{\rm drag}}$ decreases with $(1+z)^{3}$. We find that only at redshifts $z > 10$, the ${\rm {Ly{\alpha}}}$ radiation drag suppress circular motion of accreted gas efficiently, while it is not likely to block infalling stream motion like cold accretion with $V \gtrsim 100~{\rm km\;s^{-1}}$ [@Yajima12f]. The radiation drag time-scale is much shorter than that of the dynamical friction in gas medium [@Ostriker99] and the dynamical time scale at $z \sim 20$. Hence, this effect dominates the angular momentum transport and suppress the formation of large scale gas discs around the first objects like Pop III stars and seed black holes, and enhance the gas accretion towards them. Note that, however, if the clouds enter the virial radius before the stars die, they are most likely destroyed due to photoevaporation and no accretion onto the central object will occur.
Here, we focused on the gas accretion onto mini haloes in which Pop III stars formed. Similar ${\rm {Ly{\alpha}}}$ radiation drag may occur around the first galaxies at later times. Since the typical formation epoch is later than that of Pop III stars, the ${\rm {Ly{\alpha}}}$ photon density and ${F_{\rm drag}}$ are smaller. However, recent simulations have shown that the escape fraction of ionizing photons decreases with halo mass [@Yajima11; @Yajima12d; @Paardekooper13]. Smaller escape fractions result in compact H[ii]{} regions and high-density ${\rm {Ly{\alpha}}}$ photon fields, resulting in higher ${F_{\rm drag}}$. In addition, continuous star formation keeps the production of ${\rm {Ly{\alpha}}}$ photons ongoing and allows the radiation drag to occur for a longer time. Hence, the situation with respect to the ${\rm {Ly{\alpha}}}$ radiation drag around first galaxies is not certain.
After the death of stars, the central region in the H[ii]{} recombines fast, resulting in a H[ii]{} shell in between a central H[i]{} region and an outer H[i]{} border. The shell becomes smaller as the central region continues to recombine while the number of ${\rm {Ly{\alpha}}}$ photons in the shell stays roughly constant. The radiation drag increases during this period in the shell, until it has recombined or the ${\rm {Ly{\alpha}}}$ photons have escaped.
While the assumption of a uniform IGM density is fair, the gas within the virial radius is highly inhomogeneous [@Abel07]. This limits the validity of our model from the edge of the H[ii]{} region ($\sim$ a few kpc) to the virial radius ($\sim$ a few hundreds pc). However, as we show above this is the dominant region in which angular momentum loss occurs. The evolution inside the halo is complex as e.g. shock waves exist with $\gtrsim 10~{\rm km\;s^{-1}}$ [@Abel07; @Yoshida07]. These are generated in tandem with the I-front. At first, due to the high-density gas around the star, the I-front is D-type and slowly propagates with the shock. Then, reaching low-density regions, the I-front changes to R-type and quickly expands, while the shock is left behind stagnating at a propagation velocity of $\gtrsim 10~{\rm km\;s^{-1}}$. As a result, the shock is at around the virial radius when the central star dies [@Yoshida07]. Once the clump reaches the virial radius, it is likely to interact with the shock and be compressed and heated up. As a result, the accreted gas may be destroyed or survive by efficient cooling emission [@Dekel06]. This evolution of the accreted gas at $\lesssim {R_{\rm vir}}$ is out of the scope of our simple model in this paper.
In this work, as a first step, we use an analytic model to estimate the ${\rm {Ly{\alpha}}}$ radiation drag by estimating the upper limit of the possible ${\rm {Ly{\alpha}}}$ radiation field. It is important to note, that in our model trapping of ${\rm {Ly{\alpha}}}$ photons is key. Once e.g. supernovae efficiently blow out gas, ${\rm {Ly{\alpha}}}$ photons are able to escape the local region and the radiation drag quickly becomes unimportant. In a follow-up study we will investigate the ${\rm {Ly{\alpha}}}$ radiation drag in a more realistic set-up including a self-consistent time evolution within hydrodynamics simulations.
Acknowledgments {#acknowledgments .unnumbered}
===============
We are grateful to Y. Li and M. Umemura for valuable discussion and comments. We thank the anonymous referee for useful comments.
[41]{} natexlab\#1[\#1]{}
T., [Wise]{} J. H., [Bryan]{} G. L., 2007, , 659, L87
T. F., 1975, , 201, 350
B., [Davis]{} A. J., [Khochfar]{} S., [Natarajan]{} P., [Dunlop]{} J. S., 2013, , 432, 3438
B., [Khochfar]{} S., [Johnson]{} J. L., [Neistein]{} E., [Dalla Vecchia]{} C., [Livio]{} M., 2012, , 425, 2854
V., [Kudritzki]{} R. P., [Loeb]{} A., 2001, , 552, 464
V., [Yoshida]{} N., 2011, , 49, 373
Bryan G. L., Norman M. L., 1998, , 495, 80
A., [Birnboim]{} Y., 2006, , 368, 2
T., [Khandai]{} N., [DeGraf]{} C., [Feng]{} Y., [Croft]{} R. A. C., [Lopez]{} J., [Springel]{} V., 2012, , 745, L29
M., [Loeb]{} A., 2008, , 391, 457
M., [Kramer]{} R., 2012, , 424, 1672
C.-A., [Kere[š]{}]{} D., 2011, , 412, L118
J. P., 1973, , 162, 43
K., [Umemura]{} M., [Susa]{} H., 2009, , 395, 1280
A., [Woosley]{} S. E., 2002, , 567, 532
S., [Hosokawa]{} T., [Yoshida]{} N., [Umeda]{} H., [Omukai]{} K., [Chiaki]{} G., [Yorke]{} H. W., 2013, arXiv: 1308.4456
L., [Gnedin]{} N. Y., 1997, , 292, 27
I. T., [Mellema]{} G., [Pen]{} U.-L., [Merz]{} H., [Shapiro]{} P. R., [Alvarez]{} M. A., 2006, , 369, 1625
S., [Silk]{} J., 2011, , 410, L42
T., [Yoshida]{} N., [Susa]{} H., [Umemura]{} M., 2004, , 613, 631
P., [Duval]{} F., [[Ö]{}stlin]{} G., 2013, , 766, 124
P., [Razoumov]{} A. O., [Sommer-Larsen]{} J., 2009, , 696, 853
A., 1993, , 403, 542
A., [Rybicki]{} G. B., 1999, , 524, 527
D. E., [Ferland]{} G. J., 2006, [Astrophysics of gaseous nebulae and active galactic nuclei]{}, [Osterbrock, D. E. & Ferland, G. J.]{}, ed. CA: University Science Books
E. C., 1999, , 513, 252
J.-P., [Khochfar]{} S., [Dalla Vecchia]{} C., 2013, , 429, L94
A. H., [Milosavljevi[ć]{}]{} M., [Bromm]{} V., 2011, , 731, 54
A. H., [Schaye]{} J., [van Scherpenzeel]{} E., 2009, MNRAS, 394, 1812
J. H., 1903, , 64, A1
J. X., [O’Meara]{} J. M., [Worseck]{} G., 2010, , 718, 392
A., [Pawlik]{} A. H., [Raičevic]{} M., [Schaye]{} J., 2013a, , 430, 2427
A., [Schaye]{} J., [Pawlik]{} A. H., [Raičevic]{} M., 2013b, , 431, 2261
M., [Pawlik]{} A. H., [Schaye]{} J., [Rahmati]{} A., 2013, arXiv: 1311.0182
H. P., 1937, , 97, 423
E., [Choi]{} J.-H., [Shlosman]{} I., [Trenti]{} M., 2011, , 738, L19
D., 2002, , 382, 28
L., 1978, [Physical processes in the interstellar medium]{}, [Spitzer, L.]{}, ed.
B., 1939, , 89, 526
, H. and [Umemura]{}, M., 2006, , 645, L93
H., [Umemura]{} M., [Hasegawa]{} K., , 702, 480
A., 2006, , 648, 762
M., [Loeb]{} A., [Turner]{} E. L., 1993, , 419, 459
M., [Susa]{} H., [Hasegawa]{} K., [Suwa]{} T., [Semelin]{} B., 2012, Prog. Theor. Exp. Phys, 01A306
A., [Schaerer]{} D., [Maselli]{} A., 2006, , 460, 397
D., [Abel]{} T., [Norman]{} M. L., 2004, , 610, 14
J. H., [Turk]{} M. J., [Norman]{} M. L., [Abel]{} T., 2012, , 745, 50
H., [Choi]{} J.-H., [Nagamine]{} K., 2011, , 412, 411
H., [Li]{} Y., 2013, arXiv: 1308.0381
H., [Li]{} Y., 2012, arXiv: 1211.0088
H., [Li]{} Y., [Zhu]{} Q., [Abel]{} T., 2012, , 424, 884
H., [Li]{} Y., [Zhu]{} Q., [Abel]{} T., 2012, arXiv: 1211.0014
H., [Li]{} Y., [Zhu]{} Q., [Abel]{} T., [Gronwall]{} C., [Ciardullo]{} R., 2012, arXiv: 1209.5842
H., [Choi]{} J.-H., [Nagamine]{} K., 2012, , 427, 2889
N., [Oh]{} S. P., [Kitayama]{} T., [Hernquist]{} L., 2007, , 663, 687
N., [Omukai]{} K., [Hernquist]{} L., 2008, Science, 321, 669
\[lastpage\]
[^1]: E-mail: [email protected] (HY)
[^2]: Scottish Universities Physics Alliance
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
\
\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[^1]
Introduction {#Intro}
============
There are neither a priori nor observational reasons for assuming that the universe during its dynamical evolution has always been four dimensional. The unification of fundamental interactions of nature achieved in higher dimensions provides a strong motivation to give a serious consideration to this possibility. The first attempt to unify gravitation and electromagnetism by Kaluza and Klein was based on the idea that the universe we live in is in fact five dimensional, but as the fifth dimension remains small, it appears effectively four dimensional [@OverduinWesson97]. We know today that anomaly-free superstring models of all fundamental interactions require a spacetime of ten dimensions for consistency and the M-theory in which they are supposedly be embedded lives in an eleven dimensional spacetime (see [@Lidsey00] and references therein). It is generally assumed that all but four of the spacetime dimensions are compactified on an unobservable internal manifold, leaving an observable (1+3)-dimensional spacetime. In the early 1980’s the dynamical reduction of internal dimensions to unobservable scales with the physical, external dimensions expanding while the internal dimensions contracting, has been considered for the first time in cosmology [@ChodosDetweiler80; @Freund82; @DereliTucker83]. Much later cosmological models where the internal dimensions are static and remain at unobservable scales while the external space keeps expanding were also investigated (see for example, [@Bringmann03]). We would like to point out here that there is yet another possibility. Both of the external and internal dimensions may start at comparable small scales, yet at later stages of the evolution of the universe the scale of the internal dimensions could not expand as fast as that of the external space does and still remains unobservable. Independent of which possibility is applied, in a successful higher dimensional cosmological model, the universe should not only appear effectively four dimensional today but one should also be able to describe its dynamical evolution consistently with our present-day observed universe. The simplest model that fits the present-day cosmological data is the $\Lambda$-Cold Dark Matter ($\Lambda$CDM) model [@GronHervik]. It is based on Einstein’s four-dimensional theory of general relativity with a spatially flat, isotropic and homogeneous Robertson-Walker metric. It explains the observed acceleration of the universe by a simple introduction of a positive cosmological constant $\Lambda$ that is mathematically equivalent to a conventional vacuum energy with the equation of state (EoS) parameter set equal to $-1$. However, this model does not come without any problems. It suffers from two conceptual problems concerning the cosmological constant, known as the fine tuning and the coincidence problems [@Carroll92; @Copeland06]. The source that drives the observed acceleration of the universe is still a mystery in the contemporary cosmology and is usually discussed under the generic name of Dark Energy (DE). A positive $\Lambda$ is, today, the simplest candidate for DE besides some scalar field theoretic models of DE, namely the quintessence, k-essence and others [@Copeland06; @Sahni03b]. On the other hand, the dynamics of the observed universe may be studied in a model independent way known as the kinematical approach [@Rapetti07]. The kinematical approaches to DE usually favor $w\sim -1$ as well as time-dependent EoS parameters rather than the constant EoS parameter value $-1$ [@Rapetti07; @GongWang07; @CaiTuo11; @Capozziello11]. A time-dependent EoS parameter is obtained in general, for instance, when the DE is represented by a scalar field. This is an ad hoc assumption within four dimensional conventional general relativistic models. On the other hand, the observed acceleration of the universe can also be related with the existence of extra space dimensions instead of a DE field, as will be done here.
In this paper, as the theory of gravitation, we consider the extension of the conventional four-dimensional Einstein’s gravity without $\Lambda$ to higher dimensions by preserving its mathematical structure. One of the most important features of unified theories in general is that general relativity is naturally incorporated in these theories. Such theories give modifications at very short distances/high energies, however, they approach Einstein’s gravity for sufficiently large distances/low energies. Hence the use of higher dimensional Einstein’s gravity can also be justified in the context of unified theories.
The model
=========
We consider a minimal extension of the conventional $(1+3)$-dimensional Einstein’s field equations to $(1+3+n)$-dimensions: $$\label{eqn:EFE} R_{\mu\nu}-\frac{1}{2}Rg_{\mu\nu} =-\kappa
T_{\mu\nu},$$ where the indices $\mu$ and $\nu$ run through $0,1,2,...,3+n$ and $g_{\mu\nu}$, $R_{\mu\nu}$ and $R$ are the metric tensor, the Ricci tensor and the Ricci scalar, respectively, of a $(1+3+n)$-dimensional spacetime. $T_{\mu\nu}$ is the energy-momentum tensor of matter fields in $(1+3+n)$-dimensions and $\kappa = 8\pi G$ where $G$ is the (positive) gravitational constant that is to be scaled consistently in $(1+3+n)$-dimensions.
We consider a spatially homogenous but not necessarily isotropic $(1+3+n)$-dimensional synchronous spacetime metric that involves a maximally symmetric three dimensional flat external (physical) space metric and a compact $n$ dimensional flat internal space metric: $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eqn:metric} ds^2=-dt^2+a^2(t) \left (dx^{2}+dy^{2}+dz^{2}\right)+ s^2(t) \left ( d\theta_{1}^{2} +...+d\theta_{n}^{2}\right).\end{aligned}$$ $a(t)$ is the scale factor of the external space that represents the space we observe today while $s(t)$ is the scale factor of the $n=1,2,3,\dots$ dimensional internal space that cannot be observed directly and locally today.
We consider the energy-momentum tensor of a $(1+3+n)$-dimensional homogeneous and isotropic ideal fluid: $$\label{eqn:EMT} {T^{\mu}}_{\nu}={\textnormal{diag}}[-\rho,
p,p,p,p,...,p],$$ where $\rho=\rho(t)$ and $p=p(t)$ are the energy density and pressure of the fluid.
$(1+3+n)$-dimensional Einstein’s field equations (\[eqn:EFE\]) for the spacetime described by the metric (\[eqn:metric\]) in the presence of a co-moving fluid represented by the energy-momentum tensor (\[eqn:EMT\]) read:
$$\begin{aligned}
3\frac{\dot{a}^2}{a^2}+3n\frac{\dot{a}}{a}\frac{\dot{s}}{s}+\frac{1}{2}n(n-1)\frac{\dot{s}^2}{s^2}&=\kappa\rho, \label{eqn:EFE1} \\
\frac{\dot{a}^2}{a^2}+2\frac{\ddot{a}}{a}+n\frac{\ddot{s}}{s}+2n\frac{\dot{a}}{a}\frac{\dot{s}}{s}+\frac{1}{2}n(n-1)\frac{\dot{s}^2}{s^2}
&= -\kappa p, \label{eqn:EFE2}\\
3\frac{\dot{a}^2}{a^2}+3\frac{\ddot{a}}{a}+(n-1)\frac{\ddot{s}}{s}+3(n-1)\frac{\dot{a}}{a}\frac{\dot{s}}{s}
+\frac{1}{2}(n-1)(n-2)\frac{\dot{s}^2}{s^2}
&= -\kappa p. \label{eqn:EFE3}\end{aligned}$$
This system consists of three differential equations (\[eqn:EFE1\])-(\[eqn:EFE3\]) that should be satisfied by four unknown functions $a$, $s$, $\rho$, $p$ and therefore is not fully determined. It is customary at this point either to introduce an equation of state that characterizes the internal properties of the fluid or alternatively to make a kinematical ansatz to fully determine the system. However, even in four dimensional accelerating cosmological models the choice of the DE fluid is ad hoc. In our case, we almost have no clue concerning the nature of a possible higher dimensional fluid. Hence, we find it natural rather to postulate an ansatz that correlates the kinematics between the external and internal spaces to fully determine the system. In the field equations (\[eqn:EFE1\])-(\[eqn:EFE3\]), the external and internal dimensions couple directly through the term $$\frac{\dot{a}}{a}\frac{\dot{s}}{s}=f(t),$$ which most generally will be a function of the cosmic time $t$. We note that $f(t)$ is determined by the kinematics of both the external and internal spaces and hence in return one can correlate the kinematics of the internal and external spaces by specifying a function for $f(t)$ and can characterize the properties of the higher dimensional cosmology. For an expanding external space $\frac{\dot{a}}{a}>0$ and therefore the positive values of $f(t)$ correspond to an expanding internal space, while the negative values of $f(t)$ correspond to a contracting internal space. On the other hand, $f(t)=0$ describes the Kaluza-Klein reduction, i.e., one will obtain a cosmological solution in which the internal space is static. In this work we are particularly interested in the possibility of viable higher dimensional cosmological models in which both the external and internal spaces are expanding so that $f(t)>0$. In line with the above discussion, to determine the field equations fully, we propose the simplest generalization of the case $f(t)=0$ for which $$\label{eqn:constraint}
\frac{\dot{a}}{a}\frac{\dot{s}}{s}=\frac{\lambda}{9},$$ where $\lambda$ is a real constant. Since the fluid is isotropic we eliminate the pressure between (\[eqn:EFE2\])-(\[eqn:EFE3\]), and use the resulting equation together with (\[eqn:constraint\]) to solve for the scale functions $a$ and $s$. Then we substitute these in (\[eqn:EFE1\]) and (\[eqn:EFE2\]) to get $\rho$ and $p$, respectively. We were not able to get analytical expressions for arbitrary values of $n$. Therefore we give explicit solutions below only for $n=3$ (Numerical solutions might be studied for other values of $n$):
$$\label{eqn:gensola}
a=a_{0}t^{\frac{1}{3}}\quad \textnormal{and}\quad s=s_{0} \quad \textnormal{for} \quad \lambda=0,$$
where $a_{0}$ and $s_{0}$ are constants of integration, and $$\label{eqn:gensol}
a=\left(c_{1}e^{\sqrt{\lambda}\,t}-c_{2}e^{-\sqrt{\lambda}\,t}\right)^{\frac{1}{3}}\quad \textnormal{and}\quad s=c_{3}\left(c_{1}e^{\sqrt{\lambda}\,t}+c_{2}e^{-\sqrt{\lambda}\,t}\right)^{\frac{1}{3}}\quad \textnormal{for}\quad \lambda\neq 0,$$ where $c_{1}$, $c_{2}$ and $c_{3}$ are constants of integration. One may check that, depending on the choice of the integration constants and $\lambda$, the scale factors exhibit five different types of behavior[^2]:
(i) $\lambda=0$: The external space expands as in the four dimensional universe that is filled with a stiff fluid[^3], while the internal space is static.
(ii) $\lambda>0$ and $c_{1}\neq0= c_{2}$: Both of the external and internal spaces expand exponentially at the same rate.
(iii) $\lambda>0$ and $c_{1}=0\neq c_{2}$: Both of the external and internal spaces contract exponentially at the same rate.
(iv) $\lambda>0$ and $c_{1}\neq0\neq c_{2}$: The scale functions can be written in terms of hyperbolic functions.
(v) $\lambda<0$ and $c_{1}\neq0\neq c_{2}$: The scale functions can be written in terms of sinusoidal functions.
In what follows, we concentrate in particular on the case (iv) with the additional condition $c_{1}c_{2}>0$. We will show that the external space exhibits a $\Lambda$CDM-type behavior, while the internal space expands at a much slower rate than the external space.
An effective four dimensional $\Lambda$CDM-type cosmology
=========================================================
Solution of the higher dimensional equations
--------------------------------------------
It is easy to check that for $c_{1}c_{2}>0$ and $\lambda>0$, the scale factor of the external space is null $a=0$ at $t=\frac{1}{2\sqrt{\lambda}}\ln{\left(\frac{c_{2}}{c_{1}}\right)}$. Hence, for convenience, we may set the singularity of the external space at $t=0$ with the choice $c_{1}=c_{2}$ without loss of generality[^4]. Choosing $c_{1}=c_{2}$ in (\[eqn:gensol\]) and re-naming the integration constants, we obtain the cosmological parameters of the external dimensions; the scale factor, Hubble parameter and deceleration parameter, respectively, as follows:
$$\begin{aligned}
a&=a_{1}\sinh^{\frac{1}{3}}(\sqrt{\lambda}\,t),\\
H_{a}=\frac{\dot{a}}{a}&=\frac{\sqrt{\lambda}}{3}\coth(\sqrt{\lambda}\,t),\\
q_{a}=-\frac{\ddot{a} a}{\dot{a}^2}&=-1+3\, {\rm sech}^{2}(\sqrt{\lambda}\,t),\end{aligned}$$
and of the internal dimensions, respectively, as follows:
$$\begin{aligned}
s&=s_{1}\cosh^{\frac{1}{3}}(\sqrt{\lambda}\,t),\\
H_{s}=\frac{\dot{s}}{s}&=\frac{\sqrt{\lambda}}{3}\tanh(\sqrt{\lambda}\,t),\\
q_{s}=-\frac{\ddot{s} s}{\dot{s}^2}&=-1-3\, {\rm cosech}^{2}(\sqrt{\lambda}\,t),\end{aligned}$$
where $a_{1}$ and $s_{1}$ are the new integration constants. The energy density, pressure and EoS parameter of the higher dimensional fluid are given, respectively, as follows:
\[eqn:7Dfluid\] $$\begin{aligned}
\rho&= \frac{4 \lambda}{3 \kappa}\,{{\rm
cosech}^{2}(2\sqrt{\lambda}\,t)}+ \frac{5 \lambda}{3 \kappa}, \\
p&=\frac{4 \lambda}{3 \kappa}\,{{\rm cosech}^{2}(2\sqrt{\lambda}\,t)}-\frac{5 \lambda}{3\kappa},\\
w&=\frac{p}{\rho}=\frac{{4 - 5 \sinh^{2}(2\sqrt{\lambda}\,t)}}{{4 +
5\sinh^{2}(2\sqrt{\lambda}\,t)}}.\end{aligned}$$
It may be seen from the expressions above that both of the external and internal spaces expand for $t>0$. However, at the instant $t=0$, while the external space starts expanding from zero $(a=0$) with an infinitely large expansion rate ($H_{a}=\infty$ and $q_{a}=2$); the internal space will be static ($H_{s}=0$ and $q_{s}=\infty$) remaining at a non-zero size $s=s_{1}$. Indeed, when the scale factors are Taylor expanded
$$\begin{aligned}
a&=a_{1}{\lambda}^{\frac{1}{6}}\,t^{\frac{1}{3}}+a_{1}\frac{{\lambda}^{\frac{7}{6}}}{18}\,t^{\frac{7}{3}}
+O(t^{\frac{13}{3}}), \\
s&=s_{1}+s_{1}\frac{{\lambda}}{6}\,t^{2}+O(t^{4}),\end{aligned}$$
we see that $a\sim t^{\frac{1}{3}}$ while $s\sim s_{1}$ as $t\sim0$; that is, in the very early times of the expansion, the external space volume $a^3$ grows almost linearly with time, while the internal space volume $s^3$ is almost constant (see Fig. \[fig:sfs\]). Furthermore one may check that the expansion rate of the internal dimensions is always smaller than that of the external dimensions during the entire history of the universe i.e., $H_{a}>H_{s}$, and they approach each other in the infinite future, i.e., $H_{a}\rightarrow \frac{\sqrt{\lambda}}{3}$ and $H_{s}\rightarrow \frac{\sqrt{\lambda}}{3}$ as $t\rightarrow \infty$ (see Fig. \[fig:hps\]).
![The Hubble parameters of the external (solid) and internal (dashed) dimensions vs. cosmic time $t$ (Gyr). The expansion rate of the external space is always higher than of the internal space.[]{data-label="fig:hps"}](sfs.eps){width="100.00000%"}
![The Hubble parameters of the external (solid) and internal (dashed) dimensions vs. cosmic time $t$ (Gyr). The expansion rate of the external space is always higher than of the internal space.[]{data-label="fig:hps"}](hps.eps){width="100.00000%"}
Hence, if the internal dimensions start to expand at an unobservable length scale (for instance, at $s_{1}\sim
l_{{\rm{Planck}}}\sim10^{-35}$ m), they might not be able to expand to observable length scales (say for instance, to $\sim 10^{-20}$ m which is the scale that corresponds to the energy scale of $\rm TeV$ that is probed by the Large Hadron Collider (LHC)) even today. In the mean time, the external dimensions will expand from its initial singularity to its present-day observed length scale ($10^{24}$ m). Both the external and internal dimensions would have grown from their minimal values $a=0$ and $s=s_{1}$ at $t=0$ to an equal size at time $$t_{{\rm{eq}}}=\frac{1}{2\sqrt{\lambda}}\ln{\left(\frac{a_{1}^3+s_{1}^3}{a_{1}^3-s_{1}^3}\right)}.$$ Therefore, if $s_{1}\sim l_{planck}\ll a_{1}$ one can safely take $t_{{\rm{eq}}}\sim 0$. We may determine how many times the sizes of the external and internal dimensions expanded since the time $t_{{\rm{eq}}}$ when they were equal:
$$\begin{aligned}
\frac{a(t)}{a(t_{{\rm{eq}}})}&=\frac{\sinh^{\frac{1}{3}}(\sqrt{\lambda}\;t)}{\sinh^{\frac{1}{3}}\left(\frac{1}{2}\ln{\left(\frac{a_{1}^3+s_{1}^3}{a_{1}^3-s_{1}^3}\right)}\right)}, \\
\frac{s(t)}{s(t_{{\rm{eq}}})}&=\frac{\cosh^{\frac{1}{3}}(\sqrt{\lambda}\;t)}{\cosh^{\frac{1}{3}}\left(\frac{1}{2}\ln{\left(\frac{a_{1}^3+s_{1}^3}{a_{1}^3-s_{1}^3}\right)}\right)}.\end{aligned}$$
The choice $s_{1}\ll a_{1}$ implies $\frac{a(t)}{a(t_{{\rm{eq}}})}\gg\frac{s(t)}{s(t_{{\rm{eq}}})}$ for all $t\gg t_{{\rm{eq}}}$. It is also interesting to note that how many times the size of the internal dimensions have grown compared to their initial size may be determined just by the present-day value of the deceleration parameter of the external dimensions. To show this, we simply isolate $\lambda$ in $q_{a}(t)$ and substitute it in $s(t)$ above and obtain: $$\label{eqn:intfold}
\frac{s}{s_{1}}=\left(\frac{3}{q_{a}+1}\right)^{\frac{1}{6}}$$ which gives us the ratio $\frac{s}{s_{1}}$ for any given value of $q_{a}$. Hence one can easily calculate how many times the size of the internal dimensions have grown since the beginning of time to the present-day simply by measuring the present-day value of the deceleration parameter of the observed universe. Using $q_{a}=-0.73$ [@Cunha09] for the present-day value of the dimensionless deceleration parameter of the external space and setting $t_{0}=13.7$ (Gyr) for the present age of the universe we obtain $\lambda=0.0187$. We take the present size of the visible universe as $10^{24}$ m and going backwards obtain the value $a_{1}=6.8\times 10^{23}$ m. If we now assume that the internal dimensions were at Planck length scales at time $t=0$, i.e., $s_{1}=
l_{\rm Planck}\sim 10^{-35}$ m, then the external and internal dimensions would have reached the same size when $t_{{\rm{eq}}}=
2.32 \times 10^{-176}$ (Gyr). The external dimensions will expand $\frac{a(13.7)}{a(t_{{\rm{eq}}})}\simeq 10^{59}$ times during the time interval $13.7-t_{{\rm{eq}}}$ (Gyr) while the internal dimensions expand only $\frac{s(13.7)}{s(t_{{\rm{eq}}})}\simeq 1.49$ times! The same conclusion for the internal dimensions may be reached simply by using $q_{a}=-0.73$ in (\[eqn:intfold\]) so that $\frac{s}{s_{1}}\simeq 1.49$.
On the other hand, the internal dimensions expand from the $l_{\rm
Planck}$ length scales at the beginning to the LHC length scales ($10^{-20}$ m) at $t=763$ (Gyr), the proton size ($10^{-15}$ m) at $t=1015$ (Gyr) and the meter length scales at $t=1773$ (Gyr). In short, according to our model, all the dimensions that were at Planck scales $l_{\rm Planck}$ at time $t_{{\rm{eq}}}= 2.32 \times
10^{-176}$ (Gyr) evolve in such a way that the external dimensions are today at length scales $10^{24}$ m while the internal dimensions are still at Planck length scales $l_{\rm Planck}$ (see Fig. \[fig:sfs\]).
Our model also predicts that the present value of the deceleration parameter of the observed universe must be strictly higher than -1, i.e. $q_{a}> -1$, otherwise we would have observed the extra dimensions, since $\frac{s}{s_{1}}\rightarrow \infty$ as $q_{a}\rightarrow -1$.
Finally, the energy density and pressure of our higher dimensional ideal fluid will be infinitely large at the beginning. They decrease monotonically and approach $\rho\sim \frac{5 \lambda}{3 \kappa}$ and $p\sim -\frac{5 \lambda}{3 \kappa}$, respectively, for sufficiently large values of $t$. The EoS parameter of the fluid, on the other hand, starts with $w=1$ at $t=0$ and approaches $w\sim-1$ for sufficiently large $t$ values. We won’t be dwelling on the properties of this higher dimensional fluid further, however, its manifestations in the effective four dimensional universe will be discussed below.
The above calculations show that, although the internal dimensions are also expanding just as the (observable) external dimensions do, they remain far too small to allow for local and direct detection today and in the near future. However, their presence obviously has tremendous effect on our cosmological history. We have here a durable model of the effective four dimensional universe. But this is not yet enough. We should further investigate whether this predicted effective four dimensional universe is consistent with the present-day cosmological observations. We shall deal with this question in the following subsection.
The effective four dimensional universe
---------------------------------------
In cosmology, we do not usually deal with direct measurements of the energy density and pressure of the material/physical content of the universe. We collect data on the kinematics of the observed universe instead, e.g., from the supernova Ia observations [@Rapetti07; @GongWang07; @CaiTuo11; @Capozziello11; @Capozziello97; @Cunha09] and on the geometry of the space from cosmic microwave background by WMAP observations [@Komatsu11]. Furthermore, we assume that the space we live in is (effectively) three dimensional. Then, what we do in general is to interpret the collected information using a reliable theory, for instance the general relativity of Einstein, to infer the properties of the material content of the universe. This is, naturally, the approach of an observer who is unaware of internal dimensions. On the other hand, we had been arguing all along that we may in fact be living in a higher dimensional space which appears effectively three dimensional since the internal dimensions are today so small that they evade direct and local detection. However, the internal dimensions may still be controlling the dynamics of the external dimensions that we observe. Hence, while we are interpreting the cosmological data within the framework of four dimensional general relativity, the components related to the internal dimensions and the higher dimensional fluid we introduced could manifest themselves as an effective source in the 4-dimensional Einstein’s field equations. An observer who lives in four dimensions would naturally use the 4-dimensional Einstein’s field equations: $$\label{eqn:Einr} \tilde{R}_{ij}-\frac{1}{2}\tilde{R}\tilde{g}_{ij}
=-\tilde{\kappa}_{0} \tilde{T}_{ij},$$ where $i$ and $j$ run through $0,1,2,3$ and $\tilde{\kappa}_{0}=8\pi
\tilde{G}_{0}$ with $\tilde{G}_{0}$ being the value of the four dimensional gravitational coupling that is observed with local experiments today. $\tilde{R}_{ij}$, $\tilde{R}$ and $\tilde{g}_{ij}$ are the Ricci tensor, Ricci scalar and the metric tensor of the ($1+3$)-dimensional spacetime, respectively. $\tilde{T}_{ij}$ refers to the components of the four dimensional effective energy-momentum tensor. In the 4-dimensional spatially flat RW spacetime, effective Einstein field equations read:
$$\begin{aligned}
3\frac{\dot{a}^2}{a^2}&=\tilde{\kappa}_{0}\tilde{\rho}, \label{eqn:EFE4d1} \\
\frac{\dot{a}^2}{a^2}+2\frac{\ddot{a}}{a}&= -\tilde{\kappa}_{0}\tilde{p}. \label{eqn:EFE4d2}\end{aligned}$$
A comparison of these equations with the higher dimensional field equations given before, leads to the following identifications:
$$\begin{aligned}
\tilde{\rho}&=\frac{\kappa}{\tilde{\kappa}_{0}}\rho-\frac{\lambda}{\tilde{\kappa}_{0}}-
\frac{3 \dot{s}^2}{\tilde{\kappa}_{0} s^2},\\
\tilde{p}&=\frac{\kappa}{\tilde{\kappa}_{0}}p+ \frac{3
\ddot{s}}{\tilde{\kappa}_{0}s}+\frac{2 \lambda}{3 \tilde{\kappa}_{0}}+
\frac{3 \dot{s}^2}{\tilde{\kappa}_{0} s^2}.\end{aligned}$$
One may now observe how the components of the higher dimensional distributions manifest themselves in an effective energy-momentum source in the four dimensional universe. Also note that although an observer cannot observe the internal dimensions directly and locally, the internal dimensions contribute in an essential way to the dynamics of the external dimensions. Substituting $a$ into the four dimensional field equations (\[eqn:EFE4d1\]) and (\[eqn:EFE4d2\]), the observer would obtain the energy density, pressure and the EoS parameter of the observed universe as follows:
$$\begin{aligned}
\tilde{\rho}&=\frac{\lambda}{3\tilde{\kappa}_{0}}{\rm
cosech}^{2}(\sqrt{\lambda}\,t)+\frac{\lambda}{3\tilde{\kappa}_{0}}, \label{eqn:4Dfluid1}\\
\tilde{p}&=\frac{\lambda}{3\tilde{\kappa}_{0}}{\rm
cosech}^{2}(\sqrt{\lambda}\,t)-\frac{\lambda}{3\tilde{\kappa}_{0}}, \label{eqn:4Dfluid2}\\
\tilde{w}&=\frac{\tilde{p}}{\tilde{\rho}}=\frac{1
-\sinh^{2}(\sqrt{\lambda}\,t)}{1+\sinh^{2}(\sqrt{\lambda}\,t)}. \label{eqn:4Dfluid3}\end{aligned}$$
These are the properties of a 4-dimensional effective fluid that are inferred by an observer who is interpreting the kinematics of the observed universe through the 4-dimensional conventional general relativity, in which the gravitational coupling is a constant $\tilde{\kappa}_{0}$. However, in a higher dimensional universe, even when the internal space remains at an unobservable size the gravitational field will be propagating in the full higher dimensional space and hence the strength of the 4-dimensional effective gravitational coupling $\tilde{\kappa}=8\pi \tilde{G}$ will be related to the higher dimensional gravitational coupling constant through the proper volume of the internal space $V^{\rm int}\propto s^3$ as follows [@Dvali99; @Uzan11]: $$\label{eqn:G4}
\tilde{\kappa}=\frac{\kappa}{V^{\rm int}}.$$ Accordingly, the dynamics of the internal space may manifest itself by giving rise to a time variation of the 4-dimensional effective gravitational coupling. Let us now check whether the time variation of $\tilde{\kappa}$ is consistent with the observational constraints and whether it is possible for the observer to detect how $\tilde{\kappa}$ varies in time. Using (\[eqn:G4\]) we obtain $$\label{eqn:G4var1}
\tilde{\kappa}=\tilde{\kappa}_{0}\frac{V^{\rm int}_{0}}{V_{\rm int}}=\tilde{\kappa}_{0}\frac{s^{3}_{0}}{s^{3}},$$ which gives $$\frac{\dot{\tilde{\kappa}}}{\tilde{\kappa}}=-3H_{s}=-\sqrt{\lambda}\tanh(\sqrt{\lambda}t)$$ for the time variation of $\tilde{\kappa}$. We immediately notice that the time variation of the 4-dimensional gravitational coupling is null at $t=0$, decreases with the cosmic time $t$ and approaches $-\sqrt{\lambda}$ as $t\rightarrow \infty$. Using $\lambda=0.0187$ (Gyr$^{-2}$) we find that the time variation of $\tilde{\kappa}$ is null at $t=0$, $\sim -10^{-25}\,{\rm yr}^{-1}$ at $t\sim 10^{2}\,{\rm s}$ (the time scale of the primordial nucleosynthesis in the standard model for the history of the universe), $\sim -10^{-15}\,{\rm yr}^{-1}$ at $t\sim 10^{5}\,{\rm yr}$ (the time scale of photon decoupling in the standard model for the history of the universe), $-1.3\times 10^{-10}\,{\rm yr}^{-1}$ at the present age of the universe and goes to $-1.4\times 10^{-10}\,{\rm yr}^{-1}$ as $t\rightarrow \infty$. The time variation of $\tilde{\kappa}$ is plotted in Fig. \[fig:G4var\].
![The time (yr) variation of the 4-dimensional effective gravitational coupling ($\dot{\tilde{\kappa}}/\tilde{\kappa}\;{\rm yr}^{-1}$) vs. cosmic time $t$ (Gyr).[]{data-label="fig:G4var"}](G4var.eps){width="50.00000%"}
We also calculated the average value of the time variation of $\tilde{\kappa}$ from $t=0$ to the present age of the universe $13.7$ (Gyr): $$\frac{1}{13.7\times 10^{9}\,{\rm yr}}\int_{t=0}^{t=13.7\times 10^{9} {\rm yr}}\frac{\dot{\tilde{\kappa}}}{\tilde{\kappa}} {\rm d}t=-8.8\times 10^{-11}\,{\rm yr}^{-1}.$$ The majority of constraints on the time variation of $\tilde{\kappa}$ coming from the Solar system, pulsar timing or stellar observations that is found in the literature favor a value $\sim \pm 10^{-11}\,{\rm yr}^{-1}$ in the vicinity of the present age of the universe [@Uzan11]. Considering the random and the systematic errors involved in the determination of such constraints, the time variation of $\tilde{\kappa}$ in our model is consistent with the above value. The most severe constraints in the literature are set from primordial nucleosynthesis and imply that when the primordial nucleosynthesis took place in the early universe it was $\sim 10^{-12}\,{\rm yr}^{-1}$, which is also in line with our very small value $\sim -10^{-25}\,{\rm yr}^{-1}$ for the time scale of that epoch. On the other hand, considering the very small values of these constraints, it will be natural for the observer to conceive the 4-dimensional gravitational coupling as a constant. In the absence of any information of the presence of internal dimensions or the time variation of the 4-dimensional gravitational coupling, an observer would conclude that the expansion of the observed universe is governed by an unknown “dark energy” source whose properties are given by (\[eqn:4Dfluid1\])-(\[eqn:4Dfluid3\]). Let us now suppose that the observer is able to resolve the time variation of $\tilde{\kappa}$ correctly from observations. In this case, using (\[eqn:Einr\]) and (\[eqn:G4var1\]), one can define a new 4-dimensional effective energy-momentum tensor $\tilde{T}'_{ij}$ for the 4-dimensional effective fluid that is related to $\tilde{T}_{ij}$ as follows: $$\tilde{T}'_{ij}=\frac{s^{3}}{s^{3}_{0}}\tilde{T}_{ij}.$$ Hence $$\begin{aligned}
\tilde{\rho}'=\frac{s^{3}}{s_{0}^{3}}\tilde{\rho}, \quad \tilde{p}'=\frac{s^{3}}{s_{0}^{3}}\tilde{p} \quad\textnormal{and}\quad \tilde{w}'=\frac{\tilde{p}'}{\tilde{\rho}'}=\tilde{w}\end{aligned}$$ for the energy density, pressure and the EoS of the 4-dimensional effective fluid respectively. We plot the evolution of the 4-dimensional effective and higher dimensional energy densities in Fig. \[fig:rhoNEW\], pressures in Fig. \[fig:pNEW\] and EoS parameters in Fig. \[fig:w4d\].
![The pressures of the 4-dimensional effective fluids (solid for $\tilde{T}_{ij}$ and dashed-dotted for $\tilde{T}'_{ij}$) and the higher dimensional fluid (dashed) vs. cosmic time $t$ (Gyr).[]{data-label="fig:pNEW"}](rhoNEW.eps){width="100.00000%"}
![The pressures of the 4-dimensional effective fluids (solid for $\tilde{T}_{ij}$ and dashed-dotted for $\tilde{T}'_{ij}$) and the higher dimensional fluid (dashed) vs. cosmic time $t$ (Gyr).[]{data-label="fig:pNEW"}](pNEW.eps){width="100.00000%"}
![The equation of state parameters (EoS) of the four (solid) and higher (dashed) dimensional effective fluids vs. cosmic time $t$ (Gyr). EoS parameter of the four dimensional effective fluid is $-\frac{1}{3}$ at $t=8.38$ (Gyr).[]{data-label="fig:w4d"}](w4d.eps){width="50.00000%"}
It is worth noting that in this case the 4-dimensional theory of gravitation is not conventional general relativity anymore; it is a theory that yields the same mathematical form with general relativity but involves a time dependent gravitational coupling. We note that the EoS parameter of the 4-dimensional effective fluid remains the same. The energy densities and pressures of these two energy-momentum tensors coincide today and remain almost the same in the vicinity of the present age of the universe. On the other hand, they differ slightly at earlier times of the universe and will differ considerably in the far future. Note however that the universe also can no longer be taken as effectively 4-dimensional in the far future since the internal dimensions grow considerably in size. Hence, because both the internal dimensions and the time variation of the 4-dimensional gravitational coupling is out of the reach of the observer, it is a very good approximation for the observer to interpret the expansion of the observed universe through the conventional 4-dimensional general relativity which describes the local gravitational events (in the Solar system) successfully.
Now we can talk about the world as seen by an observer living in four dimensions. The universe starts at $t=0$ from a singularity with $H_{a}=\infty$ and infinitely large energy density $\tilde{\rho}=\infty$ (or $\tilde{\rho}'=\infty$), that is, at the beginning there is a Big Bang. The universe then evolves from decelerating expansion to accelerating expansion, passing through different epochs where the effective fluid behaves differently; $a\sim t^{\frac{1}{3}}$ and $\tilde{w}\sim 1$ (stiff fluid dominated era) at very early times $t\sim 0$ and through a sequence of epochs where $a\sim t^{\frac{1}{2}}$ and $\tilde{w}\sim \frac{1}{3}$ (radiation dominated era), $a\sim t^{\frac{2}{3}}$ and $\tilde{w}\sim 0$ (pressureless matter dominated era), $a\sim t$ and $\tilde{w}\sim -\frac{1}{3}$ (acceleration starts at $t=\frac{1}{2\sqrt{\lambda}}\ln{(5+2\sqrt{6})}$) and reaches the present universe $a\sim t^{3.7}$ and $\tilde{w}\sim -0.82$. It eventually evolves to the de Sitter universe, $a\sim e^{\frac{\sqrt{\lambda}}{3}\,t}$ and $\tilde{w}\sim -1$, at the very late times (however, note that the universe is not effectively 4-dimensional at this epoch). One may form a judgement on the evolution sequence of the effective four dimensional universe from the behavior of the dimensionless deceleration parameter $q_{a}$. We depict the $q_{a}$ versus cosmic time $t$ in Fig. \[fig:dps\] by using $\lambda=0.0187$, which gives the value $q_{a}=-0.73$ for the present-day universe. Such an evolution sequence is consistent with the current understanding of the universe, excluding the very far future of the universe.
As regards the present acceleration of the universe, the evolution of the deceleration parameter with the cosmic redshift $z=-1+\frac{a_{z=0}}{a}$ (where $a_{z=0}$ is the present value of the scale factor) is also important to check if our model is consistent with cosmological observations: $$q_{a}(z)=-1+3\frac{(1+z)^{6}}{(1+z)^{6}+\frac{a_{z=0}^{6}}{a_{1}^{6}}}.$$ We depict the deceleration parameter of the external dimensions versus cosmic redshift $z$ by setting $q_{z=0}=-0.73$ in Fig. \[fig:qz\]. One may observe that $q_{a}=0$ at $z=z_{\rm t}=0.31$, i.e., the accelerated expansion starts at $z_{\rm t}=0.31$, which is in the range $0.3\lesssim z_{\rm t}\lesssim 0.8$ given in different observational studies [@Sahni03b; @Rapetti07; @GongWang07; @CaiTuo11; @Capozziello11; @Capozziello97; @Cunha09; @Avgoustidis09; @Komatsu11].
![The deceleration parameter of the external dimensions vs. cosmic redshift $z$. It is plotted by choosing $q_{a}=-0.73$ at $z=0$. The transition redshift to the accelerating expansion is $z_{{\rm t}}=0.31$.[]{data-label="fig:qz"}](dps.eps){width="100.00000%"}
![The deceleration parameter of the external dimensions vs. cosmic redshift $z$. It is plotted by choosing $q_{a}=-0.73$ at $z=0$. The transition redshift to the accelerating expansion is $z_{{\rm t}}=0.31$.[]{data-label="fig:qz"}](qz.eps){width="100.00000%"}
As we are concerned with the recent transition from deceleration to acceleration, it is also useful to take the third derivative of scale factor of the observed universe into account. A convenient parameter is the dimensionless jerk parameter $j$ that gives opportunity to compare cosmological models with the $\Lambda$CDM model in which it is constant $j_{\Lambda {\rm CDM}}=1$ [@Sahni03a; @Sahni03b; @Blandford04; @Visser04; @Rapetti07; @Dunajski08]. In our model, on the other hand, the jerk parameter of the external space is dynamical: $$j_{a}=\frac{\dddot{a}}{aH_{a}^3}=1+9{\rm
sech}^{2}(\sqrt{\lambda}\;t),$$ which goes from $10$ to $1$ as the universe evolves. Using $\lambda=0.0187$ we obtain for the present value of the jerk parameter $j_{a}(13.7)=1.81$ which is also consistent with the observational studies [@Rapetti07; @Visser04].
In short, using $\lambda=0.0187$, the internal dimensions are today still at Planck length scales hence the observed universe is today effectively four dimensional, it starts accelerating at $t_{\rm
t}=8.38$ (Gyr), i.e., acceleration starts $t_{0}-t_{\rm t}=5.32$ (Gyr) ago from now, the transition redshift is $z_{\rm t}=0.31$, today $q_{a}=-0.73$ and $j_{a}=1.81$. Such a picture of the universe is consistent with the observational studies.
Final remarks
=============
It should be emphasized that our model doesn’t involve a cosmological constant $\Lambda$. The dynamical evolution of the external (physical) and internal spaces are correlated and controlled by a single real parameter $\lambda$ \[see Eqn.(\[eqn:constraint\])\]. An observer living in the 3-dimensional external space sees an effective cosmic fluid with a specific time dependent EoS parameter that drives the accelerated expansion of the universe and hence the so-called cosmological constant problem doesn’t arise here.
We also note that both the actual higher dimensional fluid and our effective fluid in four dimensions involve time dependent EoS parameters that start from $w= 1$ (stiff fluid) at very early times and approach $w=-1$ (cosmological constant) at very late times. This is exactly the type of behavior one would expect if a DE component in four dimensional conventional general relativity without cosmological constant had been introduced. A similar behavior is obtained, for instance, for a quintessence field $\phi$ with a constant potential $V(\phi)= \frac{\lambda}{3 \tilde{\kappa}_{0}}$ in four dimensional conventional general relativity without cosmological constant [@Demianski92].
We also would like to note that our effective four dimensional model induced from higher dimensions gives a more complete picture of our current understanding of the universe compared with the standard $\Lambda$CDM model. The $\Lambda$CDM model contains a binary mixture of pressure-less matter (including CDM) and a positive cosmological constant $\Lambda$. On the other hand, our four dimensional effective universe exhibits a behavior expected of a four dimensional universe in the presence of a certain mixture of stiff matter, radiation, pressure-less matter (including CDM) and a cosmological constant. A stiff fluid is the most promising EoS of matter at ultra-high densities for representing the very early universe (see [@Zeldovich62; @Barrow78]). As the universe evolves, the matter content becomes less stiff and the universe evolves into the radiation dominated phase as should be expected.
As a final remark, we gave analytical solutions in $1+3+3$ dimensions. The number of internal dimensions may provide another free parameter in the sense that more precise predictions (albeit numerical) might be possible if we keep $ n \geq 3$ in our coupled equations as a free parameter.
**Acknowledgments**
Özgür Akarsu and Tekin Dereli appreciate the financial support given by the Turkish Academy of Sciences (T[Ü]{}BA). Ö. Akarsu acknowledges also the financial support he is receiving from Koç University.
J.M. Overduin, P.S. Wesson, *Kaluza-Klein gravity*, Physics Reports **283**, 303-378 (1997)
J.E. Lidsey, D. Wands, E.J. Copeland, *Superstring Cosmology*, Physics Reports **337**, 343-492 (2000)
A. Chodos, S. Detweiler, *Where has the fifth dimension gone?*, Physical Review D **21**, 2167 (1980)
P.G.O. Freund, *Kaluza Klein Cosmologies*, Nuclear Physics B **209**, 146-156 (1982)
T. Dereli, R.W. Tucker, *Dynamical Reduction of Internal Dimensions in the Early Universe*, Physics Letters B **125**, 133-135 (1983)
T. Bringmann, M. Eriksson, M. Gustafsson, *Cosmological evolution of homogeneous universal extra dimensions*, Physical Review D **68**, 063516 (2003)
. Gr[ø]{}n, S. Hervik, **Einstein’s General Theory of Relativity: With Modern Applications in Cosmology**, Springer, New York (2007)
S.M. Carroll, W.H. Press, E.L. Turner, *The cosmological constant*, Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics **30**, 499-542 (1992)
E.J. Copeland, M. Sami, S. Tsujikawa, *Dynamics of Dark Energy*, International Journal of Modern Physics D **15**, 1753-1936 (2006)
U. Alam, V. Sahni, T.D. Saini, A.A. Starobinsky: *Exploring the expanding Universe and dark energy using the statefinder diagnostic*, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society **344**, 1057-1074 (2003)
D. Rapetti, S.W. Allen, M.A. Amin, R.D. Blandford, *A kinematical approach to dark energy studies*, Monthly Notices to Royal Astronomical Society **375**, 1510-1520 (2007)
Y. Gong, A. Wang, *Reconstruction of the deceleration parameter and the equation of state of dark energy*, Physical Review D **75**, 043520 (2007)
R.G. Cai, Z.L. Tuo, *Detecting the cosmic acceleration with current data*, Physics Letters B **706**, 116-122 (2011)
S. Capozziello, R. Lazkoz, V. Salzano, *Comprehensive cosmographic analysis by Markov chain method*, Physical Review D **84**, 124061 (2011)
Y.B. Zeldovich, *The Equation of State at Ultrahigh Densities and Its Relativistic Limitations*, Soviet Physics JETP **14**, 1143 (1962)
J.D. Barrow, *Quiescent cosmology*, Nature **272**, 211-215 (1978)
S. Capozziello, R. de Ritis, A.A. Marino, *A Time-dependent Cosmological Constant Phenomenology*, Nuovo Cimento B **112**, 1351-1359 (1997)
J.V. Cunha, *Kinematic Constraints to the Transition Redshift from SNe Ia Union Data*, Physical Review D **79**, 047301 (2009)
A. Avgoustidis, L. Verde, R. Jimenez, *Consistency among distance measurements: transparency, BAO scale and accelerated expansion*, Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics **06**, 012 (2009)
E. Komatsu, et al., *Seven-year Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) Observations: Cosmological Interpretation*, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement **192**, 18 (2011)
V. Sahni, T.D. Saini, A.A. Starobinsky, U. Alam: *Statefinder - a new geometrical diagnostic of dark energy*, Journal of Experimental and Theoretical Physics Letters **77**, 201-206 (2003)
R.D. Blandford, *Measuring and modeling the universe: A theoretical perspective.* in W. L. Freedman (Ed.), Carnegie Observatories Astrophysics Series, Vol. 2: **Measuring and Modeling the Universe**, 377-388, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2004)
M. Visser, *Jerk, snap and the cosmological equation of state*, Classical and Quantum Gravity **21**, 2603-2615 (2004)
M. Dunajski, G. Gibbons, *Cosmic Jerk, Snap and Beyond*, Classical and Quantum Gravity **25**, 235012 (2008)
M. Demianski, R. de Ritis, C. Rubano, P. Scudellaro, *Scalar fields and anisotropy in cosmological models*, Physical Review D **46**, 1391-1398 (1992)
N. Arkani-Hamed, S. Dimopoulos and G. Dvali, *Phenomenology, astrophysics, and cosmology of theories with submillimeter dimensions and TeV scale quantum gravity*, Physical Review D **59**, 086004 (1999) J.-P. Uzan, *Varying Constants, Gravitation and Cosmology*, *Living Reviews in Relativity* **14**, 2 (2011)
[^1]: **E-Mail:** [email protected], [email protected]
[^2]: We would like to note that kinematics similar to that we obtained for the external space for $\lambda\neq 0$ is also noted by Capozziello et al. [@Capozziello97], although with a totally different reasoning in the context of conventional, four dimensional relativistic cosmology.
[^3]: Stiff fluid is the most promising EoS of matter at ultra-high densities for representing the very early universe (see [@Zeldovich62; @Barrow78]) and is described with an EoS parameter $p/\rho=1$, where $\rho$ and $p$ are the energy density and pressure, respectively.
[^4]: If $c_{1}c_{2}>0$, in the case $c_{1}\neq c_{2}$ the evolution of the Hubble and deceleration parameters turn out to be exactly the same with the ones in the case $c_{1}=c_{2}$, but shifted along the time axis.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'We introduce a dynamical blockade phenomenon occurring in a nonlinear bosonic mode induced by a combination of continuous and pulsed excitations. We find that the underlying mechanism for the blockade is general, enhancing antibunching in the strongly nonlinear regime and inducing it in the weakly nonlinear regime, without fine-tuning the system parameters. Moreover, this mechanism shows advantages over existing blockade mechanisms and is suitable for implementation in a wide variety of systems due to its simplicity and universality.'
author:
- Sanjib Ghosh
- 'Timothy C. H. Liew'
bibliography:
- 'references.bib'
title: Dynamical blockade in a single mode bosonic system
---
Photon blockade is a nonlinear optical effect that suppresses multiple-photon occupancy in a quantum mode favouring the single photon state [@Imamoglu97]. Strong photon blockade is a natural source for single photons, which are essential for many rising technologies [@Lodahl15], such as quantum communication [@Kimble08; @Sangouard11], computation [@Knill01] and cryptography [@Scarani09]. Accessing the regime of photon blockade is also a prerequisite for realizing quantum many-body phenomena, e.g., the fractional quantum Hall effect [@Umucallar12], the superfluid to Mott insulator transition [@Hartmann06; @Angelakis07; @Greentree06] and the strongly correlated Tonks-Girardeau gas [@Carusotto09] of photons.
While photon blockade has been realized in a variety of physical systems, they operate with diverse mechanisms and methods in different regimes of the system parameters. Conventional photon blockade relies on the anharmonic energy spectra of multiple photons in a nonlinear cavity [@Imamoglu97]. Naturally, this mechanism is inefficient in the weakly nonlinear regime where the corresponding spectral anharmonicity is smaller than the linewidth. Consequently, the search for strong nonlinearity was the paradigm in this field, and it took different routes to enhance nonlinearity, e.g., by coupling photonic modes to single atoms [@Birnbaum05; @Dayan08], quantum dots [@Faraon08], superconducting qubits [@Lang11], Rydberg atoms [@Ningyuan18], mechanical resonators [@Lemonde16; @Rabl11], 2D materials [@Ryou18] and doubly resonant nanocavities [@Majumdar13; @Gerace14]. Exciton-polaritons in semiconducting microcavities were also considered for inducing polariton blockade [@Verger06] which was observed in recent experiments [@Munoz-Matutano19; @Delteil19] with however a limited antibunching due to limited nonlinearity. The regime of strong nonlinearity was recently accessed in exciton-polariton systems [@Sun17; @Rosenberg18; @Togan18], where the blockade physics would be exciting to study.
Alternatively, an interference effect between a pair of coupled quantum modes can induce unconventional photon blockade in the weakly nonlinear regime [@Liew10; @Bamba11; @Bamba11APL; @Lemonde14; @Flayac17], which was realized in recent experiments [@Vaneph18; @Snijders18]. However, the emission-correlation in the unconventional blockade rapidly oscillates in time [@Liew10], requiring high time resolution to observe, as well as making it unsuitable for many applications. Other blockade mechanisms were proposed, based on gain media [@Ghosh18], parametric interactions [@Kyriienko14; @Sarma17], and time-modulated driving fields [@Kryuchkyan16]. Also, proposals to enhance the unconventional blockade have been based on phase dependent tunnelling [@Shen15PRA], multiple optomechanical modes [@Sarma18], and continuous bimodal driving [@Shen17; @Shen18].
Here, we introduce a mechanism for photon blockade that can be dynamically induced universally in all regimes of nonlinearity. In our scheme, we resonantly apply a combination of both continuous and pulsed excitations to a nonlinear bosonic mode. While either of the continuous or pulsed excitations individually induces a conventional blockade, their combined effect dramatically alters the scenario with a much stronger photon blockade in certain periodic time windows. The scheme is conceptually simple, because the system involves only a single mode driven by resonant optical fields that are routinely used in experiments (e.g., Ref. [@Adiyatullin17]). The underlying mechanism is very general and can be applied to any nonlinear bosonic system. Moreover, the induced dynamical blockade has advantages over the existing blockade mechanisms, e.g., it shows no rapid oscillations in the unequal time correlation function like the unconventional blockade shows, and presents improved single photon statistics compared to that of the conventional blockade in its optimal operating configuration. Thus, the dynamical blockade can be used in preexisting single photon devices to improve their emission efficiency (brightness) and single photon statistics, while allowing other systems with weaker nonlinearity to reach the blockade regime.
Our theoretical description of the considered bosonic nonlinear mode driven by resonant optical fields is based on the quantum master equation. By analysing the system, we find the essential ingredients for the dynamical blockade to occur and identify the underlying mechanism. We present comprehensive numerical evidence for the phenomenon in different regimes of the mode parameters.
**The model:–** Let us consider a driven-dissipative Kerr nonlinear quantum mode represented by the Hamiltonian: $$\begin{aligned}
\hat{H} = E{\hat{a}}^\dagger {\hat{a}}+ \alpha{\hat{a}}^\dagger {\hat{a}}^\dagger {\hat{a}}{\hat{a}}+ P(t)\, {\hat{a}}^\dagger + P^*(t){\hat{a}}\end{aligned}$$ where ${\hat{a}}^\dagger$ (${\hat{a}}$) is the creation (annihilation) operator, $E$ is the mode energy, $\alpha$ is the strength of nonlinearity and $P(t)$ represents the envelope of a coherent driving field (laser). It is implicit that we operate in the frame rotating at the laser frequency, such that E is the mode energy relative to the laser energy. The quantum master equation describing the dynamics of an observable $\hat{\mathcal{O}}$ is given by, $$\begin{aligned}
i\hbar{\langle \dot{ \hat{ \mathcal{O} } } \rangle} = {\langle [ \hat{\mathcal{O}},\hat{H}] \rangle} + i\frac{\gamma}{2}{\langle 2{\hat{a}}^\dagger \hat{\mathcal{O}}{\hat{a}}- {\hat{a}}^\dagger {\hat{a}}\hat{\mathcal{O}} - \hat{\mathcal{O}} {\hat{a}}^\dagger {\hat{a}}\rangle}\end{aligned}$$ where $\gamma/\hbar$ is the decay rate of the mode. As a measure of antibunching, we consider the second order correlation function: $$\begin{aligned}
g_2(t,t') = \frac{{\langle {\hat{a}}(t)^\dagger {\hat{a}}(t')^\dagger {\hat{a}}(t') {\hat{a}}(t) \rangle} }{{\langle {\hat{a}}(t)^\dagger {\hat{a}}(t) \rangle} {\langle {\hat{a}}(t')^\dagger {\hat{a}}(t') \rangle}}\end{aligned}$$ that represents the correlation between emission at times $t$ and $t'$. For ideal single photon emission, a vanishing equal time correlation function $g_2(t,t)$ is required. The dynamics of the equal time correlation function can be obtained from the master equation (see Ref. [@SM]): $$\begin{aligned}
\dot{g}_2(t,t) = \frac{4P(t)}{ \hbar} f(t)
\label{g2Dot}\end{aligned}$$ where the function $f(t) = \left( g_2(t,t) n\, \text{Im}[\psi] - \text{Im}[C] \right)/ n^2 $ with occupation number $n={\langle {\hat{a}}^\dagger{\hat{a}}\rangle}$, the mean field wave-function $\psi = {\langle {\hat{a}}\rangle}$ and $C={\langle {\hat{a}}^\dagger {\hat{a}}{\hat{a}}\rangle}$. It is important to note from Eq. \[g2Dot\] that the rate of change in $g_2(t,t)$ is directly proportional to the applied field $P(t)$.
![Different driving field configurations (left panels) and the corresponding equal time correlation functions $g_2(t,t)$ (right panels). (a) schematic plot of the combined driving field that comprises the continuous and pulsed excitations. (b) the corresponding correlation function $g_2(t,t)$ as a function of time $t$ showing the strong dynamical antibunching. However, when a continuous driving field is applied alone (c), there is only conventional blockade (d) and when a short pulse is applied alone (e), the antibunching is washed out. This is because short pulses are broad in energy so the conventional blockade, which depends on energy shift of a multiple particle state out of resonance, no longer operates efficiently. The chosen parameters are $\alpha/\gamma=0.05$, $P_0/\gamma=0.2$, $P_1/\gamma=1$, $T\gamma/\hbar=18.5$ and $E/\gamma=2$.[]{data-label="PulseG2"}](Pulse_vs_g2.eps){width="1\columnwidth"}
**The blockade mechanism:–** Under a conventional continuous (time independent) driving field, the system reaches its steady state where $\dot{g}_2(t,t)=0$ implying $f(t)=0$ through Eq. \[g2Dot\]. In such a continuous driving field configuration, the system shows the conventional blockade with a constant correlation function $g_2(t,t)=g_0$. Here we consider a driving field configuration, $$\begin{aligned}
P(t) = P_0 + P_1 \sum_m \delta(t-mT)\end{aligned}$$ that is, a combination of a continuous driving field $P_0 $ and a series of $\delta$-function pulses, where $m$ is an integer. We choose the time delay between consecutive pulses $T\gamma/\hbar \gg 1$ such that the system reaches the steady state in between the pulses. Let us consider the dynamics before and after the $m$-th pulse. Just before the arrival of the pulse $(m-1)T \ll t <mT$, the system would have forgotten the effect of the previous pulse and would reach the conventional steady state $g_2(t,t)=g_0$. Immediately after the $m$-th pulse, the system moves away from the steady state due to the sudden excitation provided by the pulse. The corresponding correlation function: $$\begin{aligned}
g_2(t,t) = g_0 + \frac{4 P_0}{\hbar}\int_0^{t-mT} f(mT+t') dt'
\label{g2_AfterPulse}\end{aligned}$$ where $mT<t<(m+1)T$. Importantly, the change in the correlation function, represented by the integral in Eq. \[g2\_AfterPulse\], is proportional to the continuous part of the driving field $P_0$. A change in $g_2(t,t)$ from $g_0$ requires both $P_0 \ne 0$ and $P_1 \ne 0$. The need of $P_0 \ne 0$ is explicit in Eq. \[g2\_AfterPulse\]. Additionally, $P_1\ne 0$ is needed, because the change in $g_2(t,t)$ is given by the integral of $f(t)$ that can contribute only when it moves away from the steady state $f(t)=0$. Thus, the change in $g_2(t,t)$ from its conventional (blockade) value requires the combined form of the driving field that combines the pulses with continuous excitation. Each of them individually would induce no change in the correlation function and thus the photon statistics would remain the same as that of the conventional blockade (see Fig. \[PulseG2\]). We emphasise that even the $\delta$-pulses, which are dynamical in nature, provide just a constant $g_2(t,t)$ in absence of the continuous excitation.
Note that the correlation function $g_2(t,t)$ would reach the steady state before the arrival of the next $(m+1)$ pulse. Thus the integral in Eq. \[g2\_AfterPulse\] vanishes to satisfy $g_2(t,t)=g_0$ at $t=(m+1)T-\epsilon$ where $\epsilon$ is small. The total integral can be seen as a sum of contributions coming from the different time segments of the total interval from $t=mT$ to $(m+1)T-\epsilon$. Contributions from the individual segments oscillate between negative and positive values such that all contributions added together give $\int_0^{T-\epsilon} f(mT+t') dt' = 0$. Thus the system goes through the cycles of bunching (large $g_2(t,t)$) and antibunching (small $g_2(t,t)$) over time, as evident in Fig. \[PulseG2\](b). For the time segments when the integral is negative, the value of the correlation function $g_2(t,t)$ can be lower than the conventional value $g_0$ and can induce stronger antibunching than the conventional one.
![Strong antibunching in a weakly nonlinear mode ($\alpha/\gamma\ll 1$). Left: $g_2(t,t)$ is plotted as a function of time $t$ with a combined driving field (red solid line) and with a continuous driving field (blue dotted line). We see that while the conventional $g_2(t,t)$ for a continuous driving field stays constant around $1$, the combined driving field periodically induces a small $g_2(t,t)$. Right: The correlation function $g_2(t_s,t_s)$ ( $t_s$ is indicated in the left panel) is plotted for different occupation numbers $n$ (by varying $P_0$). The calculated $g_2\approx 1$ for the conventional continuous driving field (blue dotted line). For the combined driving field, $g_2(t,t)$ (red circles) is small for all considered $n$. We used the parameters $E/\gamma=2$, $\alpha/\gamma = 0.05$, $P_0/\gamma =0.5$, $P_1/\gamma=0.5$ and $T\gamma/\hbar=18.5$ (such that the pulse arrives in the left-hand plot at $t=37\hbar/\gamma$, corresponding to the beginning of the plot scale).[]{data-label="WeakNonlinearity"}](g2_weak_nonlinear.eps){width="1\columnwidth"}
**Analysis of equal time correlations:-** In Fig. \[WeakNonlinearity\], we show the equal time correlation function $g_2(t,t)$ for a weakly nonlinear mode with $\alpha/\gamma=0.05$. For such a mode, the conventional blockade can be induced by a continuous driving field and provides a very weak antibunching with $g_2 \approx 1$. For the combined driving field, the mode shows strong antibunching in certain periodic intervals. In the combined driving field configuration, the pulses periodically excite the mode on top of the continuous excitation. The time interval where the correlation function $g_2(t,t)$ is small follows this periodicity of the combined driving field. In the left panel of Fig. \[WeakNonlinearity\], we show one such period of the correlation function $g_2(t,t)$. In the right panel, we show $g_2(t,t)$ for different occupation numbers at a time where $g_2(t,t)$ is minimum. We find that $g_2(t,t)$ remains small for the considered small occupation numbers. We are unable to find small $g_2(t,t)$ for large occupation number $n\sim 1$ in the present weakly nonlinear regime. These results are comparable to what one gets from the interference induced unconventional blockade in two-mode configuration [@Liew10]. However, unlike the unconventional blockade, here the unequal time correlation function does not show rapid oscillations (to be shown later in this article).
![Enhancing antibunching in the strongly nonlinear regime. Panels (a) and (b) show color plots of the correlation function $g_2(t_s,t_s)$ calculated at time $t=t_s$ (indicated in panels (c) and (d)) as functions of occupation numbers $n(t_s)$ and the nonlinearity strength $\alpha/\gamma$ for combined and continuous driving fields, respectively. We see that for a given value of $\alpha/\gamma$, the combined driving field provides a much smaller $g_2(t,t)$ compared to a continuous driving field for the same occupation number. Here we varied $P_0$ to achieve different occupation numbers. In (c) and (d), we consider the nonlinearity $\alpha/\gamma = 1$ and show the correlation function $g_2(t,t)$ and occupation number $n(t)$, respectively, as functions of time $t$ after a $\delta$-pulse is applied at $t=2T$. The dotted lines indicate the respective quantities when a constant driving field is applied (conventional blockade). We see enhancement of the single photon statistics with smaller $g_2(t,t)$ and larger $n(t)$ for certain times compared to the same for conventional blockade. We used the parameters $E/\gamma=0.25$, $P_0/\gamma=0.5$, $P_1/\gamma=0.2$ and $T\gamma/\hbar=12.3$.[]{data-label="StrongNonlinearity"}](g2_alpha_occupation_numbers.eps){width="1\columnwidth"}
Our considered mechanism also allows us to operate in the strongly nonlinear regime where large occupation numbers are accessible keeping $g_2(t,t)$ small. A constant driving field $P(t) = P_0$ induces conventional blockade in the strongly nonlinear regime. Under this constant driving field the system reaches to the steady state with constant $g_2(t,t)$ and $n(t)$. With a suitable $E/\gamma=0.25$ we minimize $g_2(t,t)$ for the given driving field. Keeping the same set of parameters, we introduce the additional series of $\delta$-pulses. We immediately find that the combined driving field, that is instigated by adding the pulses, induces stronger antibunching than the same for the constant driving field. Moreover, at time $t=t_s$ when the correlation $g_2(t,t)$ is minimum, the occupation number $n(t_s)$ is higher than what we get from the conventional blockade (constant driving field). Thus, the enhancement of single photon statistics under a combined driving field is two fold: a reduction in the correlation function $g_2(t,t)$ and a simultaneous increase in the mode occupation number $n$. In Fig. \[StrongNonlinearity\], we show the single photon statistics of a strongly nonlinear mode. We present the color plots for the correlation function $g_2(t,t)$, obtained at time when it is minimum, induced dynamically by the combined driving field and conventionally by a continuous driving field, respectively, as functions of the nonlinear interaction strength $\alpha$ and mode occupation $n$. In the plots, the darker regions are indicating small $g_2(t,t)$ regimes. We find that the darker region for the dynamically induced blockade is larger than that of the conventional blockade. In addition, as shown in the supplemental material, the enhanced antibunching is not sensitive to our choice of $\delta$-function pulses and also appears with finite duration pulses provided they are shorter than the lifetime set by the inverse of the system decay rate.
**Analysis of unequal time correlations:-** In Fig. \[UnequalTimeG2\], we show the unequal time correlation function in the weak and strong nonlinearity regimes. Our system is dynamical in nature and thus the unequal time correlation function $g_2(t,t')$ depends individually on $t$ and $t'$. We consider that the reference time $t'=t_s$, at which the equal time correlation is minimum, and evaluate the correlation function $g_2(t,t_s)$ as a function of time $t$. From the figure, we find that $g_2(t,t_s)$ remains small for $|t-t'| \sim \hbar/\gamma $ in both regimes of nonlinearity. This means that no extraordinary time resolution is needed to probe the antibunching effect in both the weak and strong nonlinearity regimes.
![Unequal time correlation function in different regimes of nonlinearity. While the red solid lines are representing the unequal time correlation function for the combined driving field, the blue dotted lines are showing the values corresponding to the conventional blockade. Left panel: we plot the unequal time correlation function $g_2(t,t_s)$ for $\alpha/\gamma=0.05$, where $t_s$ is a reference time as indicated in the figure. Other parameters are $E/\gamma=2$, $\alpha/\gamma = 0.05$, $P_0/\gamma =0.5$, $P_1/\gamma=0.5$ and $T\gamma/\hbar=18.5$. Right panel: $g_2(t,t_s)$ in the strong nonlinearity regime with $\alpha/\gamma=1$. Other parameters are $E/\gamma=0.25$, $P_0/\gamma=0.5$, $P_1/\gamma=0.2$ and $T\gamma/\hbar=12.3$. []{data-label="UnequalTimeG2"}](UnequalTimeG2.eps){width="1\columnwidth"}
We compare the dynamical blockade with the conventional blockade induced by a constant driving field. In the weakly nonlinear regime, we find no sign of antibunching with $g_2(t,t_s)\approx 1$ at all times for the conventional blockade. In the strongly nonlinear regime, the conventional blockade does show an antibunching effect, with, however, a larger $g_2(t,t_s)$ compared to the same for the dynamical blockade in the most relevant regime $t\approx t_s$.
In the weakly nonlinear regime, the dynamical blockade is most comparable with the unconventional blockade occurring between two strongly coupled modes [@Liew10]. Indeed, it offers small equal time correlations similar to what we have obtained for the dynamical blockade. However, the unequal time correlation function for the unconventional blockade is controlled by a timescale that is inversely proportional to the mode coupling [@Bamba11]. In the required strong coupling regime, this correlation function rapidly oscillates in time. Observing the unconventional blockade thus requires high time resolution [@Vaneph18; @Snijders18]. In our dynamical blockade, the timescale controlling $g_2(t,t_s)$ is given by the photon life time $\hbar/\gamma$, that is, a natural time resolution in emission from the mode.
**Conclusions:–** We have introduced a dynamically induced blockade mechanism that is universal in all regimes of nonlinearity strength. We have presented advantages of this dynamical blockade over the existing blockade mechanisms, conventional and unconventional. However, unlike existing blockades, the dynamical blockade is not a continuous property of the system; instead it goes through the cycles of bunching and antibunching effects over time. Strong antibunching forms only in certain periodic time windows at particular time delays from an applied pulse. To select only these time windows and to exclude all other time segments, additional arrangements in experimental setups are required. For instance, single photons can be obtained by introducing a shutter in the emission and opening it up only during the time windows when the blockade is the strongest. The required timescale of these windows is set by the inverse of the system dissipation rate.
Dynamical blockade can be implemented in a number of systems containing nonlinear bosonic modes, e.g., optical cavities coupled to various systems [@TannoudjiBook; @Birnbaum05; @Dayan08; @Lang11; @Ningyuan18; @Faraon08; @Lemonde16; @Rabl11], photonic crystal cavities [@Akahane03] and nonlinear cavities [@Walmsley15]. Exciton-polaritons in semiconductor microcavities offer yet another alternative system. In fact, this could be an ideal system for exploring the dynamical blockade in both weakly and strongly interacting regimes [@Kasprzak07; @Sun17; @Rosenberg18; @Togan18].
Acknowledgements
================
This work was supported by the Singapore Ministry of Education, grant MOE2017-72-1-001.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
author:
- 'T. T. Takeuchi[^1]'
- 'T. T. Ishii[^2]'
date: 'Received/Accepted'
title: ' Dust emission model of Lyman-break galaxies '
---
Introduction
============
Star formation and metal enrichment in an early stage of galaxies are of great importance to understand the history of the universe. With the aid of a variety of new observational techniques and large facilities, studies on such young galaxies are being pushed to higher and higher redshifts. The surveys that have most efficiently secured large population of galaxies at a redshift $z\sim 3$ are those that exploit the Lyman break to identify high-$z$ candidates: Lyman-break galaxies (LBGs) [@steidel99; @steidel03].
Even in LBGs, there is clear evidence that they contain non-negligible amount of dust [e.g., @sawicki98; @adelberger00; @calzetti01; @shapley01]. Dust grains absorb stellar light and re-emit it in the far infrared (FIR), hence it is crucial to evaluate the intensity and spectrum of FIR emission from galaxies for understanding their star formation properties [e.g., @buat02; @hirashita03 and references therein]. Despite its importance, there still remains a large uncertainty in our understanding of the properties of dust emission from LBGs [for a review, see @calzetti01].
@ouchi99 have estimated the submm flux from LBGs and, for the first time, found empirically that the dust temperature should be high in order to explain their non-detection by SCUBA. @chapman00 also pointed out that the SCUBA submm flux of LBGs were much weaker than that expected from their UV spectral slope index. They discussed that it is hard to reconcile unless dust temperature $T$ is higher than that of local starbursts ($T \ga 70\,$K). For the analysis of SCUBA flux of a highly lensed LBG, MS 1512$-$cB58 (hereafter cB58), @sawicki01 (S01) performed a thorough survey of the parameter space of dust temperature and emissivity index, and concluded that the dust temperature and/or emissivity index in cB58 is substantially higher than those seen in local galaxies.
Another important issue to be addressed is the contribution of dust emission from LBGs to the cosmic infrared background (CIRB) [@gispert00; @hauser01; @takeuchi01a; @totani02]. The star formation rate (SFR) density of LBGs is now believed to increase toward redshifts $z \ga 3$, if we ‘correct’ dust extinction [@steidel99]. Then, the re-emission from dust in LBGs is an interesting target to examine. Some resent observations suggest that their contribution to the total CIRB is not very large, at most $\sim 20\;$% [@webb03]. If so, there must be other contributors to the CIRB, which should bear an intense star formation comparable or even larger than that in LBGs. Hence, theoretical prediction of the dust emission plays an important role in the interpretation of the cosmic SFR and the CIRB.
In order to address these issues and to make a consistent picture of the dust emission from LBGs, we must consider their star formation history, chemical evolution and dust mass evolution, radiation process with nonequilibrium temperature fluctuation, and dust composition properly. Recently, @hirashita02 (H02) have developed a model for the evolution of dust content in very young galaxies (age $t \la 10^9\,
\mbox{yr}$). Type II supernovae (SNe II) are the dominant source for the production of dust grains in young star-forming galaxies [@dwek80]. H02 have modeled the evolution of FIR luminosity and dust temperature in such a young starburst on the basis of SNe II grain formation model of @todini01 (TF01).
@takeuchi03a (T03) subsequently constructed a model of infrared (IR) spectral energy distribution (SED) of galaxies starting from the H02 model. It has been believed that the size of dust grains formed in SNe II cannot be as large as $0.1 \mbox{--} 1\,\mu$m (TF01), and host galaxies are too young for grains to grow in the interstellar space. T03, for the first time, properly considered the dust size distribution peculiar to the very early stage of galaxy evolution, and construct a model of the IR SED of very young galaxies. T03 model successfully reproduced the peculiar SED of a local metal-deficient galaxy ($Z = 1/41\,Z_\odot$), which we regarded as an analogue of genuine young galaxies. However, in clear contrast, recently @nozawa03 has presented a new model of dust grain formation in SNe II, which produce larger grains ($\sim 0.1 \mbox{--} 1\;\mu$m) than the previously believed conjecture. Their dust has a broken power-law grain size distribution. Based on the known physical condition in LBGs, we discuss the possible geometrical configuration of dust, and show that we can test the dust size distribution at high redshift by an observation of LBGs in the IR and submm. Such observations will be soon possible by, e.g.,[*SPICA*]{}, [*Herschel*]{}, SMA and ALMA.
The layout of this paper is as follows: In Section \[sec:model\] we briefly describe our model framework. We present our basic results for the SEDs of LBGs in Section \[sec:results\]. Related discussions are given in Section \[sec:discussion\]. First we focus on a gravitationally magnified LBG , a unique probe of the internal physics of LBGs. Then we consider some cosmologically important problems. Section \[sec:conclusion\] is devoted to our summary and conclusions.
SED Model for Extremely Young Galaxies {#sec:model}
======================================
SED construction
----------------
Since H02 treats the evolution of dust content in a galaxy younger than $10^8$ yr, the only contributor to the total dust mass ($M_{\rm dust}$) in a young ($<10^8$ yr) galaxy is the supply from SNe II. The rate of SNe II is given by $$\begin{aligned}
\gamma (t)=\int_{8M_\odot}^{\infty} \psi (t-t_m)\, \phi (m)\, dm\, ,\end{aligned}$$ where $\psi (t)$ is the SFR at age $t$ (we define $t=0$ at the beginning of the star formation), $\phi (m)$ is the initial mass function (IMF), $t_m$ is the lifetime of a star whose mass is $m$, and it is assumed that only stars with $m>8~M_\odot$ produce SNe II. H02 assume a constant SFR, $\psi =\psi_0$, and a Salpeter IMF. Then the rate of increase of $M_{\rm dust}$ is written as $\dot{M}_{\rm dust}=m_{\rm dust}\gamma$ ($m_{\rm dust}$ is the typical dust mass produced by one SN II). H02 adopted $m_{\rm dust}=0.4~M_\odot$.
In general we must take into account not only the production but also destruction of dust grains. However, the timescale of dust destruction is much longer than that we consider in this work, hence the effect of the destruction appears to be negligible. Detailed evaluation can be found in H02 \[their eq. (2)\].
Dust grains are roughly divided into silicate and carbonaceous ones. TF01 have presented that the sizes of silicate and carbonaceous grains formed in SN II ejecta to be about 10 Å and 300 Å, respectively. Classical studies claimed that the dust grains originating from SNe II cannot be as large as those formed in the atmosphere of evolved AGB stars or grown in the diffuse interstellar space (@kozasa87; TF01). In this case, the discrete and small grain sizes make the appearance of the IR SED of young galaxies drastically different from that of aged normal galaxies. On the other hand, recently @nozawa03 have proposed a drastically different picture of dust size distribution from SNe II. They showed that, under some condition, dust grains can grow large even within the expansion timescale of SNe ejecta. Consequently, their size distribution of grains have a broken power-law shape. For comparison, we also consider this case by using the simple description of Galactic dust [@mathis77] as $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:mdust}
\frac{dN}{da} \propto a^{-3.5} \end{aligned}$$ for both grain species, i.e., silicate or carbon dust. Here we note that we do not include polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) in our dust grain model, because they are rarely found in metal-poor systems and/or in intense radiation environments [e.g., @madden00; @galliano03].
It is well accepted that very small grains are stochastically heated, that is they cannot establish thermal equilibrium with the ambient radiation field [@draine85; @draine01]: the heat capacity of very small grains is too small to maintain its temperature until the next photon impinges. As a result, the temperature of a grain varies violently in time, and we can define a distribution of the instantaneous temperature of a grain, which will be introduced in eq. (\[eq:lum\_IR\]). For the heat capacity of a grain, $C(T)$, we apply the multidimensional Debye model according to @draine01.
Then we calculated the temperature distribution of dust as a function of size $a$ by Monte Carlo simulations, following @draine85. The UV radiation field strength is determined by the history of OB star luminosity of H02 and the size of the star forming region $r_{\rm SF}$. For the geometry, we assume that the OB stars are concentrated in the centre of the system, and dust is assumed to be distributed as a shell. We regard the radius of the sphere, $r$ as the size of the spherical star forming region, $r_{\rm SF}$. The flux is expressed by $J(t)=L_{\rm OB}(t)/(4\pi r_{\rm SF}^2)$, hence the UV energy density, $u$, is obtained by $u=J(t)/c$. The spectral UV energy density $u_\lambda$ is calculated from the assumed spectrum of the UV radiation field.
The rate at which a grain absorbs a photon with energy $E \sim E+dE$ is expressed as[^3] $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:prob}
\frac{d^2 p}{dEdt} = Q_{\rm abs} (a, \lambda)\pi a^2 u_\lambda
\frac{\lambda^3}{h^2c} \,,\end{aligned}$$ where $Q_{\rm abs}$ is the absorption efficiency of a dust grain. We used the values proposed by @draine84 for $Q_{\rm abs}$ of silicate and carbon grains.
The heating is represented as follows: $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:heating}
\frac{hc}{\lambda} = \frac{4\pi a^3}{3}\int_{T_0}^{T} C(T')dT' \, ,\end{aligned}$$ where $T$ is the peak temperature achieved by a grain hit by a photon with energy $hc/\lambda$, and $T_0$ is the grain temperature just before absorption. On the other hand, the grain cools through radiation as $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:cooling}
\frac{d T}{dt} = -\frac{3\pi}{aC(T)}
\int_0^\infty Q_{\rm abs}(a,\lambda)\, B_\lambda(T) d\lambda \,,\end{aligned}$$ where $B_\lambda(T)$ is the blackbody function represented as a function of wavelength.
From Equations (\[eq:prob\]), (\[eq:heating\]), and (\[eq:cooling\]), we obtain the sample path of a grain temperature as a function of time.
The total mass of each grain component is given by TF01. The mass ratio we adopt here is $M_{\rm sil}:M_{\rm C} = 0.56:0.44$ (H02). With this value and material density of each species ($\rho_{\rm
sil}=3.50\,\mbox{g}\,\mbox{cm}^{-3}$ and $\rho_{\rm
C}=2.26\,\mbox{g}\,\mbox{cm}^{-3}$: @draine84), we obtain the normalization of the dust size distribution $dN_i/da_i'$, $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:dust_number_norm}
M_{\rm dust} f_i =
\int \frac{4\pi {a_i'}^3 \rho_i}{3} \frac{dN_i}{da_i'}da_i' \,,\end{aligned}$$ where subscript $i$ denotes the species of dust, sil or C, and $f_i$ is the mass fraction of dust of species $i$. The total number of grains, $N_i$, is expressed as $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:dust_number}
N_i = \int \frac{dN_i}{da_i'}da_i' \,.\end{aligned}$$ For the TF01 dust distribution, $a_i$ is fixed for each dust component to a specific value $a_i$, i.e., ${dN_i}/{da_i'}=N_i\delta(a_i'-a_i)$. In this case, with Equations (\[eq:dust\_number\]) and (\[eq:dust\_number\_norm\]), the normalization reduces to $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:dust_number_single}
N_i = \frac{3M_{\rm dust}f_i}{4\pi a_i^3\rho_i} \,.\end{aligned}$$ We drop the prime in the following expressions.
Total IR emission spectrum from a galaxy is then calculated by superposing each of the continuum from silicate and carbonaceous grains, $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:lum_IR}
% L_{{\rm IR},\lambda}(t) &=&\nonumber \\
% &&\hspace{-10mm} \sum_i \pi \int\int 4 \pi a_i^2
L_{{\rm IR},\lambda}(t) =
\sum_i \pi \int\int 4 \pi a_i^2
Q_{\rm abs}^i(\lambda)B_\lambda(T)
\frac{dN_i}{da_i}\frac{dP_i(u,a_i)}{dT}\,dT da_i \,,\end{aligned}$$ where $dP_i(u,a_i)/dT$ is the temperature probability density function, i.e., the fraction of time for which a grain with species $i$ in a UV radiation field with energy density $u$ stays in a temperature range $[T, T+dT]$. The starburst age is incorporated with $N_i$ (i.e., $dN_i/da_i$) and $dP_i(u,a_i)/dT$ through $M_{\rm dust}(t)$ and $u_\lambda (t)$. Here we put a constraint that the amount of absorbed light is equal to the FIR luminosity. Lastly, if the dust opacity is very large, then self-absorption occurs, and even MIR radiation from dust is absorbed by the dust itself. We treat the extinction as given by a shell model. We crudely approximate the dust opacity and extinction to the first order as $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:tau}
\tau_{\rm dust}(\lambda) &\simeq&
\sum_i \pi a_i^2 Q_{{\rm abs},i} (\lambda)\,
\frac{3 N_i}{4\pi \left[(r_{\rm SF}+\Delta r_{\rm SF})^3
- r_{\rm SF}^3\right]} \Delta r_{\rm SF} \nonumber \\
&\simeq& \sum_i \pi a_i^2 Q_{{\rm abs},i} (\lambda)\,
\frac{N_i}{4\pi r_{\rm SF}^2}\,, \\
I(\lambda) &=&
I_0(\lambda) e^{-\tau_{\rm dust}(\lambda)} \,.\end{aligned}$$ The absorbed light is re-emitted at longer wavelengths, mainly in the submm, and consequently, the SED is deformed by the self-absorption. Final SED is obtained via this absorption–re-emission process. For further technical details, see T03.
Input parameters for LBGs {#subsec:input}
-------------------------
Here we consider the input physical parameters in the model calculation for LBGs. We adopted the dust grain sizes $a_{\rm C}=200\,\mbox{\AA}$ and $a_{\rm sil}=6\,\mbox{\AA}$ for our canonical model. They are the same as those for and used in T03, because LBGs are thought to be young, and hence we expect similar dust properties to them.
The SFR of LBGs spreads over the range of $\mbox{SFR} \simeq 1 \mbox{--} 300\,M_\odot \mbox{yr}^{-1}$ with a median value of $\mbox{SFR} \simeq 20\,M_\odot \mbox{yr}^{-1}$ [e.g., @erb03]. We assumed a constant SFR up to the age shorter than $10^9$ yr, which may be a good approximation [e.g., @baker04]. Within the young age of $t \la 10^9\,$yr, neither SNe I nor RGB/AGB stars contribute to the dust production. Other dust growth mechanism in the interstellar medium cannot work effectively, either [see, e.g., @whittet92]. Thus, the basic framework of T03 model is valid for LBGs.
The most important information to calculate the IR SED is the effective size of the star forming region, but it is the most uncertain quantity at the same time. It is still beyond the possibility of the present facilities to measure the size directly from observations. The mean half-light radius of LBGs is estimated to be $\sim 1.6\,
\mbox{kpc}$ from [*HST*]{} observations [@erb03], hence it may be a general value for LBG populations. The similarity between the rest UV and optical morphologies suggests that the dust in LBGs may not preferentially obscure particular regions in these galaxies [@dickinson00; @calzetti01]. Then we can safely use the galaxy radius $r_{\rm G}$ as the radius of a star-forming region, $r_{\rm SF}$, i.e., $r_{\rm SF} = 2\,\mbox{kpc}$. We will revisit this issue with more physical considerations in Section \[sec:discussion\].
Results {#sec:results}
=======
{width="17cm"}
{width="17cm"}
Based on the above-mentioned settings, we calculated the IR SEDs of LBGs with $\mbox{SFR} = 10$, 30, and $100\,M_\odot\mbox{yr}^{-1}$ as representative cases. We traced the evolution of the SEDs from $t=10^7\,\mbox{yr}$ to $10^9\,\mbox{yr}$.
Figure \[fig:sed\_lbg\_sdust\] shows the evolution of the SED for the single-sized dust size distribution. The dust opacity is found to be not very large, and consequently, the silicate features appeared in emission. Only in the case of $\mbox{SFR}=100\,M_\odot\mbox{yr}^{-1}$, these features becomes a significant absorption after $3 \times 10^8\,\mbox{yr}$. Most of the LBGs have a lower SFR than $\mbox{SFR}=100\,M_\odot
\mbox{yr}^{-1}$, hence basically we can expect the silicate emission band feature in their MIR spectra. Along the same line, since the self-absorption is not significant for LBG spectra, we also expect a strong MIR continuum emission from LBGs if the single-sized dust distribution takes place.
For comparison, we next show the evolution of the SED for the power-law dust size distribution in Figure \[fig:sed\_lbg\_mdust\]. In this case, an obvious difference is that the MIR radiation is an order of magnitude weaker than that for the single-sized dust results. This is because the power-law size distribution has much smaller amount of small grains ($a \la 100\,$Å) than the single-sized distribution. The extinction properties are similar to that of single-sized dust case, despite the drastic difference of the SEDs. Thus, if the geometrical configuration of dust is similar among LBGs, the MIR observation can be a strong tool to explore the size distribution of dust grains.
Discussions {#sec:discussion}
===========
{width="17cm"}
{#subsec:cb}
It is still difficult to compare a model prediction for young galaxies to observational data of LBGs. Among the LBGs, a typical $L_*$ LBG cB58 is a fortunate exception: it has been observed in various wavelengths [e.g., @ellingson96; @bechtold97; @nakanishi97; @teplitz00; @baker01], because of a strong magnification by gravitational lensing [factor $22\mbox{--}40$: @seitz98]. We adopt a commonly used value of 30 for magnification. The half-light radius of cB58 is estimated to be $r_{\rm G} \simeq 1.4h^{-1}\,$kpc from a detailed image reconstruction [@seitz98][^4].
From spectroscopic observations of nebular lines, the SFR of cB58 is estimated to be $\simeq 10 \mbox{--}20h^{-2}\, M_\odot \mbox{yr}^{-1}$ [@pettini00]. The age of major star formation in cB58 was estimated to be $t_{\rm SF}
\simeq 35\,\mbox{Myr}$ [@matteucci02]. An older age estimate of $t_{\rm SF} = 140\,$Myr is given by [@baker04], and we adopt both of these values for our calculations. This is broadly consistent with other observational suggestions [e.g., @pettini00; @ellingson96], and significantly younger than the median value of those of general LBGs [$\sim 350\,$Myr: @shapley01].
The optical extinction of cB58 is estimated to be $E(B-V) \simeq 0.27$ [@pettini00; @ellingson96; @teplitz00]. Emission from dust in cB58 is measured at two wavelengths: @sawicki01 observed this galaxy at $850\,\mu$m by SCUBA on the JCMT, and no signal was detected above $3\sigma$ level of 3.9 mJy. Another observation by SCUBA [@vanderwerf01] detected a $850\,\mu$m flux to be $4.2\pm 0.9$ mJy. @baker01 reported a detection at 1.2 mm by MAMBO (Max-Planck Millimeter Bolometer) array, and the flux was $1.06 \pm 0.35$ mJy ($4.4\sigma$).
The submm flux from the foreground cD galaxy (6$''$ away from cB58) may contaminate the observed data [@sawicki01]. After careful examination of the new submm mapping data, it has been concluded that the contamination is $\sim 5$ % at $850\,\mu$m and $\sim 22$ % at 1.2 mm, respectively [@baker04], though there still remain some other uncertainties (e.g., @baker04 discusses a possible contribution of emission lines or background sources. We may need an interferometric observation to solve this problem). In addition, the uncertainties in the lensing correction and in the UV based SFR estimation may also be as large as that of the contamination correction. We should keep these issues in mind in the following discussions.
### IR SED {#subsubsec:irsed}
We use a commonly accepted value of $24\,M_\odot \mbox{yr}^{-1}$ as a SFR [@baker04] and assume the SFR to be constant in time. For the age of the major star formation in cB58, as we mentioned above, we adopt $35\,$Myr and $140\,$Myr. Because of its young age, dust is predominantly produced by SNe II and the framework of T03 model is again valid for cB58. The half-light radius of the reconstructed image of cB58 [$\simeq 2\,\mbox{kpc}$ @seitz98] is very similar to that of general LBGs [$\sim 1.6\, \mbox{kpc}$ @erb03].
We show the model SED of cB58 in Figure \[fig:sed\_cb\]. Left panel presents the SED with a single-sized dust, and Right panel shows the SED with a power-law distribution (Equation \[eq:mdust\]), respectively. Symbols represent the measured flux densities reported by @sawicki01 (upper limits), @baker01 (open triangles) and @vanderwerf01 (open squares). There are two open symbols at each wavelength: the upper open symbols are the measured values, and the lower ones represent the flux densities corrected for the possible contamination by the point source at the lens cluster center [@baker04]. It is still not clear whether the point source is the cD galaxy or not [@baker04].
The apparent peak of the SED is located at a wavelength shorter than $100\,\mu$m at the restframe of cB58. Actually, the dust temperature is higher than that of the local ($z\sim 0$) sample of normal galaxies observed by SCUBA, but comparable to the most intense dusty starbursts [@dunne01]. It is mainly because of an intense UV radiation field of cB58 and low dust opacity. The mean dust temperature of the power-law dust model is lower than that of the single-sized dust model, but the superposition makes the submm part of its final SED similar to that of a hot dust emission. We find that both models predict slightly lower flux densities than observed. Considering the uncertainties mentioned above, we conclude that the model is roughly consistent with observations within a few factors. Some authors claim that the submm flux densities of cB58 is surprisingly low [e.g., @baker04], but in our framework, they are naturally explained by our model framework (the model predicts even smaller fluxes). The power-law model predicts a slightly larger flux at submm wavelengths, but it is difficult to distinguish the two models only by submm observations.
The prominent feature in the MIR is the silicate band of $9.7\,\mu$m. For the single-sized dust model, the NIR–MIR part of the SED is dominated by the radiation from small silicate grains, and FIR–submm part by larger carbonaceous grains. In contrast, relatively lower abundance of small grains in the power-law model makes the MIR radiation considerably weaker.
### Extinction and size of the star-forming regions {#subsec:extinction_cb}
Besides IR emission, dust extinction is a fundamental quantity to specify the dust properties. We relate the extinction in magnitude ($A_\lambda$) with $\tau_{\rm dust} (\lambda)$ (Equation \[eq:tau\]) by $$A_\lambda = 1.086 \tau_{\rm dust}(\lambda)\,.$$ When we adopt the $r_{\rm SF}=2\,\mbox{kpc}$, the extinction at $K$-band is $A_K =0.08\,\mbox{mag}$. Again we adopt the extinction curve of @cardelli89, we expect $A_V =0.8\,\mbox{mag}$ from our model. The measured color excess is $E(B-V)=0.27$, hence by adopting $R_V =3.1$ as a representative value in a diffuse ISM [@krugel03], we have $A_V = R_V E(B-V) \simeq 0.84\,\mbox{mag}$, which is in perfect agreement with our model prediction. @vijh03 performed a sophisticated analysis of the attenuation in LBGs by using a radiative transfer model. They showed the attenuation is in the range of $5.7\mbox{--}18.5$ at $1600\,
\mbox{\AA}$, and is well represented by Calzetti law [@calzetti94]. Our extinction estimate is also consistent with their result. They also showed that the shell geometry is appropriate for the dust in LBGs, which is in accordance with our assumption. Thus, we see that the extinction in the visible stellar system of cB58 is consistent with its dust amount and spatial scale of $r_{\rm SF}\simeq 2\,\mbox{kpc}$.
Then, can a heavily hidden star formation exist in this galaxy? Actually, hosts a completely extinguished starburst [@hunt01; @plante02], and its SED is well understood by T03 model. To consider this problem, we have calculated the SEDs with various smaller star-forming region sizes. This means that the bulk of the dust in cB58 could be confined in a small part of its volume. They are shown in Figure \[fig:sed\_sfr\_size\]. Dotted, dashed, and dot-dashed lines are those with $r_{\rm SF}=300\,$pc, 120pc, and 30pc, respectively. Smaller sizes make the opacity in the region significantly larger, and the conversion from UV to FIR becomes much more efficient. Considering the observational upper limits, the allowed smallest size is $r_{\rm SF}=120\,$pc, with a possible range of $50\mbox{--}200\,\mbox{pc}$ if we take into account the uncertainties in the estimates of the SFR and lensing magnification.
It has been pointed out that the galactic wind can transport the dust into larger radius (T03). Actually, precise spectroscopy by [@pettini03] clearly shows the outflowing motion of gas with a velocity of $v_{\rm wind} \simeq
255\,\mbox{km\,s}^{-1}$ in cB58. They consider the wind and extinction, and suggest that the superwind shell size is comparable to the galaxy size. Hence the wind crossing timescale is $t_{\rm cross} \sim 10^6\,\mbox{yr}$. If dust closely couples with the gas motion, it is difficult to keep dust grains confined in a region much smaller than the galaxy size through its age of $t = 35\mbox{--}140\,\mbox{Myr}$. Strong radiative pressure may also expand the dusty region, as suggested by [@inoue02]. Here we should comment the effect of the patchiness of dust, which may be realistic for LBGs. In the FIR, since the opacity of dust is small ($\tau < 1$), the FIR emission escapes from a galaxy without significant absorption. Then the flux is controlled simply by energy conservation, and the patchiness does not affect the result significantly [see, e.g., @witt00; @gordon00].
Together with its high SFR and SN rate, which are considered to provide a large amount of radiative and kinetic energy to gas-dust system, we conclude that a compact dusty star formation may not be plausible for cB58. Hence, the dust configuration of cB58 may be similar to the present model. This suggests that we can safely discriminate the effect of dust size distribution on the SED from that of the configuration and geometry of dust in the galaxy. Again, this conclusion can hardly be affected by the clumpiness of dust, just the same reason mentioned above.
### Follow-up observations of cB58 {#subsec:followup_cb}
Our single-sized dust model provides an SED with bright continuum in the rest NIR–MIR regime, hence we expect that cB58 will be detected by MIR–FIR observations ($\lambda \sim 20\mbox{--}100\,\mu$m). At present, [*Spitzer Space Telescope*]{}[^5] MIPS and [*ASTRO-F*]{}[^6] IRC will be suitable instruments for such observations. For example, both instruments have the same level of sensitivity around $\sim 20~\mu$m, and the flux of 0.06–0.08 mJy will be detected. For FIR, both can detect 0.8–1 mJy at $\lambda =60\mbox{--}70\;\mu$m. Therefore, the MIR continuum can be detected by the future MIR–FIR observations if the single-sized dust takes place
On the other hand, if the power-law distribution takes place, the flux densities will be an order of magnitude smaller than those of our canonical model, because the number of the stochastically heated grains is reduced. As we mentioned, the uncertainty caused by dust geometry is not very large for a LBG because the configuration becomes more or less shell-like in these galaxies just as a scale-up of . Therefore, the MIR observation will be a strong test for the size distribution.
We should note, however, that even by [*Spitzer*]{}, confusion limit can be severe in FIR [e.g., @ishii02; @dole03; @takeuchi04]. Larger space IR facilities such as [*Herschel Space Observatory*]{}[^7] or [*SPICA*]{}[^8], and IR interferometry missions are longed to improve the confusion limit. At longer wavelengths, of course ALMA will be useful.
Observability of the dust emission from LBGs {#subsec:observability}
--------------------------------------------
Considering the non-negligible extinction in LBGs, their energy budget radiated in the IR should be significant [@adelberger00; @calzetti01]. Stimulated by the consideration, the relation between LBGs and dusty starbursts, another representative star-forming galaxy population at $z=2\mbox{--}5$, has gathered the researchers’ attention. In fact, however, most of the LBGs have not been detected by SCUBA observations [@chapman00; @webb03], except for a few extreme cases [e.g., @chapman02]. @calzetti00 pointed out the possibility that the dust is hot in LBGs based on the observed SED of a low-metallicity galaxy Tol 1924$-$416. Hot dust in LBGs was also suggested by S01 from his observation of a lensed LBG cB58. Since their consideration is empirical, and we need some explanation for the hot dust, if it exists. As seen in the above, our model naturally predict a high dust temperature. Here, we discuss how LBGs look like in the IR/submm wavelengths. It is also useful to estimate the observational feasibility of LBGs by forthcoming submm facilities like ALMA.
{width="17cm"}
{width="17cm"}
{width="17cm"}
{width="17cm"}
{width="17cm"}
{width="17cm"}
The observed flux density of a source at observed frequency, $\nu_{\rm obs}$ is obtained by $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:flux}
S_{\nu_{\rm obs}} =
\frac{(1+z)L_{(1+z)\nu_{\rm obs}}}{4\pi d_{\rm L}(z)^2}
= \frac{(1+z)L_{\nu_{\rm em}}}{4\pi d_{\rm L}(z)^2} \,,\end{aligned}$$ where $d_{\rm L}(z)$ is the luminosity distance corresponding to a redshift $z$, and $\nu_{\rm obs}$ and $\nu_{\rm em}$ are observed and emitted frequency, respectively. We show the observed IR/submm SEDs of LBGs at $z=2$, 3, and 4 in Figures \[fig:sed\_lbg\_sdust\_sfr010\_obs\]–\[fig:sed\_lbg\_mdust\_sfr100\_obs\]. Figures \[fig:sed\_lbg\_sdust\_sfr010\_obs\]–\[fig:sed\_lbg\_sdust\_sfr100\_obs\] represent the SEDs for the single-sized dust size distribution, and Figures \[fig:sed\_lbg\_mdust\_sfr010\_obs\]–\[fig:sed\_lbg\_mdust\_sfr100\_obs\] for the power-law distribution (Equation \[eq:mdust\]). The thick black short horizontal lines indicate the 3-$\sigma$ detection limits for 8-hour observation by ALMA. Here we assumed 64 antennas and three wavelength bands, 450, 850, and $1080\,\mu$m. We also show the 3-$\sigma$ source confusion limit of [*Herschel*]{} at 75, 160, 250, and 350$\,\mu$m bands by thick gray horizontal lines. These limits are based on ‘the photometric criterion’ of [@lagache03]. @ishii02 also report similar estimates for the confusion limits.[^9]
From Figures \[fig:sed\_lbg\_sdust\_sfr010\_obs\]–\[fig:sed\_lbg\_mdust\_sfr100\_obs\], we recognize that the detectability of these galaxies at submm bands are not significantly dependent on the redshift. This is because of the ‘negative $K$-correction’, well-known in the field of submm astronomy. On the contrary, the galaxy age and SFR are more important for the detection of LBGs. If the age $\ga 10^8\,{\rm yr}$ and $\mbox{SFR} \ga 10\,M_\odot\,
{\rm yr}$, a LBG can be detected at a wide range of redshifts in the submm.
In general, the longer the wavelength is, the easier the detection becomes for millimetre (mm) observations. In the submm and mm wavelengths, the detectability is not quite different between LBGs with single-sized dust and those with power-law dust. It is a natural consequence that the radiation in these wavelengths is dominated by relatively large dust grains that can establish a thermal equilibrium with the radiation field.
The apparent peak of the dust emission lies in a relatively short wavelength of about $200\mbox{--}400\,\mu$m at $z=2\mbox{--}4$. Thus, the accumulated background radiation spectrum from LBGs may have its peak in the FIR. The expected dust emission from LBGs is, however, too faint to be detected even by [*Hershel*]{} deep survey, except some rare exceptionally bright sources, e.g., lensed galaxies like , or in the case of extremely high SFR (in order to reach the confusion limits, unrealistic integration time might be required). Hence, still more powerful instruments at these wavelengths would be required.
In the shorter wavelengths (MIR–FIR), the size distribution affects the possibility of detection drastically, just as we have seen in the case of cB58 (\[subsec:cb\]). Surveys in the MIR by [*Spitzer*]{} and [*ASTRO-F*]{} will be desirable to detect these objects. These observations are important to compare the overall SEDs of LBGs directly with those of “local analogues”, such as and . Existence of such local galaxies with hot dust is reported by recent studies [see e.g., @calzetti00; @takeuchi03b]. Similarity and difference between them provides us a unique clue to the physics of galaxy formation.
Contribution of LBGs to the CIRB
--------------------------------
The implication of hot dust also offers a potentially important cosmological insight into high-$z$ galaxies: if dust in high-$z$ object is as cool as usually assumed, then we cannot expect a high comoving SFR density because in a realistic cosmology the cosmic IR background (CIRB) spectrum strongly constrains the high-$z$ IR emission [@takeuchi01a]. However, very hot dust in such high-$z$ object reconciles the CIRB constraint with high SFR, and allows vigorous star formation hidden by dust in the early Universe [@totani02].
Actually, non-detection of LBGs in the submm wavelengths [@chapman00; @webb03] suggests the hot dust temperature. Considering the non-negligible extinction in these galaxies, their energy budget radiated in the IR is significant [@adelberger00; @calzetti01]. However, their contribution to the submm radiation cannot be quite large because of the high dust temperature. In fact, the contribution to the extragalactic submm background radiation has been suggested to be at most $\sim 20$% [@webb03].
Using our model SED and the luminosity function of LBGs [@shapley01], we calculate the integrated IR light from LBGs to the CIRB. In order to have a rough estimate, we correct the extinction to the observed luminosity function, and converted it to the distribution of the SFR by converting the UV luminosity to the SFR according to our model. Here we crudely assumed that all the LBGs have the same star forming region size $r_{\rm SF} = 2\,\mbox{kpc}$. We also assumed that the number of LBGs rapidly decreased at $z \ga 4$.[^10] By using the SFR distribution, we obtained the multiband FIR luminosity function of the LBGs. We finally integrated it over the FIR luminosity to get the CIRB intensity.
Our model predicts $0.4\,\mbox{nW\,m}^{-2}\mbox{sr}^{-1}$ at $200\,\mu$, and $0.2\,\mbox{nW\,m}^{-2}\mbox{sr}^{-1}$ at $850\,\mu$m, respectively. The difference of the dust size distribution does not affect the CIRB spectrum almost at all. This result is shown in Figure \[fig:cirb\]. The $850\,\mu$m intensity is quite consistent with the LBG contribution at $850\,\mu$m estimated by @webb03. Since the CIRB intensity at $200\,\mu$m is much smaller than the measured peak [$\nu I_\nu =15\,\mbox{nW\,m}^{-2} \mbox{sr}^{-1}$ at $\lambda
\simeq 140\,\mu$m) @lagache99], it strongly supports the existence of heavily obscured dusty galaxy population. Therefore, LBGs are not the dominant population contributing to the CIRB.
Straightforward conversion of the UV radiation from galaxies into the IR by recent models cannot reproduce the strong peak [e.g., @balland03]. In addition, the large energy budget radiated in the IR requires an effective energy release, which may related to starburst phenomena, even if they are nearby galaxies [@takeuchi01a; @franceschini01; @hauser01]. Therefore, hidden starbursts are necessary to explain the strong evolution of submm source counts [e.g., @takeuchi01a; @takeuchi01b]. At present, redshifts of the starburst population contributing to the CIRB are almost unknown. If the dusty starburst is a low-$z$ phenomenon, there must be a strongly obscured era at $z \sim 1$ [@takeuchi01a]. In this case it is interesting to discuss a possible relation between the activation of star formation and the peak of merger rate in hierarchical structure formation scenarios [e.g., @lacey93; @kitayama96]. On the other hand, if the obscured galaxies reside in a high-$z$ Universe, it implies that the high-$z$ cosmic SFR density may be higher than the dust-corrected value [@steidel99] because it would be a sum of the contributions both from LBGs and hidden starbursts.
Summary and conclusion {#sec:conclusion}
======================
Lyman-break galaxies (LBGs) contain a non-negligible amount of dust. @takeuchi03a (T03) constructed a model of the infrared spectral energy distribution (SED) for very young galaxies by taking into account the dust size distribution in the early stage of galaxy evolution, which can be different from that of present-day evolved galaxies.
In this work, we applied T03 model to LBGs and constructed their expected SED. In order to examine the grain size distribution of dust, we calculated the SEDs based on two distinct type of the distribution models: a single-sized distribution predicted by @todini01, and a power-law distribution with a slope of $dN/da \propto a^{-3.5}$, which is often used to describe the Galactic dust [@mathis77].
We found that the single-sized and power-law dust size distributions yield a very similar detectability of LBGs at the submillimetre (submm). We also found that the difference of the grain size distribution affects the SED drastically at mid-infrared (MIR) wavelengths. Galaxies with power-law dust distribution have much less flux at MIR than the other. Generally, strong outflow is observed in LBGs, and consequently their geometry of dust configuration might be relatively simple. It reduces the uncertainty of complex radiative transfer, and we can safely explore the dust grain size distribution high-redshift galaxies by (observer-frame) FIR observations.
Then, we applied the model to a gravitationally lensed LBG (cB58), a unique probe of the dust emission from LBGs. Thanks to the large magnification factor, the dust emission has been detected in the submm by SCUBA observations. These observations suggest that the dust is hot in this galaxy. Our model framework well reproduced the hot dust temperature under a natural assumption for this galaxy.
We also examined the detectability of LBGs at submm wavelengths in an eight-hour deep survey by ALMA. The LBG population with an age $\ga 10^8\,{\rm yr}$ and a SFR $\ga 10\,M_\odot {\rm yr}^{-1}$ can be detected in such a survey. The detectability of LBGs in the submm is not strongly affected by redshift, because of the well-known negative $K$-correction. Hence, the detected LBG sample will be undoubtedly an ideal sample to study the early evolution of metal and dust content in galaxies.
By integrating over their redshifted SEDs with the observed luminosity functions, we obtained the contribution of LBGs to the cosmic infrared background radiation (CIRB). Although they have non-negligible amount of dust, their contribution was found to be small, especially in the FIR $\sim 200\,\mu$m. Thus, we need a strongly obscured population of galaxies which contains a large amount of star formation, at some epoch in the history of the universe.
First we deeply thank the anonymous referee whose careful comments improved the quality and clarity of this paper very much. This work has been motivated by a stimulating discussion with Marcin Sawicki at a conference in Mykonos island. Akio K. Inoue is kindly thanked for his careful reading of the manuscript. We are greatly indebted to Hiroyuki Hirashita, Veronique Buat, Masato Onodera, Leslie K. Hunt, Andrea Ferrara, Atsunori Yonehara, Tracy M. Webb, Kouichiro Nakanishi, and Ichi Tanaka for their helpful comments and suggestions.
Adelberger, K. L., & Steidel, C. C. 2000, ApJ, 544, 218
Balland, C., Devriendt, J. E. G., & Silk, J. 2003, MNRAS, 343, 107
Baker, A. J., Lutz, D., Genzel, R., Tacconi, L. J., & Lehnert, M. D. A&A, 372, L37
Baker, A. J., Tacconi, L. J., Genzel, R., Lehnert, M. D., & Lutz, D. 2004, ApJ, 604, 125
Bechtold, J., Yee, H. K. C., Elston, R, & Ellingson, E. 1997, ApJ, 477, L29
Buat, V., Boselli, A., Gavazzi, G., & Bonfanti, C. 2002, A&A, 383, 801
Calzetti, D., Kinney, A., & Storchi-Bergmann, T. 1994, ApJ, 429, 582
Calzetti, D., Armus, L., Bohlin, R. C., et al. 2000, ApJ, 533, 682
Calzetti, D. 2001, PASP, 113, 1449
Cardelli, J. A., Clayton, G. C., & Mathis, J. S. 1989, ApJ, 345, 245
Chapman, S. C., Scott, D., Steidel, C. C. et al. 2000, MNRAS, 319, 318
Chapman, S. C., Shapley, A., Steidel, C., & Windhorst, R. 2002, ApJ, 572, L1
Dickinson, M. 2000, Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. A, 358, 2001
Dole, H., Lagache, G., & Puget, J.-L. 2003, ApJ, 585, 617
Draine, B. T., & Anderson, L. 1985, ApJ, 292, 494
Draine, B. T., & Lee, H. M. 1984, ApJ, 285, 89
Draine, B. T., & Li, A. 2001, ApJ, 551, 807
Dunne, L., & Eales, S. A. 2001, MNRAS, 327, 697
Dwek, E., & Scalo, J. M. 1980, ApJ, 239, 193
Edge, A. C., Ivison, R. J., Smail, I., Blain, A. W., & Kneib, J.-P. 1999, MNRAS, 306, 599
Ellingson, E., Yee, H. K. C., Bechtold, J., & Elston, R. 1996, ApJ, 466, L71
Erb, D. K., Shapley, A. E., Steidel, C. C., et al. 2003, ApJ, 591, 101
Fixsen, D. J., Dwek, E., Mather, J. C., Bennett, C. L., & Shafer, R. A. 1998, ApJ, 508, 123
Franceschini, A., Aussel, H., Cesarsky, C. J., Elbaz, D., & Fadda, D. 2001, A&A, 378, 1
Galliano, F., Madden, S. C., Jones, A. P., et al. 2003, A&A, 407, 159
Gispert, R., Lagache, G., & Puget, J. L. 2000, A&A, 360, 1
Gordon, K. D., Clayton, G. C., Witt, A. N., & Misselt, K. A. 2000, ApJ, 533, 236
Hauser, M. G., & Dwek, E. 2001, ARA&A, 39, 249
Hauser, M. G., Arendt, R. G., Kelsall, T., et al. 1998, ApJ, 508, 25
Hirashita, H., Hunt, L. K., & Ferrara, A. 2002, MNRAS, 330, L19 (H02)
Hirashita, H., Buat, V., & Inoue, A. K. 2003, A&A, 410, 83
Hunt, L. K., Vanzi, L., & Thuan, T. X. 2001, ApJ, 377, 66
Inoue, A. K. 2002, ApJ, 570, 688
Ishii, T. T., Takeuchi, T. T., & Sohn, J.-J. 2002, in Infrared and Submillimeter Space Astronomy, EDP Sciences, Les Ulis, p.169
James, A., Dunne, L., Eales, S., & Edmunds, M. G. 2002, MNRAS, 335, 753
Kitayama, T., & Suto, Y. 1996, MNRAS, 280, 638
Kozasa, T., & Hasegawa, H. 1987, Prog. Theor. Phys., 77, 1402
Krügel, E. 2003, The Physics of Interstellar Dust, Institute of Physics Publishing, Bristol
Lacey, C., & Cole, S. 1993, MNRAS, 262, 627
Lagache, G., Abergel, A., Boulanger, F., Désert, F. X., & Puget, J.-L. 1999, A&A, 344, 322
Lagache, G., Dole, H., & Puget, J.-L. 2003, MNRAS, 338, 555
Madden, S. C. 2000, NewAR, 44, 249
Mathis, J. S., Rumpl, W., & Nordsieck, K. H. 1977, ApJ, 217, 425
Matteucci, F., & Pipino, A. 2002, ApJ, 569, L69
Nakanishi, K., Ohta, K., Takeuchi, T. T., et al. 1997, PASJ, 49, 535
Nozawa, T., Kozasa, T., Umeda, H., Maeda, K., & Nomoto, K. 2003, ApJ, 598, 785
Ouchi, M., Yamada, T., Kawai, H., & Ohta, K. 1999, ApJ, 517, L19
Pettini, M., Steidel, C. C., Adelberger, K. L., Dickinson, M., & Giavalisco, M. 2000, ApJ, 528, 96
Pettini, M., Rix, S., Steidel, C. C., et al. E. 2003, ApJ, 569, 742
Plante, S., & Sauvage, M. 2002, AJ, 124, 1995
Sawicki, M. 2001, AJ, 121, 2405 (S01)
Sawicki, M., & Yee, H. K. C. 1998, AJ, 115, 1329
Seitz, S., Saglia, R. P., Bender, R., et al. 1998, MNRAS, 298, 945
Shapley, A. E., Steidel, C. C., Adelberger, K. L., et al. 2001, ApJ, 562, 95
Steidel, C. C., Adelberger, K. L., Giavalisco, M., Dickinson, M., Pettini, M. 1999, ApJ, 519, 1
Steidel, C. C., Adelberger, K. L., Shapley, A. E., et al. 2003, ApJ, 592, 728
Takeuchi, T. T., Yoshikawa, K., Ishii, T. T. 2000, ApJS, 129, 1
Takeuchi, T. T., Ishii, T. T., Hirashita, H., et al. 2001a, PASJ, 53, 37
Takeuchi, T. T., Kawabe, R., Kohno, K., et al. 2001b, PASP, 113, 586
Takeuchi, T. T., Hirashita, H., Ishii, T. T., Hunt, L. K., Ferrara, A. 2003a, MNRAS, 343, 839 (T03)
Takeuchi, T. T., Yoshikawa, K., Ishii, T. T. 2003b, ApJ, 587, L89 (erratum: Takeuchi, T. T., Yoshikawa, K., Ishii, T. T. 2004, ApJ, 606, L171)
Takeuchi, T. T., & Ishii, T. T. 2004, ApJ, 604, 40
Teplitz, H. I., McLean, I. S., Becklin, E. E., et al. 2000, ApJ, 533, L65
Todini, P., & Ferrara, A. 2001, MNRAS, 325, 726 (TF01)
Totani, T., & Takeuchi, T. T. 2002, ApJ, 570, 470
van der Werf, P. P., Knudsen, K. K., Labbé, I., & Franx, M. 2001, in Deep Millimeter Surveys: Implications for Galaxy Formation and Evolution, ed. J. D. Lowenthal & D. H. Hughes (Singapore: World Scientific Publishing), 103
Vijh, U. P., Witt, A. N., & Gordon, K. D. 2003, ApJ, 587, 533
Webb, T. M., Eales, S., Foucaud, S., et al. 2003, ApJ, 582, 6
Witt, A. N., & Gordon, K. D. 2000, ApJ, 528, 799
Whittet, D. C. B. 1992, Dust in the Galactic Environment, IOP, New York
Yee, H. K. C., Ellingson, E., Bechtold, J., Carlberg, R. G., & Cuillandre, J.-C. 1996, AJ, 111, 1783
[^1]: Postdoctoral Fellow of the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science for Research Abroad.
[^2]: Postdoctoral Fellow of the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science.
[^3]: We note that there are two typographic errors in Equations (13) and (14) of T03. The equations we show here are the correct expressions.
[^4]: Throughout this paper, we adopt a cosmology with $(h,\Omega_0,\lambda_0)=(0.7,0.3,0.7)$, where $h\equiv H_0/100.$
[^5]: URL: [http://sirtf.caltech.edu/.]{}
[^6]: URL: [http://www.ir.isas.ac.jp/ASTRO-F/index-e.html.]{}
[^7]: URL: [ http://www.rssd.esa.int/herschel/.]{}
[^8]: URL: [http://www.ir.isas.ac.jp/SPICA/index.html.]{}
[^9]: Generally, in a sky region suitable for cosmological surveys, the cirrus confusion is less severe than the galaxy confusion [see, e.g., @dole03].
[^10]: Actually, this assumption affect the results little.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'The paper gives a historical survey of the causal position space renormalization with a special attention to the role of Raymond Stora in the development of this subject. Renormalization is reduced to subtracting the pole term in analytically regularized primitively divergent Feynman amplitudes. The identification of residues with “quantum periods” and their relation to recent developments in number theory are emphasized. We demonstrate the possibility of integration over internal vertices (that requires control over the infrared behavior) in the case of the massless $\varphi^4$ theory and display the dilation and the conformal anomaly.'
---
CERN-TH-2016-058\
[To the memory of Raymond Stora]{}
[^1]
[Ivan Todorov]{}\
[Theoretical Physics Department, CERN, CH-1211 Geneva 23, Switzerland]{}\
[permanent address:]{}\
\
[Tsarigradsko Chaussee 72, BG-1784 Sofia, Bulgaria]{}\
Introduction
============
As Raymond Stora had written[^2] in his inimitable ironic style, he had *contributed to the “useful physics”* (in his work with P. Moussa on angular distributions in 2-particle reactions) [*as well as to the “useless” quantum field theory (QFT), including the analysis of analytic properties of scattering amplitudes which follow from the causality principle*]{} – in joint work with Bros, Epstein, Glaser, Messiah (see, e.g., \[EGS\]). Not surprisingly, our discussions at CERN were devoted to the “useless” part.
Perturbative ultraviolet renormalization in QFT was originally worked out for momentum space integrals beginning with a high energy cutoff. But a causal position space approach has also been developed concurrently by Ernst Stueckelberg, a Swiss student of Sommerfeld, starting in the early forties (after a 1938 paper in German, anticipating the abelian Higgs-Kibble model, he switched to French - see \[S45, S46, SR, SP\]). This was taken up by a (French reading) mathematician, N. N. Bogolubov \[B\], who set himself to master QFT (while mobilized to work – with many others – on the Russian atomic project). The Russian work on renormalization (referred to in the book \[BS\] – see, in particular, \[St\]), perfected by Hepp \[He\], Zimmermann and Lowenstein \[Z, LZ\] (resulting in the /incomplete/ acronym BPHZ) is still substantially using the traditional momentum space picture. Even Epstein and Glaser \[EG\], who set the stage for the position space renormalization program based on locality, were proving Lorentz invariance of time-ordered products working in momentum space. It was only in \[PS\] – another famous unpublished preprint of Raymond’s – that the problem was translated into a cohomological position space argument (see the historical survey in \[G-BL\]). This led gradually to viewing renormalization as a problem of extending distributions defined originally for non-coinciding arguments, an approach that, in the words of Stora \[S\], “from a philosophical point of view, does not require the use – and the removal – of regularizations”. The tortuous path from p- to x-space renormalization can be viewed, in modern parlance, as a duality transformation (the good old Fourier integral) mapping a large momentum onto a small distance problem. As relativistic causality does not require the existence of a Poincaré invariant vacuum state, the Stueckelberg-Bogolubov-Epstein-Glaser-Stora position space approach turned out to be the only one suited for the study of perturbative QFT on a curved background (which began flourishing during the last twenty years or so - see [@HW; @FR] for recent reviews and references).
Our collaboration started with Raymond reading Sect. 3.2 of the first volume of Hörmander’s treatise \[H\] and pointing out that it is tailor-made for renormalization of a massless theory. It is based on the observation that a density like $$\label{densG}
\textbf{G}_\ell(x) := G_\ell(x)\frac{d^4x}{\pi^2} = \frac{1}{x^{2\ell}}\frac{d^4x}{\pi^2}$$ is a meromorphic distribution valued function of $\ell$ with simple poles (at $2\ell=4, 5, 6, ...$ above). Subtracting the pole term, say at $\ell=2$, we find a renormalized amplitude $G^R_2$ defined up to a distribution with support at the origin. The ambiguity can be restricted by demanding that this distribution has the same degree of homogeneity as the function $G_2$ away from the origin (in our case $-4$). The resulting $G^R_2$ is associate homogeneous of degree $-4$ and order one. More generally, a logarithmically divergent density $\textbf{G}$ of an N-dimensional argument $\vec{x}$ defines an *associate homogeneous distribution $G$ of degree $-N$ and order $n$* if $$\label{assocHom}
\lambda^N G(\lambda \vec{x})= G(\vec{x}) +\sum_{j=1}^n R_j(G)(\vec{x}) \frac{(\ln\lambda)^j}{j!}, \, \lambda > 0,$$ where the distributions $R_j(G)$ can be viewed as generalized residues: $$\label{generRes}
R_j(G)=Res[(\mathcal{E}+N)^{j-1}G(\vec{x})]\ ,\quad \mathcal{E}= \sum_{\alpha=1}^N x^\alpha\partial_\alpha,$$ satisfying $$\label{assocHomRes}
\lambda^N R_j(G)(\lambda\vec{x}) = R_j(G)(\vec{x}) + \sum_{i=j+1}^n R_i(G)(\vec{x}) \frac{(\ln\lambda)^{i-j}}{(i-j)!}, \, \lambda > 0.$$ For a Feynman amplitude corresponding to a connected graph with $V$ vertices $N=4(V-1)$. The order $n$ of associate homogeneity corresponds to the number of (sub)divergences of the amplitude. One proves that only the coefficient to the highest power of the logarithm, $$\label{rn}
R_n(G) =res[(\mathcal{E}+N)^{n-1}G(\vec{x})]\delta(\vec{x})\ ,$$ is independent of the ambiguity of renormalization.
Causal factorization of extended Feynman amplitudes
===================================================
We start by sketching the recursive procedure of extending/renormalizing euclidean picture Feynman amplitudes based on causal factorization.
Denote the propagator between the points $x_i$ and $x_j$ of $\mathbb{R}^4$ by $G_{ij}=G_{ij}(x_{ij}), \, x_{ij}= x_i-x_j$. We assume it to be a (bounded at infinity) smooth function away from the origin (i.e. off the diagonal $x_i=x_j$). In the case of a massless theory, treated in [@NST12; @NST], it is a rational homogeneous function of the type: $$\label{prop}
G_{ij}(x)=\frac{P_{ij}(x)}{(x^2)^{m_{ij}}} \ , \quad x^2 = \sum_{\alpha = 1}^4 (x^\alpha)^2, \, \, m_{ij}\in \mathbb{N},$$ where $P_{ij}(x)$ is a homogeneous polynomial in the components $x^\alpha$ of $x$. (In a scalar QFT $P_{ij}=const, \,
m_{ij}=1$.) For the formulation of the *principle of causal factorization* one does not need the special form of the propagator. It sets a condition on a recursive (with respect to the number of vertices) procedure of *renormalization* (i.e. extension) of Feynman amplitudes.
Let the index set $I = \{1,\ldots ,n\}$ of $\Gamma$ be split into any two non-empty non-intersecting subsets $$I = I_1 \cup I_2 \ (I_1 \ne \emptyset \, , \ I_2 \ne \emptyset) \, , \ I_1 \cap I_2 = \emptyset \, .$$ Let $\mathcal{C}_{I_1,I_2}=\{(x_i)\in \mathbb{R}^{4n} \equiv (\mathbb{R}^4)^{\times n}; x_{j_1} \neq x_{j_2} \, \mbox{for} \, j_1 \in I_1, j_2\in I_2 \} (=
\mathcal{C}_{I_2,I_1})$. Let further $G_1^R$ and $G_2^R$ be the renormalized distributions associated with the subgraphs whose vertices belong to the subsets $I_1$ and $I_2$, respectively. We demand that for each such splitting the extended *euclidean* distribution $G_{\Gamma}^R$ exhibits the [*factorization property*]{}: $$\label{G12R}
G_{\Gamma}^R = G_1^R \left(\prod_{i \in I_1 \atop j \in I_2} G_{ij} \right) G_2^R \quad \mbox{on} \quad \mathcal{C}_{I_1,I_2} \, ,$$ where $G_{ij}$ are factors (propagators) in the Feynman amplitude $G_{\Gamma}$ which are smooth in $\mathcal{C}_{I_1,I_2}$ and can therefore be viewed as multipliers.
**Remark 1**. In the Lorentzian signature case one demands that the points indexed by the set $I_1$ precede those of $I_2$ and uses Wightman functions instead of $G_{ij}$ in the counterpart of (\[G12R\]) (see Sect. 2.2 of [@NST]).
In the case of a massless theory we add to this basic physical requirement two more [*mathematical conventions*]{} (MC) which restrict substantially the set of admissible renormalizations.
(MC1) [*Renormalization maps rational homogeneous functions onto associate homogeneous distributions of the same degree of homogeneity; it extends associate homogeneous distributions defined off the small diagonal to associate homogeneous distributions of the same degree*]{} (but possibly of higher order) [*defined everywhere on ${\mathbb R}^N$.*]{}
(MC2) [*The renormalization map commutes with multiplication by polynomials.*]{} If we extend the class of our distributions by allowing multiplication with smooth functions of no more than polynomial growth (in the domain of definition of the corresponding functionals), then this requirement will imply commutativity of the renormalization map with such multipliers.
The induction is based on the following *diagonal lemma*.
[**Proposition 1**]{}. [*The complement $C(\Delta_n)$ of the small diagonal is the union of all $\mathcal{C}_{I_1,I_2}$ for all pairs of disjoint $I_1,I_2$ with $I_1 \cup I_2 =\{1,\dots,n\}$, i.e., $$C(\Delta_n) \, = \,
\mathop{\bigcup}\limits_{I_1 \dot \cup I_2 \, = \, \{1,\dots,n\}} \mathcal{C}_{I_1,I_2} \,.$$*]{}
[**Proof.**]{} Let $(x_1 , \ldots , x_n) \in C(\Delta_n)$. Then there are at least two different points $x_{i_1} \ne x_{j_1}$. We define $I_1$ as the set of all indices $i$ of $I=\{1,\dots,n\}$ for which $x_i \ne x_{j_1}$ and $I_2 := I \backslash I_1$. Hence, $C(\Delta_n)$ is included in the union of all such pairs. Each $\mathcal{C}_{I_1,I_2}$, on the other hand, is defined to belong to $C (\Delta_n)$. This completes the proof of our statement.
**Remark 2**. For a more general combinatorial “diagonal lemma” that serves both the euclidean and the Minkowski space framework allowing to complete each step of the renormalization by the extension of a distribution defined outside the full diagonal - see Theorem A1 of \[NST\].
Renormalization of primitively divergent\
amplitudes
=========================================
The above recursive procedure allows to reduce the elimination of divergences to the renormalization of primitively divergent graphs. We shall again survey this step in the case of a euclidean massless QFT. A Feynman amplitude $G(\vec{x})$ is then a homogeneous function of $\vec{x}\in \mathbb{R}^N$. It is [*superficially divergent*]{} if $G$ defines a density in $\mathbb{R}^N$ of a non-positive degree of homogeneity: $$\label{homdens}
G(\lambda \vec{x})\, d^N \lambda x = \lambda^{-\kappa} G(\vec{x})\, d^N x\ ,\quad \kappa\geq 0\ \quad (\lambda > 0)\,;$$ $\kappa$ is called the (superficial) [*degree of divergence*]{}.
[**Proposition 2.**]{} [*For any primitively divergent $G(\vec{x})$ and smooth (semi)norm $\rho(\vec{x})$ on $\mathbb{R}^N$ (allowed to vanish on a cone of lower dimension) one has $$\label{Res} [\rho(\vec{x})]^\epsilon G(\vec{x})
-\frac{1}{\epsilon}(Res\, G)(\vec{x}) = G^\rho(\vec{x}) +
O(\epsilon).$$ Here $Res\,G$ is a distribution with support at the origin. Its calculation is reduced to the case $\kappa = 0$ of a logarithmically divergent graph by using the identity $$(Res\,G)(\vec{x})=\frac{(-1)^\kappa}{\kappa!}\,\partial_{i_1}...\partial_{i_\kappa} Res\,(x^{i_1}...x^{i_\kappa} G)(\vec{x})$$ where summation is assumed (from 1 to N) over the repeated indices $i_1, ..., i_\kappa$. If $G$ is homogeneous of degree $-N$ then $$\label{res}
(Res\, G)(\vec{x}) = res\, (G)\, \delta(\vec{x}) \quad (\mbox{\rm for} \ \partial_i(x^iG)=0)\, .$$ Here the numerical residue $res\, G$ is given by an integral over the hypersurface $\Sigma_\rho =\{\vec{x}| \,\rho(\vec{x}) = 1\}$: $$res\, G =\frac{1}{\pi^{N/2}}\int_{\Sigma_\rho} G(\vec{x})\sum_{i=1}^N(-1)^{i-1} x^i dx^1\wedge ... \hat{dx^i}...\wedge dx^N, \,$$ (a hat over an argument meaning, as usual, that this argument is omitted). The residue $res\, G$ is independent of the (transverse to the dilation) surface $\Sigma_\rho$ since the form in the integrand is closed in the projective space $\mathbb{P}^{N-1}$.*]{}
We note that N is even, in fact divisible by 4, so that $\mathbb{P}^{N-1}$ is orientable.
**Remark 3**. The use of a homogeneous (semi)norm as a regulator (a relative of [*analytic regularization*]{} [@Sp]) is more flexible than dimensional regularization and should be also applicable in the presence of a chiral anomaly.
The functional $res\, G$ is a [*period*]{} according to the definition of Kontsevich and Zagier [@KZ]. The convention of accompanying the 4D volume $d^4x$ by a $\pi^{-2}$ factor ($2\pi^2$ being the volume of the unit sphere $\mathbb{S}^3$ in four dimensions) helps display the number theoretic character of residues. For one and two-loop graphs in a massless theory they are just rational numbers. For three, four and five loops in the $\varphi^4$ theory all residues are integer multiples of $\zeta(3), \zeta(5)$ and $\zeta(7)$, respectively. The first double zeta value, $\zeta(3, 5)$, appears at six loops (with a rational coefficient) (see the census of Schnetz who calls such residues *quantum periods* [@Sch]). All [*known*]{} residues were (up to 2013) rational linear combinations of multiple zeta values of overall weight not exceeding $2\ell-3$ [@BK; @Sch]. A seven loop graph was recently demonstrated [@P; @B14] to involve [*multiple Deligne values*]{} – i.e., values of [*hyperlogarithms*]{} at sixth roots of unity. An infinite series of $\ell$-loop primitive $\varphi^4$ 4-point *zig-zag graphs* were conjectured by Broadhurst and Kreimer \[BK\] and proven by Brown and Schnetz \[BS12\] to be proportional to $\zeta(2\ell-3)$ with calculable rational coefficients (equal to ${2\ell-2\choose \ell-1}$ for $\ell=3, 4$ – see [@T] for an elementary derivation and further references).
Integration over internal vertices.\
Completed $\varphi^4$ vacuum graphs
====================================
In the adiabatic procedure of Bogolubov et al. all vertices are treated as external: each coupling constant $g$ is substituted by a vanishing at infinity test function $g(x)$. This is essential for the formulation of causal factorization. Integration over internal vertices corresponds to the adiabatic limit ($g(x)\rightarrow g\neq 0$) and does not keep track of localization. It is rewarding to understand that such an integration commutes with renormalization and hence does not pose a problem in a conformally invariant theory like $\varphi^4$ in $D=4$, [@GGV; @T15] (thus elucidating an old result, [@LZ]).
We shall sketch the basic idea using Schnetz’s *vacuum completion* $\bar{\Gamma}$ of a 4-point graph $\Gamma$ (in which the four external edges are joined together in a new “vertex at infinity” - [@Sch; @S14]). The introduction of this concept is justified by the following result (Proposition 2.6 and Theorem 2.7 of [@Sch]):
[**Proposition 3.**]{} [*A 4-regular vacuum graph $\bar{\Gamma}$ (with five or more vertices) is said to be completed primitive if the only way to split it by a four edge cut is by splitting off one vertex. A 4-point Feynman amplitude corresponding to a connected 4-regular graph $\Gamma$ is primitively divergent iff its completion $\bar{\Gamma}$ is completed primitive. All 4-point graphs with the same primitive completion have the same residue.*]{}
There are infinitely many primitive 4-point graphs (while there is a single primitive 2-point self-energy graph).
[**Proposition 4**]{}. [*The period of a completed primitive graph $\bar{\Gamma}$ is equal to the residue of each 4-point graph $\Gamma = \bar{\Gamma} - v$ (obtained from $\bar{\Gamma}$ by cutting off an arbitrary vertex $v$). The resulting common period can be evaluated from $\bar{\Gamma}$ by choosing arbitrarily three vertices $\{0, e \, (s.t. \, e^2=1), \infty\}$, setting all propagators corresponding to edges of the type $(x_i, \infty)$ equal to 1 and integrating over the remaining $n-2$ vertices of $\Gamma$ ($n=V(\Gamma)$): $$\label{Per}
Per(\bar{\Gamma})\equiv res(\Gamma)=
\int \Gamma(e, x_2, ..., x_{n-1}, 0)\prod_{i=2}^{n-1} \frac{d^4x_i}{\pi^2}\ .$$*]{} [*Sketch of proof*]{}. For a given choice of the vertex at infinity (\[Per\]) follows from (\[res\]). The independence of the choice of the point at infinity follows from conformal invariance. We note, for instance, that the conformal inversion $I_r: x_i\rightarrow \frac{x_i}{x_i^2}, i=2, ..., n$, exchanges the (arbitrarily chosen) $x_n=0$ and $\infty$ while the integral remains invariant since $$\label{inversion}
I_r: \frac{1}{x_{ij}^2}\rightarrow \frac{x_i^2 x_j^2}{x_{ij}^2}\ ,\quad d^4x\rightarrow \frac{d^4x}{(x^2)^4}\ .$$
It is the freedom of choice of the vertices to which one ascribes the values $0, e, \infty$ in Propositon 4 (as a consequence of conformal invariance) that guarantees the commutativity between renormalization and integration with respect to internal vertices. One can illustrate this fact on the four-loop graph of Fig. 1 with a single internal vertex $x$ (the black dot in the middle of the figure).
![[]{data-label="Fig1"}](Diagram1.eps){width="70.00000%"}
The simplest way to calculate the residue of the corresponding amplitude $G_4$ consists in setting $x=0$ (rather than integrating in x). The result appears as a special case (for $\ell = 4$) of the *wheel with $\ell$ spokes* expressed in terms of the classical polylogarithm [@S14; @T]: $$\label{lspokes}
resG_\ell = {2\ell-2\choose \ell-1} Li_{2\ell-3}(1) = {2\ell-2\choose \ell-1}
\zeta(2\ell-3) \, (resG_4=20\zeta(5)).$$ If, on the other hand, one first integrates with respect to $x$ (expressing $G_4$ in terms of the Bloch-Wigner dilogarithm) then the residue is calculated in terms of multipolylogarithms of higher depth [@T] but the final answer is the same - as a consequence of conformal invariance.
Dilation and conformal anomalies
================================
The renormalized Feynman amplitude $G(x_1, ..., x_4)$ of an arbitrary primitively divergent 4-point graph is an associate homogeneous distribution of order one (and degree twelve in the generic case when there is a single external edge at each external vertex): $$\label{4ptdil}
\lambda^{12}\, G(\lambda x_1, ..., \lambda x_4) = G(x_1, ..., x_4) + res(G)\, \delta(x_{12}) \delta(x_{23}) \delta(x_{34}) f(\lambda), \, \,$$ where $f$ is a 1-cocycle (normalized by $f^\prime(1)=1$): $$\label{1cocycle}
f(\lambda_1 \lambda_2) = f(\lambda_1) + f(\lambda_2) \Rightarrow f(\lambda) = \ln\lambda.$$
Graphs with subdivergences give rise to associate homogeneous amplitudes of higher order. The generalized residue $R_n(G)$ (\[rn\]) appearing as coefficient to the highest power of $\ln\lambda$ can be computed in terms of the residues of the divergent subgraphs and of the corresponding quotient graphs. We shall illustrate this fact on the example of the graph on Fig. 1 in which the central point is substituted by a generic primitively divergent 4-point subgraph with amplitude $S(y_1, ..., y_4)$ $$\label{GS}
G_S(x_1, ..., x_4)=\int S(y_1, ...,y_4)\prod_{i=1}^4 \frac{d^4y_i}{\pi^2 (x_i-y_i)^2}\ .$$ The dilation law for $S$, $$\label{dilS} \lambda^{12}S(\lambda\vec{y})=S(\vec{y}) + res(S)\,\delta(\vec{y})\ln\lambda$$ implies that the dilation anomaly of $G_S$ for non-coinciding arguments is $$\label{anomGS}
\lambda^{12}G_S(\lambda x_1, ..., \lambda x_4)-G_S(x_1, ..., x_4)= G_4(x_1, ..., x_4)\, res(S)\ln\lambda\ ,$$ where $G_4$ is given by $$\label{G4}
G_4(x_1, ..., x_4) = \frac{1}{x_{12}^2 x_{23}^2 x_{34}^2 x_{14}^2}\int\prod_{i=1}^4\frac{1}{(x_i-x)^2} \frac{d^4x}{\pi^2}.$$ It follows that the coefficient $res_2(G_S)$ to $(\ln\lambda)^2$, which is independent of the renormalization ambiguity, is given by the product of residues: $$\label{resGresS}
res_2(G_S)= res(G_4)\, res(S) \qquad (res(G_4) = 20\, \zeta(5))\ .$$
A renormalized primitively divergent 4-point graph also has a calculable conformal anomaly. Under the special conformal transformation $$\label{gc}
g_c x = \frac{x+c x^2}{\omega(c, x)}\ ,\quad (dg_c x)^2=\frac{dx^2}{\omega(c, x)^2}\ ,\quad
\omega(c, x)= 1 + 2cx + c^2 x^2.$$ the renormalized amplitude $G$ obeys the following counterpart of (\[4ptdil\]): $$\begin{aligned}
\label{conf}
\frac{G(g_cx_1, ..., g_cx_4)}{\prod_{i=1}^4\omega^3(c, x_i)}= G(x_1, ..., x_4) - res(G)\, \delta(x_{12}) \delta(x_{23}) \delta(x_{34})\ln\omega(c, x_j), \, \nonumber \\
j\in(1, 2, 3, 4). \end{aligned}$$ The $\delta$-function ensures that the result is independent of the choice of $j$ in the last factor. The cocycle condition that implements the group law is satisfied because of the identity $$\label{cocycle}
\omega(c_1+c_2, x) = \omega(c_1, x) \omega(c_2, g_{c_1}x)\ .$$
Outlook
=======
There is a parallel between studying renormalzation of a *massless* QFT and neglecting friction by the founders of modern physics – starting with Galileo. Both idealizations allow to grasp the essence of the problem. Introducing friction in classical mechanics, and masses in the analysis of small distance behavior seems to be just adding technical details to the general picture. Raymond, however, *did worry* about masses in QFT renormalization. Recent work [@ABW; @BKV] on a simple 2-point amplitude with arbitrary non-zero masses illustrates the arising complications. Nevertheless, the causal position space approach to renormalization wworks in this general case as well [@N; @VG].
The study of Feynman periods, an essential ingredient of renormalization theory (Sect. 3), is bringing a new insight in a lively area of number theory (see [@B15; @PS16] for recent developments in this subject).
As we see, and work in the last couple of decades, surveyed, e.g. in [@D; @T16], amply confirms, “useless” local QFT continues to serve both high energy physics and its healthy interaction with modern mathematics.
I thank the Theoretical Physics Department of CERN for hospitality in February-March 2016 when this paper has been essentially completed. The author’s work has been supported in part by Grant DFNI T02/6 of the Bulgarian National Science Foundation.
[000]{} L.Adams, C. Bogner, S. Weinzierl, A walk on sunset boulevard, arXiv:1601.03646 \[hep-ph\]. S. Bloch, M. Kerr, P. Vanhove, Local mirror symmetry and the sunset Feynman integral, arXiv:1601.08181 \[hep-th\]. N.N. Bogolubov, The causality condition in quantum field theory, *Izv. Akad. Nauk SSSR, Ser. Fiz*. **19** (1955) 237. N.N. Bogoliubov, D.V. Shirkov, [*Introduction to the Theory of Quantized Fields*]{}, 3d edition, Wiley, 1980. D.J. Broadhurst, Multiple Deligne values: a data mine with empirically tamed denominators, arXiv:1409.7204 \[hep-th\]. D.J. Broadhurst, D. Kreimer, Knots and numbers in $\phi^4$ to 7 loops and beyond, [*Int. J. Mod. Phys.*]{} [**6C**]{} (1995) 519-524, hep-ph/9504352; Association of multiple zeta values with positive knots via Feynman diagrams up to 9 loops, [*Phys. Lett.*]{} [**B393**]{} (1997) 403-412, hep-th/9609128. F. Brown, Periods and Feynman amplitudes, Talk at the ICMP, Santiago de Chile, 2015, arXiv:1512.09265 \[math-ph\]; –, Notes on motivic periods, arXiv:1512.06410 \[math.NT\]. F. Brown, O. Schnetz, Proof of the zig-zag conjecture, arXiv: 1208.1890v2 \[math.NT\]. C. Duhr, Mathematical aspects of scattering amplitudes, arXiv: 1411.7538 \[hep-ph\]. H. Epstein, V. Glaser, The role of locality in perturbation theory, *Ann. Inst. H. Poincaré* **A19**:3 (1973) 211-295. H. Epstein, V. Glaser, R. Stora, General properties of the n-point functions in local quantum field theory, in J. Bros, D. Jagolnitzer (eds.), *Les Houches Proceedings*, 1975. K. Fredenhagen, K. Rejzner, QFT on curved spacetimes: axiomatic framework and examples, *J. Math. Phys.***57** (2016) 031101; arXiv:1412.5125v2 \[math-ph\]. J.M. Gracia-Bondia, S. Lazzarini, Improved Epstein-Glaser renormalization II. Lorentz invariant framework, hep-th/0212156v3. J.M. Gracia-Bondia, H. Gutierrez-Garro, J.C. Varilly, Imroved Epstein-Glaser renormalization in x-space. III Versus differential renormalization, [*Nucl. Phys.*]{} [**B886**]{} (2014) 824-869; arXiv:1403.1785v3 \[hep-th\]. K. Hepp, Proof of the Bogoliubov-Parasiuk theorem on renormalization, *Commun. Math. Phys*. **2**:4 (1966) 301-326; –, *La Théorie de la Renormalisation*, LNP 2, Springer, Berlin 1969. S. Hollands, R.M. Wald, Quantum field theory in curved spacetime, “*100 Years of General Relativity*” monograph series, arXiv:1401.2026v2 \[gr-qc\]. L. Hörmander, [*The Analysis of Linear Partial Differential Operators, I. Distribution Theory and Fourier Analysis*]{}, 2d edition, Springer, 1990. M. Kontsevich, D. Zagier, Periods, in:[*Mathematics - 2001 and beyond*]{}, B. Engquist, W. Schmid, eds., Springer, Berlin et al. 2001, pp. 771-808. J. Lacki, G. Wanders, H. Ruegg (Eds.) *Stueckelberg, an Unconventional Figure in Twentieth Century Physics*, Birkhäuser, 2009. J.H. Lowenstein, W. Zimmermann, On the formulation of theories with zero-mass propagators, [*Nucl. Phys.*]{} [**B86**]{} (1975) 77-103. N.M. Nikolov, Renormalization of massive Feynman amplitudes and homogeneity (based on a joint work with Raymond Stora), *Nucl. Phys.* **B912** (2016) 38-50. N.M. Nikolov, R. Stora, I. Todorov, Euclidean configuration space renormalization, residues and dilation anomaly, [*Lie Theory and Its Applications in Physics*]{} (LT9), Ed. V.K. Dobrev, Springer Japan, Tokyo 2013, pp. 127-147; CERN-TH-PH/2012-076, LAPTH-Conf-016/12. N.M. Nikolov, R. Stora, I. Todorov, Renormalization of massless Feynman amplitudes as an extension problem for associate homogeneous distributions, [*Rev. Math. Phys.*]{} [**26**]{}:4 (2014) 1430002 (65 pages); CERN-TH-PH/2013-107; arXiv:1307.6854 \[hep-th\]. E. Panzer, Feynman integrals via hyperlogarithms, [*Proc. Sci.*]{} [**211**]{} (2014) 049, arXiv:1407.0074 \[hep-ph\]; –, Feynman graphs and hyperlogarithms (PhD thesis, 220 pages), arXiv:1506.07243 \[math-ph\]. E. Panzer, O. Schnetz, The Galois coaction on $\varphi^4$ periods, arXiv:1603.04289 \[hep-th\]. G. Popineau, R. Stora, A pedagogical remark on the main theorem of perturbative renormalization theory, CPT, CERN, LAPP-TH, 1982. O. Schnetz, Quantum periods: A census of $\phi^4$ transcendentals, [*Commun. in Number Theory and Phys.*]{} [**4**]{}:1 (2010) 1-48; arXiv:0801.2856v2 \[hep-th\]. O. Schnetz, Graphical functions and single-valued multiple polylogarithms, [*Commun. in Number Theory and Phys.*]{} [**8**]{}:4 (2014) 589-685; arXiv:1302.6445v2 \[math.NT\]. E.R. Speer, On the structure of analytic renormalization, [*Commun. Math. Phys.*]{} [**23**]{} (1971) 23-36; [*ibid*]{} [**25**]{} (1972) 336. B.M. Stepanov, Abstraktnaia teoriia R-operatsii, *Izv. AN SSSR, ser. Mat*. **27** (1963) 819; On the construction of S-matrix in accordance with perturbation theory, *Izv. AN SSSR, ser. Mat*. **29** (1965) 1037-1054 (transl. *Amer. Math. Soc.* (2) 91 (1969)). R. Stora, Renormalized perturbation theory: a missing chapter, *Int. J. Geom. Methods Mod. Phys*. **5** (2008) 1345-1360; arXiv:0901.3426. E.C.G. Stueckelberg, Mécanique fonctionnelle, *Helv. Phys. Acta* **18**:3 (1945) 195-220. E.C.G. Stueckelberg, Une propriété de l’opérateur S en physique quantique, *Helv. Phys. Acta* **19**:4 (1946) 242-243. E.C.G. Stueckelberg, A. Petermann, La normalisation des constantes dans la théorie des quanta, *Helv. Phys. Acta* **26** (1953) 499-520. E.C.G. Stueckelberg, D. Rivier, Causalité et structure de la matrice S, *Helv. Phys. Acta* **23** (1950) 215-222; A propos des divergences en théorie des champs quantifiés, *ibid*. 236-239. I. Todorov, Polylogarithms and multizeta values in massless Feynman amplitudes, in: [*Lie Theory and Its Applications in Physics*]{} (LT10), ed. V. Dobrev, [*Springer Proceedings in Mathematics and Statistics*]{}, [**111**]{}, Springer, Tokyo 2014; pp. 155-176; IHES/P/14/10. I. Todorov, Renormalization of position space amplitudes in a massless QFT, *Physics of Elementary Particles and Atomic Nuclei*, Special Issue (2016); CERN-PH-TH-2015-016. I. Todorov, Perturbative quantum field theory meets number theory, Extended version of a talk at the 2014 ICMAT Research Trimester “[*Multiple Zeta Values, Multiple Polylogarithms, and Quantum Field Theory*]{}”; IHES/P/16/02; –, Hyperlogarithms and periods in Feynman amplitudes, Proceedings of the 11-th International Workshop Lie Theory and Its Applications in Physics (LT-11), 15-21 June 2015, Varna, Bulgaria, Chapter 10 in: Springer Proceeedings in Mathematics and Statistics 191, V.K. Dobrev (ed.) 2016; CERN-TH-2016-042. J.C. Várilly, J.M. Gracia-Bondia, Stora’s fine notion of divergent amplitudes, *Nucl. Phys.* **B912** (2016) 28-37; arXiv:1605.00237v2 \[math-ph\]. W. Zimmermann, Convergence of Bogoliubov’s method of renormalization in momentum space, *Commun. Math. Phys*. **15** (1969) 208-234.
[^1]: *Nuclear Physics* **B912** (2016) 79-87 (updated).
[^2]: I thank Paul Sorba for providing me with Stora’s “bio0908” for the French Academy.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'The broadband spectral energy distribution (SED) of blazars show significant curvature. In this paper, we study the curvature properties for a large sample of *Fermi*/LAT bright blazars based on quasi-simultaneous SED. Both SEDs of synchrotron and inverse Compton (IC) components are fitted by a log-parabolic law in $\log\nu$-$\log\nu f_{\nu}$ diagram. The second-degree term of log-parabola measures the curvature of SED. We find a statistically significant correlation between synchrotron peak frequency and its curvature. This result is in agreement with the theoretical prediction, and confirms previous studies, which dealt with single source with various epoch observations or a small sample. If a broken power-law is employed to fit the SED (spectral indexes $\alpha_{1}$ and $\alpha_{2}$, before and after the peak frequency, respectively), the difference between the two spectral indexes (i.e., $|\alpha_{2}-\alpha_{1}|$) can be considered as a “surrogate" of the SED curvature. We collect spectral parameters of a sample blazars from literature, and find a correlation between the synchrotron peak frequency and the spectral difference. We do not find a significant correlation between the IC peak frequency and its curvature, which may be caused by complicated seed photon field. It is also found that the synchrotron curvatures are on average larger than that of IC curvatures, and there is no correlation between these two parameters. As suggested by previous works in literature, both the log-parabolic law of SED and above correlation can be explained by statistical and/or stochastic particle accelerations. Stochastic particle acceleration predicts a different slope of the correlation from that of statistical one, and our result seems favor stochastic acceleration mechanisms and emission processes. Some of other evidences also seem to support that the electron energy distribution (and/or synchrotron SED) may be log-parabolic, which include SED modeling, particle acceleration simulation, and comparisons between some predictions and empirical relations/correlations.'
author:
- 'Liang Chen[$^{1,\,2}$]{}'
title: The curvature of spectral energy distribution of blazars
---
Introduction {#Introduction}
============
As early as 1970s, people noted that the non-thermal spectra of blazar show significant curvature. @1974ApJ...192L.115R found the infrared (IR) spectrum is significantly flatter than that of optical for OJ 287. Many other blazars, like BL Lacertae, 0735+178, ON 231, B2 0912+29, B2 1215+30, and AO 0253+164 also present similar properties [@1974ApJ...192L.115R; @1977ApJ...214L.105O; @1983PASP...95..724S]. @1986ApJ...310..317G claimed that there is apparent difference between slopes of IR and ultraviolet (UV), with a mean value of $\Delta\alpha=0.49\pm0.14$ [see also, @1989ApJ...340..129B]. Blazar SED shows more clear curvature and some present significant breaks, when combine broadband emissions [radio through X-ray bands, @1981ApJ...243...47L; @1985ApJ...298..630L; @1987ApJ...318..175B]. Further researches revealed a component on blazar SED from radio to UV/X-ray bands in $\log\nu$-$\log\nu f_{\nu}$ diagram, which is widely interpreted as synchrotron emissions of high energy electrons in a relativistic jet closely aligned to our line of sight [see e.g., @1978bllo.conf..328B; @1986ApJ...308...78L; @1995PASP..107..803U; @1996ApJ...463..444S; @1989MNRAS.241P..43G; @1998MNRAS.301..451G]. Some high energy detectors have broad energy coverage, e.g, *Beppo*SAX covering 0.1-300 keV (LECS: 0.1-10 keV, MECS: 1.3-10 keV, and PDS: 13-300 keV). And hence, with observations of some of the telescopes alone, blazar SEDs are found to be curved, some of which can be fitted by a log-parabolic law. For instance, X-ray observations of Mrk 501 and Mrk 421 , together with several other BL Lacs show that X-ray spectra can be fitted by log-parabolic law, i.e., $\log\nu f_{\nu}=-b\left(\log\nu-\log\nu_{p}\right)^{2}+\log\nu_{p}f_{\nu_{p}}$. @2011ApJ...739...73M studied a sample of high-frequency-peaked BL Lac objects (HBLs), and found that X-ray spectral curvature (measured by the second-term $b$) of TeV HBLs are systematically larger than that of those HBLs non-detected at TeV energies (NBL), implying that the NBL X-ray spectra are systematically narrower [see also, @2013ApJS..207...16M].
For the first time, BL Lac object Mrk 421 was detected by Whipple emitting $\gamma$-ray photons at TeV band [@1992Natur.358..477P]. Thanks to development of many ground based Cherenkov telescopes (e.g., Whipple, MAGIC, VERITAS, H.E.S.S., CANGAROO), more than 50 blazars have now been discovered bearing TeV $\gamma$-ray emissions (see, http://tevcat.uchicago.edu). At GeV $\gamma$-ray band, *CGRO*/EGRET successfully detected 68 AGNs with significance $\sigma>5$ [working at 20 MeV - 30 GeV, most of them are blazars, @1999ApJS..123...79H]. As a successor, *Fermi*/LAT works between 20 MeV - 300 GeV, which was launched at June 2008. During the first 11 months survey of *Fermi*/LAT, 671 AGNs were detected with high confidence level at high Galactic latitude [$|b|>10^{\circ}$, $\sigma>5$, and most of them are blazars, see @2010ApJ...715..429A]. The number increases to 1017, through first two years survey of *Fermi*/LAT [@2011ApJ...743..171A]. Based on these $\gamma$-ray observations, another component on blazar SED was discovered, peaking at $\gamma$-ray band. These $\gamma$-ray emissions are usually explained as inverse Compton emissions (IC) of the same electron population accounting for the synchrotron component emissions [see, @1998MNRAS.301..451G; @2010MNRAS.402..497G; @2010ApJ...716...30A and references therein]. Many blazars observed by *Fermi*/LAT alone present curved $\gamma$-ray spectra and some can be well fitted by a log-parabolic law [see, e.g., @2011ApJ...743..171A]. Higher energy observation of some balzars by Imaging Atmospheric Cherenkov Telescopes (IACT) show substantial curvature at TeV band, and some can also be fitted by log-parabolic law. If combine the GeV data with those of TeV, the spectra present more significant curvature [see, @2009ApJ...707.1310A; @2012ApJ...752..157Z; @2013ApJ...764..119S].
To characterize a broadband peaked component, one needs at least two parameters: peak frequency and peak flux/luminosity. These two parameters are extensively used in blazar studies, especially in the so called balzar sequence [see e.g., @1998MNRAS.299..433F; @1998MNRAS.301..451G; @2011ApJ...735..108C; @2012MNRAS.420.2899G]. If log-parabolic law is adopted to fit the peaked component, i.e., $\log\nu f_{\nu}=-b\left(\log\nu-\log\nu_{p}\right)^{2}+\log\nu_{p}f_{\nu_{p}}$, the second-term $b$ measures the curvature around the SED peak, which is the third important parameter to characterize the component. Using multi-epoch observations of Swift, XMM-Newton, and *Beppo*SAX, it was found that each observational X-ray spectra of Mrk 421 can be well fitted by a log-parabolic law, and an anti-correlation between the peak frequency $\nu_{p}$ and the curvature $b$ is discovered . Further, extend the study to several other BL Lacs, e.g., Mrk 501, PKS 2155-304, PKS 0548-322, and found that all these BL Lacs present similar behavior: an anti-correlation between the peak frequency $\nu_{p}$ and the curvature $b$. As expected by previous theoretical investigations, the anti-correlation between peak frequency and curvature can be explained in the framework of acceleration processes of emitting electrons . More detailed study on this third parameter, the curvature, is necessary to understand the particle acceleration, and energy dissipation mechanism in blazars.
Besides the high energy study, low energy observations from radio to optical also illustrate a similar feature. For example, @1986ApJ...308...78L fitted the SED from radio to optical with a log-parabolic law of a sample of 18 balzars. Except for 3 bad fitted or steep radio spectral blazars, they found an anti-correlation between peak frequency and curvature for the remaining 15 blazars [see the top panel of Fig. 3 in @1986ApJ...308...78L]. In the past nearly three decades, many large samples of blazars were used to study the properties of the peak frequency, luminosity, and jet emission parameters . However, few works focused on the curvature properties by using broadband SEDs. Until recently, @2011MNRAS.417.1881R presented an anti-correlation between synchrotron peak frequency and curvature by fitting the SEDs from radio to optical of 10 BL Lacs in both high and low states.
In this paper, we collect quasi-simultaneous broadband SEDs, from radio to $\gamma$-ray, of a large sample of blazars. Both SEDs of synchrotron and IC components are fitted by log-parabolic law in $\log\nu$-$\log\nu f_{\nu}$ diagram, respectively, and we obtain the synchrotron and IC curvatures. We then present detailed studies on the correlations between the peak frequency and curvature, and implications of the results. This paper is organized as follows: Section \[TheoryoftheCorrelation\] shows the theoretical interpretation of the correlation between the peak frequency and curvature. Section \[TheSample\] describes the sample, and Section \[TheFittingProcedure\] shows the fitting procedures. After providing the results in Section \[TheResults\], the detailed discussions and implications of the results are presented in Section \[DiscussionandConclusions\]. We end with a summary of the findings in Section \[Summary\]. Throughout the paper, a $\Lambda$CDM cosmology with values within 1$\sigma$ of the *Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe* (*WMAP*) results [@2011ApJS..192...18K] is used; in particular, $H_{0}=70$ km s$^{-1}$ Mpc$^{-1}$, $\Omega_{\Lambda}=0.73$, and $\Omega_{\rm M}=0.27$.
Theory of the Correlation {#TheoryoftheCorrelation}
=========================
Two different scenarios can explain the correlation between peak frequency and curvature, i.e., statistical and the stochastical acceleration mechanisms, both of which can reproduce the electron energy distribution as a log-parabolic law. A log-parabolic distribution of electron energy also emits a log-parabolic SED approximately, which consists with the fitting methods . In the following, we will explain the difference between these two acceleration mechanisms, that will be tested with our results in this work.
The first scenario is in the framework of statistical acceleration, which needs either an energy-dependent acceleration probability ($p_{a}$) or a fluctuation of fractional acceleration gain ($\varepsilon$). For the case of energy-dependent acceleration probability, showed that when acceleration efficiency is inversely proportional to the energy itself ($p_{a}=g/\gamma^{q}$ and $\varepsilon=cons.$ in this case), the log-parabolic law would be a very good approximation of the electron energy distribution, $$N(\gamma)\approx cons.\left(\frac{\gamma}{\gamma_{0}}\right)^{-s-r\log(\gamma/\gamma_{0})}.$$ Where $\gamma_{0}$ is initial electron energy, $r=q/(2\log\varepsilon)$ is curvature of electron energy distribution, and $s=-2r/q\log(g/\gamma_{0})-(q-2)/2$. The SED of synchrotron emissions by these electrons is also approximately log-parabolic, i.e., $\log\nu L_{\nu}=-b_{sy}\left(\log\nu-\log\nu_{p}\right)^{2}+\log\nu_{p}L_{\nu_{p}}$. With monochromatic emission assumption (i.e., $\delta$-approximation), one can derive the synchrotron peak frequency $\nu_{p}\propto\gamma_{p}^{2}$ and curvature $b_{sy}=r/4$, where $\log\gamma_{p}=\log\gamma_{0}+(3-s)/2r$ is the peak energy of electron in diagram $\log\gamma$-$\log\gamma^{3}N(\gamma)$. As suggested by , one obtains $b_{sy}\approx r/5$ instead of $b_{sy}=r/4$, when release the assumption of $\delta$-approximation. After substituting the $\gamma_{p}$, $s$ and $r$, we obtain $\log\nu_{p}=C+2\log\gamma_{0}+(3-s)/r
=C+2\log\gamma_{0}+2/q\log(g/\gamma_{0})+\log\varepsilon+2/r$. Assuming that $\gamma_{0}$, $q$, $g$, and $\varepsilon$ are independent variables and substituting the relation $b_{sy}\approx r/5$, we get $\log\nu_{p}\approx C_{1}+2/(5b_{sy})$. For the case of fluctuations of fractional acceleration gain, @2011ApJ...739...66T showed that when $\varepsilon$ is a random variable around a systematic energy gain $\overline{\varepsilon}$ ($p_{a}=1$ and $\varepsilon=\overline{\varepsilon}+\chi$ in this case, where random variable $\chi$ has a probability density function with zero mean value and variance $\sigma_{\varepsilon}^{2}$), applying the multiplicative case of the central limit theorem, one derives the electron energy distribution at acceleration step $n_{s}$, $$N(\gamma)=\frac{N_{0}}{\gamma\sigma_{\gamma}\sqrt{2\pi}}
\exp\left[-\frac{\left(\ln\gamma-\mu\right)^{2}}{2\sigma_{\gamma}^{2}}\right].$$ Where $\sigma_{\gamma}^{2}\approx n_{s}(\sigma_{\varepsilon}/\overline{\varepsilon})^{2}$ and $\mu=\ln\gamma_{0}+n_{s}\left[\ln\overline{\varepsilon}-
(\sigma_{\varepsilon}/\overline{\varepsilon})^{2}/2\right]$. Therefore, the electron peak energy and curvature in diagram $\log\gamma$-$\log\gamma^{3}N(\gamma)$ can be derived: $\log\gamma_{p}=\log\gamma_{0}+n_{s}\log\overline{\varepsilon}+3/(4r)$ and $r=\ln10/\left[2n_{s}(\sigma_{\varepsilon}/\overline{\varepsilon})^{2}\right]$. Substituting the relation $b_{sy}\approx r/5$ and $\gamma_{b}$, we have $\log\nu_{p}\approx C+2\log\gamma_{0}+2n_{s}\log\overline{\varepsilon}+3/(10b)$. Assuming that $\gamma_{0}$, $n_{s}$, $\overline{\varepsilon}$ and $\sigma_{\varepsilon}$ are independent variables, we obtain $\log\nu_{p}\approx C+3/(10b_{sy})$. The second scenario is in the framework of stochastic acceleration, provided the Fokker-Planck equation with presence of a momentum-diffusion term. @1962SvA.....6..317K suggested that a log-parabolic distribution of electron energy can be derived from a ‘quasi-’monoenergetic particle injection , $$N(\gamma)=\frac{N_{0}}{\gamma\sqrt{4\pi a_{1}}}
\exp\left[-\frac{(\ln\gamma-a_{1}-a_{2}-\ln\gamma_{0})^{2}}{4a_{1}}\right].$$ Where $a_{1}$ and $a_{2}$ correspond stochastic and systematic acceleration terms, respectively. When represented in diagram $\log\gamma$-$\log\gamma^{3}N(\gamma)$, we obtain the curvature $r=\ln10/4a_{1}$, and the electron peak energy $\log\gamma_{p}=\log\gamma_{0}+5a_{1}/\ln10+a_{2}/\ln10 =\log\gamma_{0}+a_{2}/\ln10+5/(4r)$. Assuming that $\gamma_{0}$, $a_{1}$ and $a_{2}$ are independent variables and substituting the relation $b_{sy}\approx r/5$ and $\gamma_{p}$, we have $\log\nu_{p}\approx C+1/(2b_{sy})$.
The Sample {#TheSample}
==========
@2010ApJ...716...30A collected broadband quasi-simultaneous spectral data, from radio through $\gamma$-ray, of 48 LBAS [*Fermi* LAT Bright AGN Sample, see @2009ApJ...700..597A] blazars based on the first three months operation of *Fermi*/LAT. All these data are properly scaled in $\log\nu$-$\log\nu f_{\nu}$ diagram. The 48 LBAS blazars are taken as our sample in this paper, and the detailed information of these blazars are presented in Table \[tabledata\]. Column (1) provides the *Fermi*/LAT name of the source. Column (2) is the source redshift. The broadband spectral data of these blazars are also taken from @2010ApJ...716...30A. Figure \[sed\] in the Appendix are the SED of these 48 blazars. The red points are the broadband quasi-simultaneous spectral data, while the grey ones represent other observations [see, @2010ApJ...716...30A for detail description].
The Fitting Procedure {#TheFittingProcedure}
=====================
In order to get the curvatures of synchrotron and IC components, we adopt a log-parabolic law, i.e., $\log\nu f_{\nu}=-b\left(\log\nu-\log\nu_{p}\right)^{2}+\log\nu_{p}f_{\nu_{p}}$, to fit the quasi-simultaneous SED of the two components, respectively . The coefficient of the second degree term, $b_{sy}$/$b_{IC}$, measures the curvature around the peak. The least $\chi^{2}$ technique is used to determine the parameters. For some blazars, there are no quasi-simultaneous data (the red points in the Figure \[sed\]) at radio or microwave bands to constrain the lower energy part of synchrotron fitting. We add other observation data (i.e., the grey points) in the fitting. For some data points, the errors are unavailable. We estimate the errors with average errors of those data points whose errors are available. Since the errors of the data for the synchrotron component are usually much smaller than that for the IC component, we derive the average errors of the data in the two components separately. The best fitting parameter values are listed in Table \[tabledata\]. Columns (3), (4), (5), (6), and (7) are the (for synchrotron fitting) peak frequency, flux, curvature, the degree of freedom, and the reduced $\chi^{2}$, respectively. Columns (8), (9), (10), (11), and (12) denote the same quantities but for IC fitting.
In order to test the validity of our fitting parameters, we compare the peak fluxes and peak frequencies between ours and those obtained from @2010ApJ...716...30A by fitting a third degree polynomial function for both SEDs of synchrotron and IC components, respectively. The comparison results are shown in Figure \[comparetotal\]. The top left panel is for synchrotron peak frequency comparison, top right for synchrotron peak flux comparison, bottom left for IC peak frequency comparison, and bottom right for IC peak flux comparison. The red lines are the best linear fits. The Pearson test shows that they are all tightly correlated, with Pearson’s probability for a null correlation negligible ($p=1.14\times10^{-24}$, $3.81\times10^{-19}$, $2.24\times10^{-18}$, and $4.23\times10^{-18}$ for synchrotron peak frequency comparison, synchrotron peak flux comparison, IC peak frequency comparison, and IC peak flux comparison, respectively). Therefore, our log-parabolic fittings present similar parameter values as that of @2010ApJ...716...30A.
The synchrotron fitting curves of total 48 blazars are plotted as red solid lines in Figure \[sed\] in Appendix. We check all the fitted SEDs (one by one) by naked eyes. From these Figures, it can be seen that the X-ray emissions of 14 blazars belong to the synchrotron components (see Figure \[sed\] and Table \[tabledata\] for the name list). The IC components of these blazars cover only $\gamma$-ray band, and therefore the IC fitted parameters may be unreliable because of the narrow SED coverage. These 14 IC fitted curves are plotted as red dashed lines in the Figure \[sed\]. For blazars J0238.6+1636, J0538.8-4403, J2254.0+1609, and J2345.5-1559, it can be seen that the fitted spectra at *Fermi* $\gamma$-ray band are much harder than the observed spectra. These 4 IC fitted curves are plotted as red dotted lines. For blazars J1719.3+1746 and 2202.4+4217, there are no observational data at the right wing of IC component, and therefore the fitted curvatures ($b_{IC}$) may be unreliable. In fact, the value of $b_{IC}$ of these two blazars are significantly smaller than that of others (see Table \[tabledata\]). These two IC fitted curves are also plotted as red dashed lines. Because of above reasons, we exclude these 20 ($=14+4+2$) blazars in the following analysis concerning the IC component. The IC fitted curves of remaining 28 blazars are presented as red solid lines. Among these 48 blazars, 43 sources have measured redshifts (see Table \[tabledata\]). The peak luminosities and frequencies (in AGN frame) can be calculated through $\left(\nu_{p}L_{\nu_{p}}\right)_{s,C}=4\pi d_{L}^{2}\left(\nu_{p}f_{\nu_{p}}\right)_{s,C}$ and $\left(\nu_{p}\right)_{s,C}=\left(1+z\right)\left(\nu_{p}\right)_{s,C}^{obs}$, where $d_{L}$ is the luminosity distance and $z$ is the source redshift. In the following analysis, all values (e.g., peak frequency and curvature) are indicated in AGN frame, noticing that the curvature $b$ is unchanged when transform from observational to AGN frames.
The Results {#TheResults}
===========
From Table \[tabledata\], we can see that the value of synchrotron curvature $b_{sy}$ varies between 0.056 and 0.27. The range of the value is larger than that of any previous studies . We plot the synchrotron curvature versus peak frequency in Figure \[synfrecurve\]. Here we use $1/b_{sy}$ instead of $b_{sy}$ to represent the synchrotron curvature, since it will be convenient to compare with the theoretical results (see Section \[TheoryoftheCorrelation\]). The black squares denote these 43 balzars having measured redshift. The Pearson test presents a small $p$-value, $p=1.35\times10^{-17}$. The red solid line is the best linear fitting, which gives $1/b_{sy}=-(22.08\pm0.43)+(2.04\pm0.03)\log\nu_{p}^{sy}$ and the dashed red lines indicate the 1$\sigma$ confidence bands. Hence, the synchrotron peak frequency correlates with its curvature at a high level of confidence.
Among these 28 blazars whose IC curvatures are well estimated, 26 blazars have measured redshift. Similar to the synchrotron one, we plot the IC peak frequency versus IC curvature in Figure \[compfrecurve\]. The black squares denote these 26 blazars. The Pearson test shows a very weak correlation, with $p$-value $p=5.16\times10^{-2}$, which is mainly contributed by the object J1504.4+1030 (the red point in the Figure \[compfrecurve\], through jackknife statistical test[^1]).
Discussion and Conclusions {#DiscussionandConclusions}
==========================
Blazars are observationally subdivided into flat spectrum radio quasars (FSRQs) and BL Lacertae objects (BL Lacs), based on presence or absence of emission lines . Our sample includes 48 blazars, in which 43 sources have measured redshift. The sample is not large enough to separate them into various subclasses, e.g., FSRQs versus BL Lacs. FSRQs and BL Lacs show continuous properties, although they are divided by some criterions . Nowadays when discuss *Fermi*/LAT detected blazars, the terms Low Synchrotron Peaked blazars (LSP), Intermediate Synchrotron Peaked blazars (ISP) and High Synchrotron Peaked blazars (HSP) are often used instead of FSRQs and BL Lacs [see, e.g., @2010ApJ...716...30A; @2010ApJ...715..429A].
Because of possible importance of the correlation between the synchrotron peak frequency and curvature (see Section \[TheoryoftheCorrelation\]), many works have studied the correlation . These works are based on either the X-ray data of single sources or small samples using data from radio to optical. In this paper, we study the correlation using a sample of 48 blazars, whose broadband quasi-simultaneous SEDs are from radio to $\gamma$-ray. The correlation between the synchrotron peak frequency and curvature depicted in this work confirm the results of these previous works.
As an alternative to log-parabolic fitting, a broken power-law of electron energy distribution is commonly used to fit the SED in both synchrotron self-Compton (SSC) and external Compton (EC) models . Therefore, if the above correlation between the peak frequency and curvature is genuine, there should be a similar correlation even a broken power-law is employed to fit SED. From electron energy distribution to blazar SED, the spectral indexes transform as $\alpha_{1,2}=(p_{1,2}-1)/2$ approximately, where $p_{1}$ and $p_{2}$ are electron energy indexes below and above the break. In this case, the difference between the spectral indexes (i.e., $|\alpha_{2}-\alpha_{1}|=|p_{2}-p_{1}|/2$) can be considered as a “surrogate" of the curvature ($b_{sy}$), and one expects a correlation between synchrotron peak frequency and this “curvature". We collect the data of 24 blazars (at both high and low states) from @2012ApJ...752..157Z to test the correlation, which are plotted in Figure \[a1a2\] (similar to $1/b_{sy}$, here we use $1/|\alpha_{2}-\alpha_{1}|$). The visual inspection shows a positive correlation between these two quantities, if excluding two obviously departure points (marked as green triangle and blue star). The green triangle represents high state of Mrk 501. From the Fig. 1 of @2012ApJ...752..157Z, it can be seen that there are no spectral data above the synchrotron peak to constrain the spectral index ($\alpha_{2}$/$p_{2}$), and the index adopted by the authors is significantly larger than that at lower state [$p_{2}^{\rm high}=4.6$ versus $p_{2}^{\rm low}=3.72$, see Table 1 of @2012ApJ...752..157Z]. The blue star represents the high state of PKS 2005-489, whose SED fitting is not very good: the value of synchrotron peak may be underestimated and the value of spectral index below the synchrotron peak may be overestimated [see the Fig. 1 of @2012ApJ...752..157Z]. For these reasons, we exclude these two points. The Pearson’s test yields a significant correlation with $p=5.35\times10^{-5}$. Therefore, even a broken power-law is employed to fit SED, there is also a correlation between the “curvature" and the synchrotron peak frequency. Although there are different mathematic functions to describe blazar SED (log-parabolic law versus broken power-law), these two correlations represent an identical property of blazar SED.
Based on SSC model, predicted a relation between curvatures of IC and synchrotron components, $b_{\rm SSC}\approx b_{\rm sy}/2$ at Thomson regime, while $b_{\rm SSC}\approx5b_{\rm sy}$ at Klein-Nishina (KN) regime . The SSC peak frequency is $\nu_{p}^{SSC}\propto\nu_{p}\gamma_{p}^{2}\propto\gamma_{p}^{4}$ for Thomson scattering, and $\nu_{p}^{SSC}\propto\gamma_{p}$ for KN scattering, respectively. As discussed in Section \[TheoryoftheCorrelation\] , the peak energy of electron ($\gamma_{p}$) correlates with the synchrotron curvature ($b_{sy}$). We therefore expect a correlation between SSC peak frequency and curvature at Thomson or KN regimes. For the first time, we study the relation between the IC peak frequency and curvature from observational view, while our results present no significant correlation with a chance probability only $p=0.0516$. This is due to the following reasons:
- The IC component is sometimes a composite of SSC and EC emissions.
- The IC emission may lie at Thomson regime for some blazars, while others are at KN regime.
- The intrinsic spectrum of a single IC scattering is broader than the intrinsic synchrotron spectrum of a single electron [see, Figures 6.6 versus 7.3 in @1979rpa..book.....R], and the SED of seed photons are usually very broad.
These reasons will significantly broaden the SED of IC component, and the value of IC curvature is more uncertain relative to the synchrotron one. We note that these reasons lead to another two predictions. Firstly, the synchrotron curvature ($b_{sy}$) would be on average larger than that of IC component ($b_{IC}$) at Thomson regime. Secondly, there would be very weak or no correlation between the two curvatures. These two predictions are confirmed by Figure \[sycurviccurv\], which shows IC curvature versus synchrotron curvature (represented by $1/b_{IC}$ versus $1/b_{sy}$), and the red solid line shows a perfect one-to-one relation.
As suggested in Section \[TheoryoftheCorrelation\], two scenarios can explain the observed correlation between synchrotron peak frequency and curvature. Theoretical predictions of the slope $B$ (in $1/b_{sy}=A+B\log\nu_{p}$) are $B=$5/2, 10/3, and 2 for models of energy-dependent acceleration probability, fluctuation of fractional acceleration gain, and stochastic acceleration, respectively. Our observational result $B=2.04\pm0.03$ (see Section \[TheResults\]) is consistent with the stochastic acceleration mechanisms and emission processes.
Some of other evidences seem to support that the electron energy distribution may be log-parabolic. Taking the synchrotron radiation and a three-dimensional turbulent electromagnetic field configuration into account, presented numerical simulations of particle acceleration. They found, in a few cases, energy spectral index characterized by a steepening spectra at high energies. verified that these spectra can be represented well by a log-parabolic law or by a combination of a power law and a parabola. @2013ApJ...771L...4C presented a detailed SED modeling of 3C 454.3 and finds that its GeV $\gamma$-ray break could be well reproduced if electron energy distribution is log-parabolic. In order to fit the SED of MeV blazars, @2002ApJ...577...78S assumed that electrons are accelerated via a two-step process with a broken power-law energy distribution as injection. Taking the cooling effect into account, verified that these resulting electron spectra can be well described by a log-parabola over a range wider than three decades. The log-parabolic law of synchrotron component of SED are also found to be consistent with some empirical relations/correlations (see Appendix for detail).
Summary {#Summary}
=======
The curvature, in addition to peak frequency and peak flux, is the third important parameter to characterize a broadband SED, which may shine out the hidden electron energy distribution, particle acceleration mechanism, energy dissipation mechanism, and many other blazar properties. A larger sample of blazars with high quality SED is needed to check these results in detail, especially for the IC components. We summarize the main results of this paper as follows.
- We found a significant correlation between the curvature (in $1/b_{sy}$) and peak frequency for synchrotron component and no significant correlation between same quantities for IC component. It is also found that the synchrotron curvatures are on average larger than that of IC curvatures, and there is no correlation between the two parameters. This may be caused by complicated seed photon field.
- The difference between spectral indexes above and below the SED peak of 24 blazars (at both high and low states) are calculated [i.e., $|\alpha_{2}-\alpha_{1}|$, data from @2012ApJ...752..157Z]. We found a significant correlation between $1/|\alpha_{2}-\alpha_{1}|$ and the synchrotron peak frequency. Parameter $|\alpha_{2}-\alpha_{1}|$ can be considered as a “surrogate" of the curvature. Therefore, this result confirms the correlation between the synchrotron peak frequency and curvature, even provided a broken power-law fit of SED.
- We found that the slop of correlation between synchrotron curvature of peak frequency ($B=2.04\pm0.03$) is consistent with the prediction of stochastic scenario.
- Some of other evidences also seem to support that the electron energy distribution (and/or synchrotron SED) may be log-parabolic, which include SED modeling, particle acceleration simulation, and comparisons between some predictions and empirical relations/correlations.
We thank the anonymous referee for insightful comments and constructive suggestions. We are grateful to the help from Xinwu Cao, Jinming Bai, Jin Zhang and Wentao Luo. This work is supported by the NSFC (grants 11233006, 11133006, 11173043, 11103054 and 11103060), and XTP project XDA04060604.
[99]{}
Abdo, A. A., Ackermann, M., Ajello, M., et al. 2009a, , 700, 597
Abdo, A. A., Ackermann, M., Ajello, M., et al. 2009b, , 699, 31
Abdo, A. A., Ackermann, M., Ajello, M., et al. 2009c, , 707, 1310
Abdo, A. A., Ackermann, M., Agudo, I., et al. 2010a, , 721, 1425
Abdo, A. A., Ackermann, M., Agudo, I., et al. 2010b, , 716, 30
Abdo, A. A., Ackermann, M., Ajello, M., et al. 2010c, , 715, 429
Ackermann, M., Ajello, M., Allafort, A., et al. 2011, , 743, 171
Aharonian, F., Akhperjanian, A. G., Bazer-Bachi, A. R., et al. 2007, , 664, L71
Aleksi[ć]{}, J., Alvarez, E. A., Antonelli, L. A., et al. 2012, , 542, A100
B[ö]{}ttcher, M., & Dermer, C. D. 2002, , 564, 86
Bai, J.-M. 2005, Chinese Journal of Astronomy and Astrophysics Supplement, 5, 207
Blandford, R. D., & Rees, M. J. 1978, BL Lac Objects, 328
Brodie, J., Bowyer, S., & Tennant, A. 1987, , 318, 175
Brown, L. M. J., Robson, E. I., Gear, W. K., et al. 1989, , 340, 129
Cerruti, M., Dermer, C. D., Lott, B., Boisson, C., & Zech, A. 2013, , 771, L4
Chen, L., & Bai, J. M. 2011, , 735, 108
Chen, L., Cao, X., & Bai, J. M. 2012, , 748, 119
Chen, Z., Gu, M., & Cao, X. 2009, , 397, 1713
Fossati, G., Maraschi, L., Celotti, A., Comastri, A., & Ghisellini, G. 1998, , 299, 433
Georganopoulos, M., & Kazanas, D. 2003, , 594, L27
Ghisellini, G., Celotti, A., Fossati, G., Maraschi, L., & Comastri, A. 1998, , 301, 451
Ghisellini, G., Maraschi, L., & Tavecchio, F. 2009, , 396, L105
Ghisellini, G., Maraschi, L., Treves, A., & Tanzi, E. G. 1986, , 310, 317
Ghisellini, G., & Tavecchio, F. 2008, , 386, L28
Ghisellini, G., Tavecchio, F., & Chiaberge, M. 2005, , 432, 401
Ghisellini, G., Tavecchio, F., Foschini, L., et al. 2010, , 402, 497
Ghisellini, G., George, I. M., & Done, C. 1989, , 241, 43P
Giommi, P., Padovani, P., Polenta, G., et al. 2012, , 420, 2899
Hartman, R. C., Bertsch, D. L., Bloom, S. D., et al. 1999, , 123, 79
Kardashev, N. S. 1962, , 6, 317
Komatsu, E., Smith, K. M., Dunkley, J., et al. 2011, , 192, 18
Krennrich, F., Biller, S. D., Bond, I. H., et al. 1999, , 511, 149
Landau, R., Golisch, B., Jones, T. J., et al. 1986, , 308, 78
Ledden, J. E., & Odell, S. L. 1985, , 298, 630
Ledden, J. E., Odell, S. L., Stein, W. A., & Wisniewski, W. Z. 1981, , 243, 47
Massaro, E., Perri, M., Giommi, P., & Nesci, R. 2004a, , 413, 489
Massaro, E., Perri, M., Giommi, P., Nesci, R., & Verrecchia, F. 2004b, , 422, 103
Massaro, E., Tramacere, A., Perri, M., Giommi, P., & Tosti, G. 2006, , 448, 861
Massaro, F., Paggi, A., Elvis, M., & Cavaliere, A. 2011a, , 739, 73
Massaro, F., Tramacere, A., Cavaliere, A., Perri, M., & Giommi, P. 2008, , 478, 395
Massaro, F., Paggi, A., Errando, M., et al. 2013, , 207, 16
Nieppola, E., Tornikoski, M., & Valtaoja, E. 2006, , 445, 441
Nodes, C., Birk, G. T., Gritschneder, M., & Lesch, H. 2004, , 423, 13
Odell, S. L., Puschell, J. J., Stein, W. A., & Warner, J. W. 1977, , 214, L105
Padovani, P., & Giommi, P. 1995, , 444, 567
Padovani, P., Perlman, E. S., Landt, H., Giommi, P., & Perri, M. 2003, , 588, 128
Paggi, A., Massaro, F., Vittorini, V., et al. 2009a, , 504, 821
Paggi, A., Cavaliere, A., Vittorini, V., & Tavani, M. 2009b, , 508, L31
Punch, M., Akerlof, C. W., Cawley, M. F., et al. 1992, , 358, 477
Rani, B., Gupta, A. C., Bachev, R., et al. 2011, , 417, 1881
Rieke, G. H., & Kinman, T. D. 1974, , 192, L115
Rybicki, G. B., & Lightman, A. P. 1979, New York, Wiley-Interscience, 1979. 393 p.,
Sambruna, R. M., Maraschi, L., & Urry, C. M. 1996, , 463, 444
Samuelson, F. W., Biller, S. D., Bond, I. H., et al. 1998, , 501, L17
Scarpa, R., & Falomo, R. 1997, , 325, 109
ent[ü]{}rk, G. D., Errando, M., B[ö]{}ttcher, M., & Mukherjee, R. 2013, , 764, 119
Sikora, M., B[ł]{}a[ż]{}ejowski, M., Moderski, R., & Madejski, G. M. 2002, , 577, 78
Sitko, M. L., Stein, W. A., Zhang, Y.-X., & Wisniewski, W. Z. 1983, , 95, 724
Tavecchio, F., Maraschi, L., & Ghisellini, G. 1998, , 509, 608
Tramacere, A., Giommi, P., Massaro, E., et al. 2007, , 467, 501
Tramacere, A., Giommi, P., Perri, M., Verrecchia, F., & Tosti, G. 2009, , 501, 879
Tramacere, A., Massaro, E., & Taylor, A. M. 2011, , 739, 66
Tramacere, A., Massaro, F., & Cavaliere, A. 2007, , 466, 521
Urry, C. M., & Padovani, P. 1995, , 107, 803
Wu, Z.-Z., Gu, M.-F., & Jiang, D.-R. 2009, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 9, 168
Xu, Y.-D., Cao, X., & Wu, Q. 2009, , 694, L107
Zhang, J., Liang, E.-W., Zhang, S.-N., & Bai, J. M. 2012, , 752, 157
[llllllllllll]{} J0033.6-1921\* & 0.610 & 15.607$\pm$ 0.066 & -11.160$\pm$ 0.029 & 0.106$\pm$0.003 & 11 & 0.4145 & 24.265$\pm$ 0.335\* & -10.955$\pm$ 0.120\* & 0.480$\pm$0.297\* & 1 & 0.7803\
J0050.5-0928\* & — & 14.626$\pm$ 0.059 & -10.842$\pm$ 0.063 & 0.101$\pm$0.005 & 11 & 2.6429 & 22.962$\pm$ 0.448\* & -10.578$\pm$ 0.043\* & 0.178$\pm$0.169\* & 1 & 0.0001\
J0137.1+4751 & 0.859 & 13.347$\pm$ 0.078 & -10.502$\pm$ 0.083 & 0.176$\pm$0.014 & 8 & 0.6019 & 22.304$\pm$ 0.330 & -10.550$\pm$ 0.075 & 0.069$\pm$0.012 & 7 & 1.7003\
J0210.8-5100 & 1.003 & 13.156$\pm$ 0.019 & -10.965$\pm$ 0.017 & 0.149$\pm$0.003 & 35 & 17.7985 & 22.467$\pm$ 0.219 & -10.232$\pm$ 0.035 & 0.074$\pm$0.008 & 11 & 4.8359\
J0222.6+4302\* & 0.444 & 14.714$\pm$ 0.025 & -10.400$\pm$ 0.018 & 0.117$\pm$0.002 & 40 & 2.6078 & 23.682$\pm$ 0.038\* & -10.147$\pm$ 0.028\* & 0.237$\pm$0.013\* & 13 & 4.3426\
J0229.5-3640 & 2.115 & 13.446$\pm$ 0.290 & -11.928$\pm$ 0.206 & 0.146$\pm$0.033 & 7 & 0.8482 & 21.745$\pm$ 0.126 & -10.332$\pm$ 0.069 & 0.126$\pm$0.011 & 8 & 2.1163\
J0238.4+2855 & 1.213 & 12.765$\pm$ 0.037 & -11.285$\pm$ 0.043 & 0.156$\pm$0.006 & 12 & 1.1031 & 22.058$\pm$ 0.382 & -10.737$\pm$ 0.097 & 0.074$\pm$0.017 & 5 & 1.9191\
J0238.6+1636$\dag$ & 0.940 & 12.973$\pm$ 0.021 & -10.421$\pm$ 0.026 & 0.227$\pm$0.005 & 47 & 10.7721 & 24.604$\pm$ 1.085$\dag$ & -9.899$\pm$ 0.074$\dag$ & 0.031$\pm$0.009$\dag$ & 16 & 34.6859\
J0349.8-2102 & 2.944 & 13.087$\pm$ 0.032 & -11.055$\pm$ 0.111 & 0.214$\pm$0.015 & 8 & 0.4579 & 21.891$\pm$ 0.119 & -10.205$\pm$ 0.061 & 0.172$\pm$0.015 & 2 & 0.4180\
J0423.1-0112 & 0.915 & 13.017$\pm$ 0.023 & -10.893$\pm$ 0.028 & 0.168$\pm$0.006 & 35 & 1.0149 & 21.317$\pm$ 0.130 & -10.368$\pm$ 0.096 & 0.099$\pm$0.013 & 7 & 2.6917\
J0428.7-3755 & 1.112 & 13.582$\pm$ 0.073 & -11.211$\pm$ 0.030 & 0.130$\pm$0.005 & 20 & 2.7216 & 22.986$\pm$ 0.177 & -10.223$\pm$ 0.024 & 0.070$\pm$0.005 & 12 & 6.1359\
J0449.7-4348\* & 0.205 & 15.105$\pm$ 0.032 & -10.375$\pm$ 0.020 & 0.111$\pm$0.002 & 24 & 9.9664 & 24.025$\pm$ 0.895\* & -10.531$\pm$ 0.045\* & 0.037$\pm$0.011\* & 4 & 1.2272\
J0457.1-2325 & 1.003 & 13.104$\pm$ 0.062 & -10.992$\pm$ 0.068 & 0.167$\pm$0.009 & 10 & 1.1554 & 22.507$\pm$ 0.156 & -10.091$\pm$ 0.058 & 0.091$\pm$0.007 & 10 & 5.7873\
J0507.9+6739\* & 0.416 & 17.186$\pm$ 0.568 & -10.783$\pm$ 0.078 & 0.071$\pm$0.011 & 17 & 0.0690 & 25.738$\pm$ 0.735\* & -10.607$\pm$ 0.144\* & 0.088$\pm$0.054\* & 5 & 2.1029\
J0516.2-6200 & — & 13.550$\pm$ 0.177 & -11.515$\pm$ 0.107 & 0.141$\pm$0.017 & 14 & 0.4809 & 22.612$\pm$ 0.298 & -10.726$\pm$ 0.024 & 0.067$\pm$0.008 & 20 & 4.6043\
J0531.0+1331 & 2.070 & 12.640$\pm$ 0.015 & -11.295$\pm$ 0.021 & 0.174$\pm$0.004 & 39 & 7.5104 & 21.422$\pm$ 0.079 & -9.953$\pm$ 0.066 & 0.145$\pm$0.011 & 10 & 4.8000\
J0538.8-4403$\dag$ & 0.892 & 13.062$\pm$ 0.033 & -10.400$\pm$ 0.042 & 0.191$\pm$0.006 & 18 & 1.8883 & 24.520$\pm$ 0.919$\dag$ & -10.164$\pm$ 0.053$\dag$ & 0.032$\pm$0.008$\dag$ & 17 & 1.2905\
J0712.9+5034 & — & 13.557$\pm$ 0.647 & -11.213$\pm$ 0.477 & 0.155$\pm$0.101 & 3 & 0.0340 & 23.365$\pm$ 1.375 & -11.000$\pm$ 0.069 & 0.052$\pm$0.025 & 4 & 0.7682\
J0722.0+7120\* & 0.310 & 14.620$\pm$ 0.021 & -9.978$\pm$ 0.016 & 0.130$\pm$0.002 & 62 & 5.8716 & 23.003$\pm$ 0.353\* & -10.380$\pm$ 0.025\* & 0.046$\pm$0.007\* & 3 & 1.2265\
J0730.4-1142 & 1.589 & 12.876$\pm$ 0.076 & -10.572$\pm$ 0.226 & 0.200$\pm$0.033 & 6 & 17.0701 & 22.333$\pm$ 0.128 & -10.104$\pm$ 0.036 & 0.095$\pm$0.007 & 10 & 6.9697\
J0855.4+2009 & 0.306 & 13.429$\pm$ 0.014 & -10.148$\pm$ 0.011 & 0.210$\pm$0.003 & 38 & 16.4465 & 21.346$\pm$ 0.161 & -10.482$\pm$ 0.086 & 0.075$\pm$0.012 & 13 & 1.2470\
J0921.2+4437 & 2.190 & 13.016$\pm$ 0.051 & -10.926$\pm$ 0.082 & 0.205$\pm$0.014 & 5 & 2.2666 & 22.077$\pm$ 0.334 & -10.734$\pm$ 0.064 & 0.058$\pm$0.011 & 9 & 1.8761\
J1015.2+4927\* & 0.212 & 16.183$\pm$ 0.097 & -10.580$\pm$ 0.024 & 0.078$\pm$0.003 & 17 & 3.3939 & 24.676$\pm$ 0.280\* & -10.610$\pm$ 0.071\* & 0.067$\pm$0.025\* & 4 & 2.0654\
J1058.9+5629 & 0.143 & 15.057$\pm$ 0.063 & -10.884$\pm$ 0.040 & 0.103$\pm$0.003 & 11 & 1.8680 & 21.551$\pm$ 0.118 & -10.692$\pm$ 0.059 & 0.103$\pm$0.016 & 18 & 2.3297\
J1057.8+0138 & 0.888 & 12.961$\pm$ 0.160 & -10.813$\pm$ 0.302 & 0.186$\pm$0.045 & 5 & 0.1860 & 21.896$\pm$ 0.462 & -10.819$\pm$ 0.136 & 0.062$\pm$0.019 & 5 & 0.9898\
J1104.5+3811\* & 0.030 & 16.689$\pm$ 0.056 & -9.299$\pm$ 0.021 & 0.089$\pm$0.002 & 47 & 25.3150 & 24.249$\pm$ 0.057\* & -10.066$\pm$ 0.033\* & 0.147$\pm$0.011\* & 13 & 3.1334\
J1159.2+2912 & 0.729 & 12.942$\pm$ 0.023 & -10.712$\pm$ 0.027 & 0.219$\pm$0.004 & 16 & 6.4871 & 22.501$\pm$ 0.418 & -10.737$\pm$ 0.059 & 0.059$\pm$0.011 & 11 & 2.7382\
J1221.7+2814\* & 0.102 & 14.927$\pm$ 0.034 & -10.675$\pm$ 0.023 & 0.113$\pm$0.002 & 33 & 11.1198 & 24.312$\pm$ 0.089\* & -10.458$\pm$ 0.057\* & 0.156$\pm$0.031\* & 15 & 4.6653\
J1229.1+0202 & 0.158 & 14.134$\pm$ 0.172 & -9.990$\pm$ 0.034 & 0.089$\pm$0.007 & 18 & 1.9384 & 20.802$\pm$ 0.035 & -9.579$\pm$ 0.023 & 0.081$\pm$0.003 & 26 & 2.1859\
J1248.7+5811\* & — & 14.590$\pm$ 0.043 & -10.946$\pm$ 0.038 & 0.136$\pm$0.004 & 10 & 1.0594 & 22.885$\pm$ 1.426\* & -10.969$\pm$ 0.094\* & 0.117$\pm$0.285\* & 1 & 0.2037\
J1256.1-0548 & 0.536 & 12.760$\pm$ 0.008 & -10.247$\pm$ 0.019 & 0.206$\pm$0.003 & 30 & 13.6854 & 22.073$\pm$ 0.179 & -10.208$\pm$ 0.099 & 0.076$\pm$0.018 & 12 & 0.7205\
J1310.6+3220 & 0.997 & 12.996$\pm$ 0.025 & -10.659$\pm$ 0.051 & 0.239$\pm$0.008 & 10 & 2.4370 & 22.764$\pm$ 0.263 & -10.442$\pm$ 0.023 & 0.060$\pm$0.007 & 14 & 3.5332\
J1457.6-3538 & 1.424 & 13.688$\pm$ 0.095 & -11.256$\pm$ 0.044 & 0.128$\pm$0.008 & 9 & 5.0165 & 22.344$\pm$ 0.256 & -10.095$\pm$ 0.080 & 0.084$\pm$0.012 & 6 & 2.3088\
J1504.4+1030 & 1.839 & 13.191$\pm$ 0.049 & -10.863$\pm$ 0.069 & 0.185$\pm$0.012 & 11 & 0.9404 & 23.624$\pm$ 0.318 & -9.895$\pm$ 0.032 & 0.063$\pm$0.007 & 12 & 5.2857\
J1512.7-0905 & 0.360 & 13.271$\pm$ 0.024 & -11.095$\pm$ 0.013 & 0.132$\pm$0.003 & 30 & 17.7053 & 22.193$\pm$ 0.170 & -9.999$\pm$ 0.061 & 0.088$\pm$0.009 & 14 & 2.6933\
J1522.2+3143 & 1.487 & 12.925$\pm$ 0.065 & -12.078$\pm$ 0.124 & 0.144$\pm$0.019 & 10 & 4.7695 & 22.192$\pm$ 0.176 & -10.172$\pm$ 0.097 & 0.132$\pm$0.014 & 3 & 2.8494\
J1543.1+6130\* & — & 14.404$\pm$ 0.042 & -11.292$\pm$ 0.048 & 0.137$\pm$0.004 & 13 & 5.0679 & 24.819$\pm$ 3.734\* & -11.082$\pm$ 0.287\* & 0.035$\pm$0.032\* & 2 & 0.0362\
J1653.9+3946\* & 0.033 & 16.551$\pm$ 0.083 & -10.317$\pm$ 0.026 & 0.061$\pm$0.002 & 44 & 0.7394 & 25.033$\pm$ 0.220\* & -10.674$\pm$ 0.110\* & 0.097$\pm$0.041\* & 6 & 0.1482\
J1719.3+1746\* & 0.137 & 13.585$\pm$ 0.098 & -11.453$\pm$ 0.057 & 0.138$\pm$0.010 & 10 & 0.5019 & 24.493$\pm$ 0.387\* & -10.644$\pm$ 0.033\* & 0.036$\pm$0.004\* & 10 & 2.7840\
J1751.5+0935 & 0.322 & 12.871$\pm$ 0.079 & -10.207$\pm$ 0.224 & 0.270$\pm$0.034 & 5 & 0.6216 & 22.036$\pm$ 0.215 & -10.324$\pm$ 0.083 & 0.088$\pm$0.013 & 6 & 0.4860\
J1849.4+6706 & 0.657 & 13.753$\pm$ 0.039 & -10.938$\pm$ 0.021 & 0.141$\pm$0.003 & 14 & 45.2431 & 22.573$\pm$ 0.313 & -10.443$\pm$ 0.055 & 0.065$\pm$0.010 & 8 & 0.9814\
J2000.2+6506\* & 0.047 & 17.886$\pm$ 0.171 & -10.154$\pm$ 0.023 & 0.056$\pm$0.002 & 29 & 2.0107 & 24.492$\pm$ 0.103\* & -10.629$\pm$ 0.078\* & 0.177$\pm$0.045\* & 6 & 2.3534\
J2143.2+1741 & 0.213 & 14.192$\pm$ 0.036 & -10.661$\pm$ 0.074 & 0.146$\pm$0.006 & 8 & 3.1776 & 21.829$\pm$ 0.296 & -10.531$\pm$ 0.127 & 0.091$\pm$0.021 & 3 & 0.1145\
J2158.8-3014\* & 0.116 & 15.479$\pm$ 0.032 & -9.874$\pm$ 0.018 & 0.116$\pm$0.002 & 40 & 6.1386 & 23.789$\pm$ 0.057\* & -10.167$\pm$ 0.026\* & 0.203$\pm$0.013\* & 11 & 1.8782\
J2202.4+4217\* & 0.069 & 14.295$\pm$ 0.042 & -10.185$\pm$ 0.009 & 0.129$\pm$0.003 & 40 & 9.5177 & 21.848$\pm$ 0.331\* & -10.723$\pm$ 0.055\* & 0.034$\pm$0.009\* & 23 & 1.4534\
J2254.0+1609$\dag$ & 0.859 & 12.791$\pm$ 0.013 & -9.966$\pm$ 0.015 & 0.233$\pm$0.003 & 33 & 23.2350 & 22.698$\pm$ 0.155$\dag$ & -9.674$\pm$ 0.028$\dag$ & 0.048$\pm$0.004$\dag$ & 22 & 6.1458\
J2327.3+0947 & 1.843 & 12.965$\pm$ 0.025 & -11.191$\pm$ 0.031 & 0.190$\pm$0.005 & 7 & 10.4132 & 21.587$\pm$ 0.082 & -10.289$\pm$ 0.045 & 0.119$\pm$0.008 & 15 & 1.6895\
J2345.5-1559$\dag$ & 0.621 & 13.666$\pm$ 0.148 & -11.803$\pm$ 0.068 & 0.117$\pm$0.013 & 7 & 2.6984 & 22.993$\pm$ 0.536$\dag$ & -10.717$\pm$ 0.029$\dag$ & 0.069$\pm$0.014$\dag$ & 5 & 9.0312\
Figures
=======
{height="4cm"} {height="4cm"} {height="4cm"} {height="4cm"} {height="4cm"} {height="4cm"} {height="4cm"} {height="4cm"}
{height="5cm"} {height="5cm"} {height="5cm"} {height="5cm"} {height="5cm"} {height="5cm"} {height="5cm"} {height="5cm"}
{height="5cm"} {height="5cm"} {height="5cm"} {height="5cm"} {height="5cm"} {height="5cm"} {height="5cm"} {height="5cm"}
{height="5cm"} {height="5cm"} {height="5cm"} {height="5cm"} {height="5cm"} {height="5cm"} {height="5cm"} {height="5cm"}
{height="5cm"} {height="5cm"} {height="5cm"} {height="5cm"} {height="5cm"} {height="5cm"} {height="5cm"} {height="5cm"}
{height="5cm"} {height="5cm"} {height="5cm"} {height="5cm"} {height="5cm"} {height="5cm"} {height="5cm"} {height="5cm"}
compare with empirical relation/correlation
===========================================
@2010ApJ...716...30A presented an empirical relation between radio flux density, synchrotron peak frequency, and synchrotron peak flux, i.e., $\log\nu_{p}f_{\nu_{p}}=0.5\log\nu_{p}-20.4+0.9\log(R_{\rm 5GHz})$, where $R_{\rm 5GHz}$ is the radio flux density at 5 GHz in units of mJy, $\nu_{p}$ the synchrotron peak frequency in unit of Hz, and $\nu_{p}f_{\nu_{p}}$ the synchrotron peak flux in unit of erg s$^{-1}$ cm$^{-2}$ [Equation 4 in @2010ApJ...716...30A]. A similar relation can be derived by combining a log-parabolic law of SED ($\log\nu f_{\nu}=-b\left(\log\nu-\log\nu_{p}\right)^{2}+\log\nu_{p}f_{\nu_{p}}$) and the correlation between peak frequency and curvature ($1/b=A+B\log\nu_{p}$)[^2], $$\log\nu_{p}f_{\nu_{p}}=\log\nu f_{\nu}+\frac{\left(\log\nu-\log\nu_{p}\right)^{2}}{A+B\log\nu_{p}}.
\label{peakfluxeq}$$ The comparison of these two relations is shown in Figure \[peakflux\], where the blue dotes are synchrotron peak fluxes calculated by two relations from Mote-Carlo simulation by randomizing the values of synchrotron peak frequency and 5 GHz flux density. The red line is the perfect one-to-one relation. We can see that these two relations are roughly consistent with each other.
As early in 1990s people found an empirical correlation between the synchrotron peak frequency and the radio to optical broadband spectral index [see e.g., @1995ApJ...444..567P; @1998MNRAS.299..433F; @2003ApJ...588..128P]. A similar relation can also be derived when combining $\log\nu f_{\nu}=-b\left(\log\nu-\log\nu_{p}\right)^{2}+\log\nu_{p}f_{\nu_{p}}$ and $1/b_{sy}=A+B\log\nu_{p}$. If $f_{\nu_{1}}$ and $f_{\nu_{2}}$ are flux densities at $\nu_{1}$ and $\nu_{2}$, respectively, one has, $$\begin{cases}
\log\nu_{1}f_{\nu_{1}}=-b\left(\log\nu_{1}-\log\nu_{p}\right)^{2}+\log\nu_{p}f_{\nu_{p}} \\
\log\nu_{2}f_{\nu_{2}}=-b\left(\log\nu_{2}-\log\nu_{p}\right)^{2}+\log\nu_{p}f_{\nu_{p}}.
\end{cases}
\label{nupeakmid}$$ Substituting the relation $1/b_{sy}=A+B\log\nu_{p}$ and a broadband spectral index $\alpha_{12}=-\left(\log f_{\nu_{2}}-\log f_{\nu_{1}}\right)/\left(\log\nu_{2}-\log\nu_{1}\right)$ into the Equation \[nupeakmid\], one gets, $$\log\nu_{p}=\frac{A(1-\alpha_{12})+(\log\nu_{2}+\log\nu_{1})}{2-B(1-\alpha_{12})}.
\label{nupeak}$$ The Figure \[alpha12\] indicates the correlation between the synchrotron peak frequency and the radio to optical broadband spectral index, where the blue squares and the black open dots are data collected from @1998MNRAS.299..433F and @2003ApJ...588..128P, respectively. The red solid line is derived from Equation \[nupeak\], and the red dashed lines indicate the 3$\sigma$ confidence bands. The radio frequency and optical wavelength are taken at 5 GHz and 5100 [Å]{}, which are same as those in @1998MNRAS.299..433F and @2003ApJ...588..128P. We can see that even though the data are systemically higher than the theory around $\nu\sim10^{14}$ Hz, the trend of the data generally agrees with theory.
[^1]: We estimate the $p$-value for each subsample by omitting the $i$th object. And it is found that the $p$-value reaches maximum, $p=0.118$, when omitting the object J1504.4+1030.
[^2]: Note that relation $1/b_{sy}=A+B\log\nu_{p}$ is derived in AGN frame. While this relation is assumed to be valid in the observational frame, because the uncertainty caused by transformation from AGN to observational frames (i.e., $\nu_{\rm p}^{obs}=\nu_{\rm p}/(1+z)$) is smaller than the scatter of the correlation. Similar for following analysis.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'Let $G$ be a finite subgroup in ${\mathrm{SU(2)}}$, and $Q$ the corresponding affine Dynkin diagram. In this paper, we review the relation between the categories of $G$-equivariant sheaves on ${\mathbb{P}^1}$ and $\operatorname{Rep}Q_h$, where $h$ is an orientation of $Q$, constructing an explicit equivalence of corresponding derived categories.'
address: 'Department of Mathematics, SUNY at Stony Brook, Stony Brook, NY 11794, USA'
author:
- 'Alexander Kirillov, Jr.'
title: 'McKay correspondence and equivariant sheaves on ${\mathbb{P}^1}$'
---
Introduction {#introduction .unnumbered}
============
Let $G\subset {\mathrm{SU(2)}}$ be a finite subgroup. According to McKay correspondence, such a subgroup gives rise to a graph $Q$ which turns out to be an affine Dynkin diagram of ADE type. Let ${\mathfrak{g}}$ be the corresponding affine Lie algebra.
There are several approaches allowing one to construct ${\mathfrak{g}}$ from $G$:
1. There is a geometric construction, due to Nakajima and Lusztig, of ${\mathfrak{g}}$ and its representations in terms of the quiver varieties associated to graph $Q$. These varieties are closely related to the moduli spaces of instantons on the resolution of singularities $\widetilde{{\mathbb{C}}^2/G}$.
2. There is an algebraic construction, due to Ringel [@ringel2], which allows one to get the universal enveloping algebra $U{\mathfrak{n}}_+$ of the positive part of ${\mathfrak{g}}$ as the Hall algebra of the category $\operatorname{Rep}Q_h$, where $h$ is an orientation of $Q$ and $Q_h$ is the corresponding quiver. It was shown by Peng and Xiao [@peng-xiao] that replacing $\operatorname{Rep}Q_h$ by the quotient $R=D^b(\operatorname{Rep}Q_h)/T^2$ of the corresponding derived category, we can get a description of all of ${\mathfrak{g}}$. Different choices of orientation give rise to equivalent derived categories $R$, with equivalences given by Bernstein-Gelfand-Ponomarev reflection functors; in terms of ${\mathfrak{g}}$, these functors correspond to the action of the braid group of the corresponding Weyl group.
Recently, a third approach was suggested by Ocneanu [@ocneanu] (unpublished), in a closely related setting of a subgroup in quantum ${\mathrm{SU(2)}}$, for $q$ being a root of unity. His approach is based on studying essential paths in ${{\widehat{Q}}}=Q\times {\mathbb{Z}}/h{\mathbb{Z}}$, where $h$ is the order of the root of unity. This approach is purely combinatorial: all constructions are done using this finite graph and vector spaces of essential paths between points in this graph, without involving any categories at all.
This paper grew out of the author’s attempt to understand Ocneanu’s construction and in particular, find the appropriate categorical interpretation of his combinatorial constructions; however, for simplicity we do it for subgroups in classical ${\mathrm{SU(2)}}$, leaving the analysis of the subgroups in quantum ${\mathrm{SU(2)}}$ for future papers. We show that Ocneanu’s essential paths in ${{\widehat{Q}}}$ have a natural interpretation in terms of the category ${{Coh_G({\mathbb{P}^1})}}$ of $G$–equivariant ${\mathcal{O}}$-modules on ${\mathbb{P}^1}$ (or, rather, its “even part” ${\mathcal{C}}={{Coh_G({\mathbb{P}^1})}}_0$, for certain natural ${\mathbb{Z}}_2$ grading on ${{Coh_G({\mathbb{P}^1})}}$). This also provides a relation with Ringel–Lusztig construction: for (almost) any choice of orientation $h$ of $Q$, we construct an equivalence of triangulated categories $$R{\Phi}_h\colon D^b( {{Coh_G({\mathbb{P}^1})}}_0)\simeq D^b(\operatorname{Rep}Q_h)$$ These equivalences agree with the equivalences of $D^b(\operatorname{Rep}Q_h)$ for different choices of $h$ given by reflection functors. As a corollary, we see that the Grothendieck group $L=K({\mathcal{C}})$ is an affine root lattice, and the set $\Delta$ of classes of indecomposable modules is an affine root system.
This construction of the affine root system via equivariant sheaves has a number of remarkable properties, namely:
1. This does not require a choice of orientation of $Q$ (unlike the category $D^b(\operatorname{Rep}Q_h)$, where we first choose an orientation and then prove that the resulting derived category is independent of orientation).
2. The indecomposable objects in the category ${{Coh_G({\mathbb{P}^1})}}$ can be explicitly described. Namely, they are the sheaves ${\mathcal{O}}(n){\otimes}X_i$, where $X_i$ are irreducible representations of $G$ (these sheaves and their translations correspond to real roots of ${\mathfrak{g}}$) and torsion sheaves, whose support is a $G$–orbit in ${\mathbb{P}^1}$ (in particular, torsion sheaves whose support is an orbit of a generic point correspond to imaginary roots of ${\mathfrak{g}}$).
3. This construction of the affine root system does not give a natural polarization into negative and positive roots. Instead, it gives a canonical Coxeter element in the corresponding affine Weyl group, which is given by $C[{\mathcal{F}}]=[{\mathcal{F}}{\otimes}{\mathcal{O}}(-2)]$ (this also corresponds to the Auslander–Reiten functor $\tau$).
4. This construction gives a bijection of the vertices of the affine Dynkin diagram $Q$ and (some of) the $C$-orbits in $\Delta$ (as opposed to the quiver construction, where vertices of $Q$ are in bijection with the simple positive roots).
For $G=\{1\}$ (which is essentially equivalent to $G=\{\pm 1\}$), these results were first obtained in the paper [@baumann-kassel], where it was shown that the corresponding Hall algebra contains the subalgebra isomorphic to $U\widehat{{\mathfrak{sl}_2}}$. This paper in turn was inspired by an earlier paper of Kapranov [@kapranov].
It should be noted that many of the results obtained here have already been proved in other ways. Most importantly, it had been proved by Lenzing [@geigle-lenzing; @lenzing] that the derived category of equivariant sheaves on ${\mathbb{P}^1}$ is equivalent to the derived category of representation of the corresponding quiver; this result has been used by Schiffmann [@schiffmann; @schiffmann2] for construction of a subalgebra in the corresponding affine Lie algebra via Hall algebra of the category of equivariant sheaves. However, the construction of equivalence in [@lenzing] is different than the one suggested here. The primary difference is that in Lenzing’s construction, the Dynkin diagram $Q$ is constructed as the star diagram, with lengths of branches determined by the branching points of the cover ${\mathbb{P}^1}\to X={\mathbb{P}^1}/G$, and he uses a standard orientation of this diagram. In the construction presented here, the diagram is $Q$ is defined in a more standard way, using the set $I$ of irreducible representations of $G$; more importantly, we construct not a single equivalence but a collection of equivalences, one for each admissible orientation. In Lenzing’s construction, torsion sheaves naturally play a major role; in our construction, we concentrate on the study of locally free sheaves.
Lenzing’s results apply not only to ${\mathbb{P}^1}/G$ but to a much larger class of “non-commutative projective curves”. However, the downside of this is that the language he uses is rather technical, making his papers somewhat hard for non-experts. For this reason, we had chosen to give independent proofs of some of the results, thus saving the reader the necessity of learning the language of non-commutative curves. Of course, we tried to clearly mark the results which had already been known.
[**Acknowledgments.**]{} The author would like to thank P. Etingof, V. Ostrik, and O. Schiffmann for fruitful discussions. Special thanks to A. Ocneanu, whose talk inspired this paper.
Basic setup {#s:basic}
===========
Throughout the paper, we work over the base field ${\mathbb{C}}$ of complex numbers. $G$ is a finite subgroup in ${\mathrm{SU(2)}}$; for simplicity, we assume that $\pm I\in G$ and denote ${{\bar G}}=G/\{\pm I\}$ (this excludes $G={\mathbb{Z}}_n$, $n$ odd; this case can also be included, but some of the constructions of this paper will require minor changes). We denote by $V$ the standard 2-dimensional space, considered as a tautological representation of ${\mathrm{SU(2)}}$ (and thus of $G$) and $$V_k=S^k V$$ is the $k+1$–dimensional irreducible representation of ${\mathrm{SU(2)}}$ (and thus a representation, not necessarily irreducible, of $G$).
We denote by $\operatorname{Rep}G$ the category of finite-dimensional representations of $G$ and by $I=\operatorname{Irr}G$ the set of isomorphism classes of simple representations; for $i\in I$, we denote by $X_i$ the corresponding representation of $G$. Since $G\supset \{\pm I\}$, the category $\operatorname{Rep}G$ is naturally ${\mathbb{Z}}_2$–graded: $$\label{e:even-odd}
\operatorname{Rep}G=\operatorname{Rep}_0 G\oplus \operatorname{Rep}_1 G,\quad
\operatorname{Rep}_p G=\{V\in \operatorname{Rep}G{\; | \;}(-I)|_V=(-1)^p\operatorname{id}\}$$ For homogeneous object $X$, we define its “parity” $p(X)\in {\mathbb{Z}}_2$ by $$\label{e:parity}
p(X)=p\text{ if } X\in \operatorname{Rep}_p G$$ in particular, $p(V)=1$. We will also define, for $i\in I$, its parity $p(i)=p(X_i)$. This gives a decomposition $$\label{e:decomposition_I}
I=I_0 \sqcup I_1.$$
We define the graph $Q$ with the set of vertices $V(Q)=I$ and for every two vertices $i,j$, the number of edges connecting them is defined by $$n(i,j)=\dim \operatorname{Hom}_G(X_i,X_j{\otimes}V)$$
Note that decomposition shows that this graph is bipartite: $V(Q)=V_0(Q)\sqcup V_1(Q)$, and all edges connect vertices of different parities.
It is well-known that one can construct an isomorphism $$\{\text{Paths of length $l$ in $Q$ connecting $i,j$}\}
=\operatorname{Hom}_G(X_i, V^{{\otimes}l}{\otimes}X_j)$$ and that $\operatorname{Hom}_G(X_i, V_l {\otimes}X_j)$ can be described as the space of “essential paths” in $Q$, which is naturally a direct summand in the space of all paths (see [@coq-garcia]). The algebra of essential paths is also known as the preprojective algebra of $Q$.
By McKay correspondence, $Q$ must be an affine Dynkin diagram. We denote by $\Delta(Q)$ the corresponding affine root system; it has a basis of simple roots ${\alpha}_i, i\in I$. We denote $$L(Q)=\bigoplus_{i\in I} {\mathbb{Z}}{\alpha}_i ={\mathbb{Z}}^I$$ the corresponding root lattice. It has a natural bilinear form given by $({\alpha}_i,{\alpha}_i)=2$ and $({\alpha}_i,{\alpha}_j)=-n(i,j)$; as is well-known, this form is positive semidefinite. The kernel of this form is ${\mathbb{Z}}{\delta}$, where ${\delta}$ is the imaginary root of $\Delta(Q)$.
We denote by $s_i\colon L(Q)\to L(Q)$ the reflection around root ${\alpha}_i$.
Finally, let $K(G)$ be the Grothendieck group of the category $\operatorname{Rep}G$. It is freely generated by classes $[X_i], i\in I$; thus, we have a natural isomorphism $$\label{e:K(G)}
\begin{aligned}
K(G)&{\xrightarrow{\sim}}L(Q)\\
[X_i]&\mapsto {\alpha}_i
\end{aligned}$$
Quiver $Q_h$
============
We will consider a special class of orientations of $Q$.
\[d:height\_function\] A [*height function*]{} $h$ is a map $I\to {\mathbb{Z}}$ such that $h(i)-h(j)=\pm 1$ if $i,j$ are connected by an edge in $Q$, and $h(i)\equiv p(i) \pmod 2$.
Every height function gives rise to orientation of edges of $Q$: if $h(j)=h(i)-1$ then all edges connecting $i$ and $j$ are directed towards $j$: $$i\longrightarrow j \quad\text{ if } h(j)=h(i)-1$$
We will denote by $Q_h$ the quiver given by this orientation. We will write $i\to j$ if there exists an edge whose tail is $i$ and head is $j$. The notation $\sum_{j\colon j\to i}$ will mean the sum over all vertices $j$ connected with $i$ by an edge $j\to i$; if there are multiple edges, the corresponding vertex $j$ will be taken more than once.
Orientations obtained in this way will be called [*admissible*]{} (note: our use of this word is slightly different from the use in other sources). It is easy to check that if $Q$ has no loops, then any orientation of $Q$ is admissible. For type $A$, an orientation is admissible if the total number of clockwise arrows is equal to the number of counterclockwise ones (which again rules out type $\widehat{A}_n$, $n$ even, corresponding to $G={\mathbb{Z}}_{n+1}$). It is also obvious that $Q_h$ has no oriented loops, and that adding a constant to $h$ gives the same orientation.
Given a height function $h$, we will draw $Q$ in the plane so that $h$ is the $y$–coordinate; then all edges of $Q_h$ are directed down. [Figure [\[f:Qh\]]{}]{} shows an example of a height function for quiver of type $D$.
\[d:reflection\_functors1\] Let $h$ be a height function on $Q$, and $i\in I$ be a sink in $Q_h$: there are no edges of the form $i\to j$ (in terms of $h$, it is equivalent to saying that $h$ has a local minimum at $i$). We define new height function $$s_i^+h (j)=\begin{cases}
h(j)+2, & j=i\\
h(j), & j\ne{{\mathrm{i}}}\end{cases}$$ Similarly, if $i$ is a source, i.e., there are no vertices of the form $j\to i$ (equivalently, $h$ has a local maximum at $i$), then we define $$s_i^-h (j)=\begin{cases}
h(j)-2, & j=i\\
h(j), & j\ne{{\mathrm{i}}}\end{cases}$$
One easily sees that $s_i^+h$, $s_i^-h$ are again height functions; the quiver $Q_{s_i^\pm h}$ is obtained from $Q_h$ by reversing orientation of all edges adjacent to $i$. We will refer to $s_i^\pm$ as (elementary) orientation reversal operations.
The following lemma is known; however, for the benefit of the reader we included the proof.
\[l:reflection\_functors1\] Any two height functions $h, h'$ can be obtained one from another by a sequence of orientation reversal operations $s_i^\pm$.
Define the “distance” between two height functions by\
$d(h,h')=\sum_I |h(i)-h'(i)|\in {\mathbb{Z}}_+$. We will show that if $d(h,h')>0$, then one can find $s_i^\pm$ such that $s_i^\pm$ can be applied to $h$, and $d(s_i^\pm h, h')<d(h, h')$; from this the theorem clearly follows.
Let $I_+=\{i{\; | \;}h(i)>h'(i)\}$. One easily sees that if $i\in I_+$, and $j\to i$ in $Q_h$, then $j\in I_+$. Thus, if $I_+$ is non-empty, it must contain at least one source $i$ for $Q_h$. But then $d(s_i^- h,
h')=d(h, h')-2$.
Similarly, let $I_-=\{i{\; | \;}h(i)<h'(i)\}$. If $I_-$ is non-empty, similar argument shows it must contain at least one sink $i$ for $Q_h$. But then $d(s_i^+ h,h')=d(h, h')-2$.
Representations of quivers
==========================
For readers convenience, we recall here the known results about the relation between representations of quiver $Q_h$ and root system $\Delta(Q)$ (see, e.g., [@drab-ringel], [@kraft-riedtmann]).
Let $h$ be a height function on $Q$ and $Q_h$ the corresponding quiver. Consider the category $\operatorname{Rep}Q_h$ of finite-dimensional representations of $Q_h$; similarly, let ${\mathcal{D}}^b(Q_h)$ be the bounded derived category of $\operatorname{Rep}Q_h$. We denote by $K(Q_h)$ the Grothendieck group of $\operatorname{Rep}Q_h$ which can also be described as the Grothendieck group of ${\mathcal{D}}^b(Q_h)$. It is well-known that the category $\operatorname{Rep}Q_h$ is a hereditary abelian category: $$\operatorname{Ext}^i(X,Y)=0\text{ for all }i>1.$$
For a representation $M=(M_i)_{i\in I}$ of $Q_h$, we define its dimension $\dim X\in L(Q)$ by $\dim M=\sum (\dim M_i){\alpha}_i$ (recall that $L(Q)={\mathbb{Z}}[I]$ is the root lattice of the root system $\Delta(Q)$, see [Section [\[s:basic\]]{}]{}).
The following theorem summarizes some of the known results about representations of quivers and root system $\Delta(Q)$.
\[t:reps\_of\_quivers\]
1. The map $[X]\mapsto \dim X$ gives an isomorphism $K(Q_h){\xrightarrow{\sim}}L(Q)$. Under this isomorphism, the bilinear form on $L(Q)$ is identified with the following bilinear form on $K(Q_h)$: $$(x,y)={\langle}x,y{\rangle}+{\langle}y,x{\rangle}$$ where by definition $${\langle}[X],[Y]{\rangle}= \dim \operatorname{RHom}(X,Y)=\dim \operatorname{Hom}(X,Y) -\dim \operatorname{Ext}^1(X,Y).$$
2. The set of dimensions of indecomposable modules is exactly the set $\Delta_+(Q)$ of positive roots in $\Delta(Q)$. For real roots ${\alpha}$, there is exactly one up to isomorphism indecomposable module $M_{\alpha}$ of dimension ${\alpha}$; for imaginary root ${\alpha}$, there are infinitely many pairwise non-isomorphic modules of dimension ${\alpha}$.
There is also an explicit description of indecomposables in ${\mathcal{D}}^b(Q_h)$ (see [@happel Lemma I.5.2]).
\[t:indecompos\_derived\] Indecomposable objects in ${\mathcal{D}}^b(Q_h)$ are of the form $M[n]$, where $M$ is an indecomposable object in $\operatorname{Rep}Q_h$, $n\in {\mathbb{Z}}$.
We will also need reflection functors of Bernstein–Gelfand–Ponomarev. Recall that if $i$ is a sink in $Q_h$, then one has a natural functor $$\label{e:reflection_2}
S_i^+\colon \operatorname{Rep}(Q_h)\to \operatorname{Rep}(Q_{s_i^+h})$$ similarly, if $i$ is a source, one has a natural functor $$\label{e:reflection_3}
S_i^-\colon \operatorname{Rep}(Q_h)\to \operatorname{Rep}(Q_{s_i^-h})$$ (see definition in [@drab-ringel], [@kraft-riedtmann]).
The following result is known and easy to prove, so we skip the proofs.
\[t:coxeter2\]
1. Functor $S_i+$ is left exact and $S_i^-$ is right exact.
We will denote by $RS_i^+, LS_i^-\colon {\mathcal{D}}^b(Q_h)\to
{\mathcal{D}}^b(Q_{s_i^\pm h})$ the corresponding derived functors.
2. The functors $RS_i^+$, $LS_i^-$ are equivalences of categories ${\mathcal{D}}^b(Q_h)\to{\mathcal{D}}^b(Q_{s_i^\pm h})$, which induce the usual reflections $s_i$ on the Grothendieck group: $$\dim RS_i^+ (X)=s_i(\dim X), \quad \dim LS_i^- (X)=s_i(\dim X)$$
3. If $i,j$ are not neighbors in $Q$, then $RS_i^+,
RS_j^+$ commute (i.e., compositions in different orders are isomorphic) and similarly for $LS_i^-$.
In particular, for a given height function $h$ let $s^+_{i_1}\dots
s^+_{i_r}$ be a sequence of elementary orientation reversal operations such that $$s_{i_1}^+\dots s_{i_r}^+ (h) =h+2$$ One easily sees that this condition is equivalent to requiring that every index $i\in I$ appears in the sequence $\{i_1,\dots, i_r\}$ exactly once; it follows from [Lemma [\[l:reflection\_functors1\]]{}]{} that for every height function $h$, such sequences of orientation reversal operations exist. For such a sequence, the corresponding element of the Weyl group $$\label{e:coxeter}
c^+_h=s_{i_1}\dots s_{i_r}$$ is called the [*Coxeter element*]{}, and the corresponding composition of reflection functors $$\label{e:C+}
RC^+_h=RS_{i_1}^+\dots RS_{i_r}^+\colon {\mathcal{D}}^b(Q_h)\to{\mathcal{D}}^b(Q_{h+2})$$ will be called the [*Coxeter functor*]{}. Note that since $Q_h\simeq
Q_{h+2}$ as a quiver, we can consider$RC_h^+$ as an autoequivalence of ${\mathcal{D}}^b(Q_h)$.
It is easy to show (see [@drab-ringel], [@shi]) that the Coxeter element $c^+_h$ only depends on $h$ and not on the choice of the sequence $i_1,\dots,i_r$; moreover, the proof of this only uses the fact that $s_i, s_j$ commute if $i,j$ are not connected in $Q$ and does not use the braid relations. Thus, by [Theorem [\[t:coxeter2\]]{}]{}, this implies that up to an isomorphism, $RC^+_h$ also depends only on $h$; this justifies the notation $RC_h^+$.
Similarly, we can define functors $$\label{e:coxeter2}
LC^-_h\colon {\mathcal{D}}^b(Q_h)\to{\mathcal{D}}^b(Q_{h-2})\simeq{\mathcal{D}}^b(Q_h)$$ using sequences of orientation reversals $s_{i_1}^-\dots s_{i_r}^- h
=h-2$; the corresponding element of the Weyl group will be denoted by $c_h^-$. As before, it can be shown that $LC_h^-$, $c_h^-$ only depend on $h$.
For readers familiar with the theory of Auslander–Reiten sequences (see [@auslander-reiten], [@happel]), we add that the category $\operatorname{Rep}Q_h$ has Auslander–Reiten sequences, and the Auslander–Reiten functor $\tau$ is given by $\tau=C_h^-$.
Equivariant sheaves
===================
In this section, we introduce the main object of this paper, the category of equivariant sheaves on ${\mathbb{P}^1}$. Most of the results of this section are well-known and given here only for the convenience of references. [Lemma [\[l:frobenius\]]{}]{} does not seem to be easily available in the literature, but is very easy to prove.
Let $V^*$ be the dual of the tautological representation $V$ of ${\mathrm{SU(2)}}$. Since $G$ is a finite subgroup in ${\mathrm{SU(2)}}$, it naturally acts on ${\mathbb{P}^1}=\mathbb{P}(V^*)$, and the structure sheaf ${\mathcal{O}}$ has a standard ${\mathrm{SU(2)}}$- (and thus $G$-) equivariant structure. Moreover, all twisted sheaves ${\mathcal{O}}(n)$ also have a standard equivariant structure, so that the space of global sections ${\Gamma}({\mathcal{O}}(n))$ is a representation of $G$: $$\label{e:H0}
{\Gamma}({\mathcal{O}}(n))=\begin{cases}
S^nV=V_n, &n\ge 0\\
0, &n<0
\end{cases}$$ Similarly, the higher homology spaces are naturally representations of $G$: it is well-known that $H^i({\mathbb{P}^1}, {\mathcal{O}}(n))=0$ for $i>1$, and $$\label{e:H1}
H^1({\mathbb{P}^1},{\mathcal{O}}(n))=\begin{cases}
S^{-n-2}V^*=V^*_{-n-2}, &n\le -2\\
0, &n\ge -1
\end{cases}$$
Let ${{Qcoh_G({\mathbb{P}^1})}}$, ${{Coh_G({\mathbb{P}^1})}}$ be the categories of $G$–equivariant quasi-coherent (respectively, coherent) ${\mathcal{O}}$–modules on ${\mathbb{P}^1}$ (see, e.g., [@bkr Section 4] for definitions). Note that we are considering isomorphisms ${\lambda}_g\colon {\mathcal{F}}\to g^*{\mathcal{F}}$ as part of the structure of the $G$–equivariant sheaf. For brevity, we will denote morphisms and $\operatorname{Ext}$ groups in ${{Qcoh_G({\mathbb{P}^1})}}$ by ${\operatorname{Hom}_G}(X,Y)$, ${\operatorname{Ext}_G}(X,Y)$. For an equivariant sheaf ${\mathcal{F}}$ we will denote $${\mathcal{F}}(n)={\mathcal{O}}(n){\otimes}_{\mathcal{O}}{\mathcal{F}}$$ with the obvious equivariant structure. Similarly, for a finite-dimensional representation $X$ of $G$, we denote $$X(n)={\mathcal{O}}(n){\otimes}_{\mathbb{C}}X.$$
We list here some of the basic properties of equivariant sheaves; proofs can be found in [@bkr Section 4].
\[t:Gcoh\]
1. ${{Qcoh_G({\mathbb{P}^1})}}$ is an abelian category, and a sequence $0\to
{\mathcal{F}}_1\to {\mathcal{F}}_2\to {\mathcal{F}}_3\to 0$ is exact in ${{Qcoh_G({\mathbb{P}^1})}}$ iff it is exact in ${Qcoh({\mathbb{P}^1})}$.
2. For any ${\mathcal{F}},{\mathcal{G}}\in {{Qcoh_G({\mathbb{P}^1})}}$, the space $\operatorname{Hom}_{\mathcal{O}}({\mathcal{F}},{\mathcal{G}})$ is a representation of $G$, and ${\operatorname{Hom}_G}({\mathcal{F}},{\mathcal{G}})=(\operatorname{Hom}_{\mathcal{O}}({\mathcal{F}},{\mathcal{G}}))^G$. Similarly,\
${\operatorname{Ext}_G}^i({\mathcal{F}},{\mathcal{G}})=(\operatorname{Ext}^i_{\mathcal{O}}({\mathcal{F}},{\mathcal{G}}))^G$; in particular, ${\operatorname{Ext}_G}^i({\mathcal{F}}, {\mathcal{G}})=0$ for $i>1$.
3. For any ${\mathcal{F}},{\mathcal{G}}\in {{Coh_G({\mathbb{P}^1})}}$, the spaces ${\operatorname{Hom}_G}({\mathcal{F}},{\mathcal{G}})$, ${\operatorname{Ext}_G}^1({\mathcal{F}},{\mathcal{G}})$ are finite-dimensional.
4. For any ${\mathcal{F}},{\mathcal{G}}\in {{Coh_G({\mathbb{P}^1})}}$, one has $$\begin{aligned}
{\operatorname{Hom}_G}({\mathcal{F}}, {\mathcal{G}}(n))={\operatorname{Hom}_G}({\mathcal{F}}(-n),{\mathcal{G}})=0\quad \text{for }n\ll 0,\\
{\operatorname{Ext}_G}^1({\mathcal{F}}, {\mathcal{G}}(n))={\operatorname{Hom}_G}({\mathcal{F}}(-n),{\mathcal{G}})=0\quad \text{for }n\gg 0,
\end{aligned}$$
As an immediate corollary of this, we see that the category ${{Coh_G({\mathbb{P}^1})}}$ has the Krull–Schmidt property: every object ${\mathcal{F}}\in {{Coh_G({\mathbb{P}^1})}}$ can be written as a direct sum of indecomposable modules, and the multiplicities do not depend on the choice of such decomposition. It is also a hereditary category (recall that a category is called hereditary if $\operatorname{Ext}^2(A,B)=0$ for any objects $A,B$; in particular, this implies that a quotient of an injective object is injective, as can be easily seen from the long exact sequence of $\operatorname{Ext}$ groups).
We say that ${\mathcal{F}}\in{{Coh_G({\mathbb{P}^1})}}$ is locally free if it is locally free as an ${\mathcal{O}}$-module.
\[t:locally\_free\]
1. Every locally free ${\mathcal{F}}\in{{Coh_G({\mathbb{P}^1})}}$ is isomorphic to direct sum of sheaves of the form $$X_i(n)={\mathcal{O}}(n){\otimes}X_i, \quad X_i \text{ -- irreducible representation of
$G$}$$
2. If ${\mathcal{F}}\in{{Coh_G({\mathbb{P}^1})}}$ is locally free, then the functor ${\otimes}{\mathcal{F}}\colon
{{Coh_G({\mathbb{P}^1})}}\to {{Coh_G({\mathbb{P}^1})}}$ is exact.
3. Every coherent $G$-equivariant sheaf has a resolution consisting of locally free sheaves.
4. Serre Duality For any two locally free sheaves ${\mathcal{F}}, {\mathcal{G}}$ we have isomorphisms $${\operatorname{Ext}_G}^1({\mathcal{F}}, {\mathcal{G}}(-2))=\operatorname{Ext}^1({\mathcal{F}}(2),{\mathcal{G}})={\operatorname{Hom}_G}({\mathcal{G}}, {\mathcal{F}})^*$$
It immediately follows from computation of homology of ${\mathcal{O}}(n)$ as coherent sheaves that $$\label{e:hom1}
{\operatorname{Hom}_G}( X_i(n), X_j(k))
=\begin{cases}
\operatorname{Hom}_G( X_i, V_{k-n}{\otimes}X_j), &k\ge n\\
0, & k<n
\end{cases}$$ $$\label{e:hom2}
{\operatorname{Ext}_G}^1 (X_i(n), X_j(k))
=\begin{cases}
\operatorname{Hom}_G(X_i, V^*_{n-k-2}{\otimes}X_j), &k\le n-2\\
0, & k\ge n-1
\end{cases}$$
Finally, we note that the action of $(-I)\in {\mathrm{SU(2)}}$ gives a decomposition of ${{Coh_G({\mathbb{P}^1})}}$ into even and odd part. Namely, since $-I$ acts trivially on ${\mathbb{P}^1}$, structure of $G$-equivariant sheaf gives an isomorphism ${\lambda}_{-I}\colon {\mathcal{F}}\to (-I)^*{\mathcal{F}}={\mathcal{F}}$. We define $${{Coh_G({\mathbb{P}^1})}}_p=\{{\mathcal{F}}\in{{Coh_G({\mathbb{P}^1})}}{\; | \;}{\lambda}_{-I}=(-1)^p\},
\quad p\in {\mathbb{Z}}_2$$
From now on, the main object of our study will be the category $$\label{e:C}
{\mathcal{C}}={{Coh_G({\mathbb{P}^1})}}_0.$$ In particular, a locally free sheaf $X_i(n)\in
{\mathcal{C}}$ iff $n+p(X_i)\equiv 0 \mod 2$, where $p(X_i)$ is the parity defined by .
One easily sees that ${\mathcal{C}}$ is a full subcategory in ${{Coh_G({\mathbb{P}^1})}}$ closed under extensions. Equivalently, it can be described as follows.
Let ${{\bar G}}=G/\{\pm I\}$.Then ${\mathcal{C}}$ is naturally equivalent to the category ${{Coh_{{{\bar G}}}({\mathbb{P}^1})}}$ of ${{\bar G}}$-equivariant coherent sheaves on ${\mathbb{P}^1}$.
We will denote the bounded derived category of ${\mathcal{C}}$ by ${\mathcal{D}}^b({\mathcal{C}})$.
For future use, we will also need an analogue of induction functor. Recall that for any finite subgroup $H\subset G$, we have an induction functor $\operatorname{Ind}_H^G\colon \operatorname{Rep}H\to \operatorname{Rep}G$. In particular, for $H=\{1\}$ and the trivial representation ${\mathbb{C}}$ it gives the regular representation of $G$: $$\label{e:regular_rep}
R=\operatorname{Ind}_{\{1\} }^G{\mathbb{C}}\simeq \bigoplus_{i\in I}d_i X_i,
\qquad d_i=\dim X_i$$ As any representation of $G$, $R$ can be decomposed into even and odd part (cf. ): $R=R_0\oplus R_1$, where $$\label{e:R_p}
R_p=\bigoplus_{i\in I_p}d_iX_i$$
It is easy to check that $R_0$ is exactly the regular representation of ${{\bar G}}$.
Similarly, we have an induction functor from the category of $H$-equivariant sheaves to $G$–equivariant sheaves; in particular, for $H=\{1\}$, we get a functor ${Coh({\mathbb{P}^1})}\to{{Coh_G({\mathbb{P}^1})}}$. However, it will be more convenient to consider the functor $$\label{e:ind}
\begin{aligned}
\operatorname{Ind}\colon {Coh({\mathbb{P}^1})}&\to{\mathcal{C}}={{Coh_{{{\bar G}}}({\mathbb{P}^1})}}\\
{\mathcal{F}}&\mapsto \bigoplus_{g\in{{\bar G}}}g^*{\mathcal{F}}\end{aligned}$$ The following lemma lists some of the properties of this functor; the proof is straightforward and left to the reader.
\[l:frobenius\] Let $\operatorname{Ind}\colon {Coh({\mathbb{P}^1})}\to{\mathcal{C}}$ be defined by . Then for even $n$, $\operatorname{Ind}{\mathcal{O}}(n)$ is naturally isomorphic as an equivariant sheaf to $R_0{\otimes}{\mathcal{O}}(n)$; for odd $n$, $\operatorname{Ind}{\mathcal{O}}(n)$ is naturally isomorphic as an equivariant sheaf to $R_1{\otimes}{\mathcal{O}}(n)$.
Auslander–Reiten relations
==========================
The following result will play a key role in the study of the category ${{Coh_G({\mathbb{P}^1})}}$.
\[t:auslander\_reiten\] For any $n\in {\mathbb{Z}}$, $i\in I$, there is short exact sequence in ${{Coh_G({\mathbb{P}^1})}}$: $$\label{e:aus-reiten1}
0\to X_i(n)\to \sum_j X_j(n+1)\to X_i(n+2)\to 0$$ where the sum is over all neighbors $j$ of $i$ in $Q$.
We will call sequences of the form .
Notice first that we have a short exact sequence of ${\mathcal{O}}$-modules: $$0\to {\mathcal{O}}\to {\mathcal{O}}(1){\otimes}V\to {\mathcal{O}}(2)\to 0$$ Let us tensor it with $X_i(n)$. Since tensoring with a locally free sheaf is an exact functor ([Theorem [\[t:locally\_free\]]{}]{}), this gives short exact sequence $$\label{e:aus-reiten2}
0\to X_i(n)\to (V{\otimes}X_i)(n+1)\to X_i(n+2)\to 0$$ Since $V{\otimes}X_i=\sum_{j} X_j$, we get the statement of the theorem.
For readers familiar with the general theory of Auslander–Reiten (AR) sequences (see [@auslander-reiten] for the overview of the theory), we point out that our use of this name is justified: it can be shown, using Serre duality that these sequences do satisfy the usual definition of AR sequences (see [@reiten-bergh]). This, in particular, shows that the Auslander–Reiten functor $\tau$ for locally free equivariant sheaves is given by $$\tau({\mathcal{F}})={\mathcal{F}}(-2).$$ However, we are not going to use the general theory of AR sequences in this paper.
For any $n\in {\mathbb{Z}}, i\in I$ we have the following relations in the Grothendieck group $K({{Coh_G({\mathbb{P}^1})}})$ $$\label{e:aus-reiten3}
[X_i(n)]-\sum_{j}[X_j(n+1)]+[X_i(n+2)]=0$$ where the sum is over all neighbors $j$ of $i$ in $Q$.
Later we will study the Grothendieck group $K({{Coh_G({\mathbb{P}^1})}})$ in more detail, in particular showing that relations is the full set of relations among classes $[X_i(n)]$ (see [Corollary [\[c:generators\_of\_K(C)\]]{}]{}).
Indecomposable objects in ${{Coh_G({\mathbb{P}^1})}}$
=====================================================
In this section, we describe the indecomposable sheaves in ${{Coh_G({\mathbb{P}^1})}}$. Again, these results are not new; they follow from results of [@lenzing], [@schiffmann] who considers more general setting of “non-commutative projective curves”. So this section is included just for the reader’s convenience.
We start by describing torsion sheaves.
For every point $x\in {\mathbb{P}^1}$, $n\in {\mathbb{Z}}_+$, denote ${\mathcal{O}}_{n[x]}={\mathcal{O}}/m_x^n$, where $m_x$ is the ideal of functions vanishing at $x$. This sheaf is supported at point $x$; choosing a local coordinate $z$ at $x$, we can identify the stalk of this sheaf at $x$ with ${\mathbb{C}}[z]/z^n{\mathbb{C}}[z]$. It is well known that sheaves ${\mathcal{O}}_{n[x]}$ are indecomposable, and that every coherent ${\mathcal{O}}$-module is isomorphic to a direct sum of a locally free sheaf and sheaves of the form ${\mathcal{O}}_{n[x]}$.
Assume now that $x\in {\mathbb{P}^1}$ is such that $\operatorname{Stab}_G(x)=\{\pm I\}$ and thus $\operatorname{Stab}_{{\bar G}}x=\{1\}$ (recall that ${{\bar G}}=G/\{\pm I\}$). Such points will be called [*generic*]{}. Define $$\label{e:torsion_sheaf}
{\mathcal{O}}_{n[Gx]}=\operatorname{Ind}{\mathcal{O}}_{n[x]}=\bigoplus_{g\in
{{\bar G}}}{\mathcal{O}}_{n[gx]}$$ where the functor $\operatorname{Ind}$ is defined by . This sheaf is supported on the orbit $Gx$ and has a canonical ${{\bar G}}$–equivariant structure which can be lifted to a $G$-equivariant structure. It is easy to see that the space of global sections ${\Gamma}({\mathcal{O}}_{n[Gx]})$ is isomorphic to $n$ copies of the regular representation of ${{\bar G}}$.
This construction can be generalized to non-generic points.
\[t:torsion\] Let $x\in {\mathbb{P}^1}$ be non-generic: $H=\operatorname{Stab}_{{\bar G}}x\ne \{1\}$. Then
1. $H$ is a cyclic group.
2. For suitable choice of the generator ${\sigma}$ of $H$, its action in the one-dimensional vector space ${\mathcal{O}}_{[x]}={\mathcal{O}}/m_x$ is given by ${\sigma}\mapsto e^{2\pi i /|H|}$.
3. Consider the completed local ring $\widehat{{\mathcal{O}}}_{{\mathbb{P}^1},x}$; choosing a local coordinate $z$ at $x$ identifies this algebra with ${\mathbb{C}}[[z]]$. It has a natural action of $H$. Then we have a natural equivalence of categories $$\begin{aligned}
&\{{{\bar G}}\text{-equivariant coherent sheaves supported on }Gx\}\\
&\quad \simeq
\{H\text{-equivariant finite-dimensional modules over }
\widehat{{\mathcal{O}}}_{{\mathbb{P}^1},x}\}
\end{aligned}$$ given by $${\mathcal{F}}\mapsto\text{stalk of ${\mathcal{F}}$ at $x$}$$
The proof of this theorem is straightforward and left to the reader.
Let $H=\operatorname{Stab}_{{\bar G}}x$, and $Y$ — a finite-dimensional representation of $H$. Then we denote by ${\mathcal{O}}_{n[Gx],Y}$ the ${{\bar G}}$-equivariant sheaf supported on the orbit $Gx$ and whose stalk at $x$ is isomorphic as an $H$-module to $Y\otimes
({\mathcal{O}}_{{\mathbb{P}^1}, x}/m_x^n)$.
It is easy to show that the space of global sections of ${\mathcal{O}}_{n[Gx],Y}$ is isomorphic to $$\operatorname{Ind}_H^G (Y\otimes ({\mathcal{O}}/m_x^n)).$$
\[t:indecomposable\]
1. The following is the full list of indecomposable objects in ${\mathcal{C}}$:
- Torsion sheaves ${\mathcal{O}}_{n[Gx]}$, $x\in {\mathbb{P}^1}$, $\operatorname{Stab}_{{{\bar G}}}x=\{1\}$, $n\in {\mathbb{Z}}_+$
- Torsion sheaves ${\mathcal{O}}_{n[Gx],Y}$, $x\in {\mathbb{P}^1}$, $H=\operatorname{Stab}_{{{\bar G}}}x\ne\{1\}$, $Y$– an irreducible representation of $H$.
- Free sheaves $X_i(n)$, $n\in {\mathbb{Z}}$, $i\in I$, $n+p(i)\equiv
0\mod $.
2. Indecomposable objects in ${\mathcal{D}}^b({\mathcal{C}})$ are of the form $M[n]$, $M$—an indecomposable object in ${\mathcal{C}}$, $n\in {\mathbb{Z}}$.
3. There are no injective and no projective indecomposable objects in ${\mathcal{C}}$.
Of course, sheaves ${\mathcal{O}}_{n[Gx]}$, $H=\operatorname{Stab}_{{{\bar G}}}x=\{1\}$, can be considered as special case of sheaves ${\mathcal{O}}_{n[Gx],Y}$. However, we choose to list cases $H=\{1\}$ and $H\ne\{1\}$ separately.
It is known that every coherent sheaf ${\mathcal{F}}$ has a maximal torsion subsheaf ${\mathcal{T}}$ so that ${\mathcal{F}}/{\mathcal{T}}$ is locally free, and short exact sequence $0\to{\mathcal{T}}\to {\mathcal{F}}\to {\mathcal{F}}/{\mathcal{T}}\to 0$ splits. If we additionally assume that ${\mathcal{F}}$ is a ${{\bar G}}$-equivariant sheaf, then ${\mathcal{T}}$ (and thus ${\mathcal{F}}/{\mathcal{T}}$) must also be ${{\bar G}}$-equivariant. It easily follows from [Theorem [\[t:Gcoh\]]{}]{} that then $0\to{\mathcal{T}}\to{\mathcal{F}}\to{\mathcal{F}}/{\mathcal{T}}\to 0$ splits in the category of $G$-equivariant sheaves; thus, every coherent $G$-equivariant sheaf is a direct sum of a free sheaf and a torsion sheaf.
By [Theorem [\[t:locally\_free\]]{}]{}, indecomposable free sheaves are of the form $X_i(n)$. For torsion sheaves, it is easy to see that an indecomposable torison sheaf must be supported on an orbit $Gx$. Now the classification of indecomposable torsion sheaves follows from [Theorem [\[t:torsion\]]{}]{}.
Classification of indecomposable objects in ${\mathcal{D}}^b$ follows from [@happel Lemma I.5.2]. His argument was given for the category of representations of a hereditary algebra, but actually works in any hereditary category: it only uses that a quotient of an injective object is injective, which easily follows from long exact sequence of $\operatorname{Ext}$ spaces and the fact that $\operatorname{Ext}^2({\mathcal{F}},{\mathcal{G}})=0$ for any ${\mathcal{F}},{\mathcal{G}}$.
Auslander–Reiten quiver ${{\widehat{Q}}}$
=========================================
We can now define a combinatorial structure which will play a crucial role in our paper. Let ${{\widehat{Q}}}$ be the set of isomorphism classes of locally free indecomposable objects in ${\mathcal{C}}$; by [Theorem [\[t:indecomposable\]]{}]{}, we can write $$\label{e:qhat}
{{\widehat{Q}}}=\{(i,n){\; | \;}n\in {\mathbb{Z}}, i\in I, n+p(i)\equiv 0 \mod 2\}$$ We will frequently use the notation $$X_q=X_i(n)={\mathcal{O}}(n){\otimes}X_i, \quad q=(i,n)\in {{\widehat{Q}}}.$$
We turn ${{\widehat{Q}}}$ into a quiver by defining, for $q=(i,n)$, $q'=(j,n+1)$, $$\begin{aligned}
&(\text{Number of edges }q\to q')=\dim \operatorname{Hom}_{\mathcal{C}}(X_q,X_{q'})\\
&\qquad =\dim \operatorname{Hom}_G(X_i, X_j{\otimes}V)=n(i,j)\end{aligned}$$ (recall that $n(i,j)$ is the number of edges between $i$ and $j$ in $Q$ and $V={\Gamma}({\mathbb{P}^1},{\mathcal{O}}(1))$ is the tautological representation of ${\mathrm{SU(2)}}$).
Note that the edges only connect vertices with $n$ differing by one, and all edges are directed “up” (i.e., so that $n$ increases). The figure below shows an example of the quiver ${{\widehat{Q}}}$ when $G$ is of type $\widehat{D_7}$.
Again, for users familiar with the Auslander–Reiten theory, we note that ${{\widehat{Q}}}$ is exactly the stable AR quiver of the category ${{Coh_G({\mathbb{P}^1})}}$. As was mentioned in the introduction, it is the picture of this quiver in Ocneanu’s work (who defined it purely combinatorially, without reference to the category of sheaves) that inspired the current paper.
The following easy lemma is left as an exercise to the reader.
\[l:qhat\_connected\] ${{\widehat{Q}}}$ is a connected quiver.
This is actually the reason for considering the even part ${\mathcal{C}}={{Coh_G({\mathbb{P}^1})}}_0$ rather than all of ${{Coh_G({\mathbb{P}^1})}}$: otherwise, the resulting quiver would not be connected.
Note that we have a natural pairing $$\operatorname{Hom}_G(X_i, X_j{\otimes}V){\otimes}\operatorname{Hom}_G(X_j, X_i{\otimes}V)\to {\mathbb{C}}$$ given by composition $$X_i{\xrightarrow}{{\varphi}}X_j{\otimes}V{\xrightarrow}{\psi{\otimes}1}
X_i{\otimes}V^{{\otimes}2}{\xrightarrow}{1{\otimes}ev}X_i$$ where $ev\colon V^{{\otimes}2}\to {\mathbb{C}}$ is a $G$-equivariant pairing (which is defined uniquely up to a constant). This gives rise to duality $$\label{e:pairing}
\operatorname{Hom}_{\mathcal{C}}(X_i(n), X_j(n+1))
=\operatorname{Hom}_{\mathcal{C}}(X_j(n+1), X_i(n+2))^*$$
As usual in quiver theory, we define path algebra of ${{\widehat{Q}}}$ by $$\label{e:path_algebra}
\begin{aligned}
&\operatorname{Path_{{{\widehat{Q}}}}}(q,q')=\text{Span(paths from $q$ to $q'$ in ${{\widehat{Q}}}$)},\\
&\operatorname{Path_{{{\widehat{Q}}}}}=\bigoplus_{q,q'\in {{\widehat{Q}}}}\operatorname{Path_{{{\widehat{Q}}}}}(q,q')
\end{aligned}$$ One easily sees that $\operatorname{Path_{{{\widehat{Q}}}}}( (i,k), (j,l))$ coincides with the space of paths in $Q$ of length $l-k$ between $j$ and $j$ (if $l-k\ge 0$; otherwise, $\operatorname{Path_{{{\widehat{Q}}}}}((i,k), (j,l))=0$ ).
We also define an analogue of preprojective algebra by $$\label{e:preproj_algebra}
\begin{aligned}
&\Pi_{{\widehat{Q}}}=\operatorname{Path_{{{\widehat{Q}}}}}/(\theta_q)\\
&\theta_q=\sum_{e\colon q\to q'} e_i e^i\colon q\to q(2)
\end{aligned}$$ where for $q=(i,n)$, we denote $q(2)=(i,n+2)$, the sum is over all edges originating at $q$, and $e_i, e^i$ are dual bases in $\operatorname{Hom}_{\mathcal{C}}(X_q, X_{q'})$ and $\operatorname{Hom}_{\mathcal{C}}(X_{q'}, X_{q(2)})$ with respect to the pairing . (This algebra is isomorphic to Ocneanu’s algebra of essential paths, or, in the terminology of AR quivers, to the mesh algebra of ${{\widehat{Q}}}$ considered as a polarized translation quiver.)
\[t:homs=paths\] Let $q,q'\in {{\widehat{Q}}}$. Then $$\operatorname{Hom}_{\mathcal{C}}(X_q,X_{q'})=\Pi_{{\widehat{Q}}}(q,q')$$
Let $\Pi_Q$ be the preprojective algebra of the graph $Q$, and $\Pi_Q^l$ subspace of paths of length $l$. Then for $q=(i,k)$, $q'=(j,l)$ it follows from the definition that for $l<k$ we have $$\Pi_{{\widehat{Q}}}(q,q')=0=\operatorname{Hom}_{\mathcal{C}}(X_i(k),X_j(l))$$ and for $l\ge k$, $$\Pi_{{\widehat{Q}}}(q,q')=\Pi_Q^{l-k}(X_i,X_j)=
\operatorname{Hom}_G(X_i,V^{{\otimes}(l-k)}{\otimes}X_j)
=\operatorname{Hom}_{\mathcal{C}}(X_i(k),X_j(l)).$$
This theorem shows that morphisms between free indecomposable modules in ${\mathcal{C}}$ are described by essential paths in ${{\widehat{Q}}}$, so the structure of the subcategory $Free({\mathcal{C}})$, consisting of locally free sheaves, can be recovered from ${{\widehat{Q}}}$. Note however that realization of $Free({\mathcal{C}})$ in terms of equivariant sheaves gives much more than $\operatorname{Hom}$ spaces: it embeds $Free({\mathcal{C}})$ into an abelian category with sufficiently many injectives, allowing one to define $\operatorname{Ext}$ functors and derived category ${\mathcal{D}}^b({\mathcal{C}})$. Both of these would be difficult to define in terms of ${{\widehat{Q}}}$.
Equivalence of categories
=========================
Let $Q$, ${{\widehat{Q}}}$ be as defined above, and let $h$ be a height function on $Q$ (see [Definition [\[d:height\_function\]]{}]{}). Recall that such a height function defines a choice of orientation on $Q$; the corresponding quiver is denoted $Q_h$. Then this height function defines an embedding $$\label{e:embedding}
\begin{aligned}
i_h\colon Q_h^{opp}& \to {{\widehat{Q}}}\\
i&\mapsto (i,h_i)
\end{aligned}$$ where $Q_h^{opp}$ is the quiver obtained from $Q_h$ by reversing all arrows. The figure below shows an example of such an embedding.
Note that once we have embedded $Q_h\subset {{\widehat{Q}}}$, we can identify the quiver ${{\widehat{Q}}}$ with ${\mathbb{Z}}Q_h$ (see, e.g., [@ringel1] for the definition).
From now on, we will consider $Q_h^{opp}$ as a subset of ${{\widehat{Q}}}$, omitting $i_h$ in our notation.
Let $q_1,q_2\in {{\widehat{Q}}}$. We say that $q_1$ is a predecessor of $q_2$ (notation: $q_1\prec q_2$) if there exists a path $q_1\to
\bullet\to\dots\to \bullet \to q_2$ in ${{\widehat{Q}}}$. In this case, we also say that $q_2$ is a successor of $q_1$ and write $q_2\succ q_1$.
\[l:technical1\] Let $q=(i,n)\in {{\widehat{Q}}}$. Then
1. $n>h_i \iff (q\notin Q_h, q\succ q'$ for some $q'\in Q_h)$. In this case, we will say that $q$ is above $Q_h$ and write $q\succ Q_h$.
2. $n<h_i \iff (q\notin Q_h, q\prec q'$ for some $q'\in Q_h)$. In this case, we will say that $q$ is below $Q_h$ and write $q\prec Q_h$.
\[l:vanishing\_of\_homs\]
1. If $q_1\succeq Q_h, q_2\prec Q_h$, then $\operatorname{Hom}_{\mathcal{C}}(X_{q_1},X_{q_2})=0$
2. If $q_1\preceq Q_h, q_2\succeq Q_h$, then $\operatorname{Ext}^1_{\mathcal{C}}(X_{q_1},X_{q_2})=0$. In particular, if $q_1, q_2\in
Q_h$, then $\operatorname{Ext}^1_{\mathcal{C}}(X_{q_1},X_{q_2})=0$.
It follows from $\operatorname{Hom}_{\mathcal{C}}(X_{q_1},X_{q_2})=\Pi_{{{\widehat{Q}}}}(X_{q_1},X_{q_2})$ that $\operatorname{Hom}_{\mathcal{C}}(X_{q_1},X_{q_2})$ can be nonzero only if $q_1\preceq q_2$. But then $q_2\succeq q_1\succeq Q_h$, which proves part (a).
Part (b) follows from part (a) and Serre duality ([Theorem [\[t:locally\_free\]]{}]{})
\[l:generators\] The sheaves $X_q$, $q\in Q_h$, generate the category ${\mathcal{D}}^b({\mathcal{C}})$ as a triangulated category: the smallest full triangulated subcategory in ${\mathcal{D}}^b({\mathcal{C}})$ containing all $X_q$, $q\in Q_h$, is ${\mathcal{D}}^b({\mathcal{C}})$.
Let ${\mathcal{D}}$ be the smallest triangulated subcategory in ${\mathcal{D}}^b({\mathcal{C}})$ containing all $X_q$, $q\in Q_h$. If $i$ is a sink for $Q_h$, then it follows from AR exact sequence that $X_i(h_i+2)\in {\mathcal{D}}$. Thus, all $X_q$, $q\in Q_{s_i^+ h}$, are in ${\mathcal{D}}$. Similarly, if $i$ is a source for $Q_h$, then all $X_q$, $q\in Q_{s_i^-
h}$, are in ${\mathcal{D}}$. By [Lemma [\[l:reflection\_functors1\]]{}]{}, this implies that all $X_q$, $q\in {{\widehat{Q}}}$, are in ${\mathcal{D}}$, so ${\mathcal{D}}$ contains all locally free equivariant sheaves. Since every coherent sheaf admits a locally free resolution, this completes the proof.
Define now a functor $$\label{e:Ph}
\begin{aligned}
{\Phi}_h\colon {\mathcal{C}}\to \operatorname{Rep}(Q_h)
\end{aligned}$$ by $${\Phi}_h({\mathcal{F}})(i)=\operatorname{Hom}_{\mathcal{C}}(X_i(h_i), {\mathcal{F}})$$ and for an edge $e\colon j\to j$ in $Q_h$, we define the corresponding map by $$\begin{aligned}
\operatorname{Hom}_{\mathcal{C}}(X_j(h_j), {\mathcal{F}})&\to \operatorname{Hom}_{\mathcal{C}}(X_i(h_i), {\mathcal{F}})\\
{\varphi}&\mapsto {\varphi}\circ h(e)\end{aligned}$$ where $h(e)\colon (i,h_i)\to (j,h_j)$ is the edge in ${{\widehat{Q}}}$ corresponding to $e$ under embedding .
\[l:Ph\]
1. ${\Phi}_h$ is left exact.
2. $R^i{\Phi}_h=0$ for $i>1$, and $$(R^1{\Phi}_h({\mathcal{F}}))(i)=\operatorname{Ext}_{\mathcal{C}}^1(X_i(h_i),{\mathcal{F}})$$
Follows from left exactness of functor $\operatorname{Hom}_{\mathcal{C}}(X_i(h_i), -)$ and definitions.
\[x:standard\] Let $h$ be the “standard” height function: $h(i)=0$ for $i\in I_0$, $h(i)=1$ for $i\in I_1$. Then the map ${\Phi}_h$ can also be described as follows. Consider the functor $\operatorname{Rep}Q_h\to \operatorname{Rep}G$ defined by $\{V_i\}\mapsto \bigoplus V_i{\otimes}X_i$. Then the composition $${\mathcal{C}}{\xrightarrow}{{\Phi}_h} \operatorname{Rep}Q_h\to \operatorname{Rep}G$$ is given by $${\mathcal{F}}\mapsto {\Gamma}({\mathcal{F}})\oplus {\Gamma}({\mathcal{F}}(-1)).$$
Indeed, for each representation $M$ of $G$ we have $$M\simeq\bigoplus \operatorname{Hom}_G(X_i,M){\otimes}X_i$$ Applying it to ${\Gamma}({\mathcal{F}})=\operatorname{Hom}_{\mathcal{O}}({\mathcal{O}},{\mathcal{F}})$ we get $${\Gamma}({\mathcal{F}})=\bigoplus_{i\in I} \operatorname{Hom}_{\mathcal{O}}(X_i{\otimes}{\mathcal{O}},{\mathcal{F}})^G{\otimes}X_i
=\bigoplus_{i\in I} {\operatorname{Hom}_G}(X_i{\otimes}{\mathcal{O}},{\mathcal{F}}){\otimes}X_i$$ Since ${\mathcal{F}}\in {\mathcal{C}}={{Coh_G({\mathbb{P}^1})}}_0$, we have ${\operatorname{Hom}_G}(X_i{\otimes}{\mathcal{O}},{\mathcal{F}})=0$ for $i\in I_1$; thus, $${\Gamma}({\mathcal{F}})=\bigoplus_{i\in I_0} {\operatorname{Hom}_G}(X_i{\otimes}{\mathcal{O}},{\mathcal{F}}){\otimes}X_i$$ Similar argument shows that $${\Gamma}({\mathcal{F}}(-1))=\bigoplus_{i\in I_1} {\operatorname{Hom}_G}(X_i{\otimes}{\mathcal{O}}(1),{\mathcal{F}}){\otimes}X_i$$ Thus, $${\Gamma}({\mathcal{F}})\oplus {\Gamma}({\mathcal{F}}(-1))=
\left(\bigoplus_{i\in I_0} \operatorname{Hom}_{\mathcal{C}}(X_i,{\mathcal{F}}){\otimes}X_i\right)
\oplus
\left(\bigoplus_{i\in I_1} \operatorname{Hom}_{\mathcal{C}}(X_i(1),{\mathcal{F}}){\otimes}X_i\right)$$ as desired.
Since ${\Phi}_h$ is left exact, we can define the associated derived functor $R{\Phi}_h\colon {\mathcal{D}}^b({\mathcal{C}})\to {\mathcal{D}}^b(\operatorname{Rep}Q_h)$. The following two theorems are the main results of this paper.
\[t:main2\] For any height function $h$, the functor $R{\Phi}_h\colon {\mathcal{D}}^b({\mathcal{C}})\to
{\mathcal{D}}^b(Q_h)$ defined by is an equivalence of triangulated categories.
It follows from [Lemma [\[l:vanishing\_of\_homs\]]{}]{} that the object $$T=\bigoplus_{q\in Q_h}X_q$$ satisfies $\operatorname{Ext}^1(T,T)=0$. By [Lemma [\[l:generators\]]{}]{}, direct summands of $T$ generate ${\mathcal{D}}^b({\mathcal{C}})$ as a triangulated category. Therefore, $T$ is the tilting object in ${\mathcal{D}}^b({\mathcal{C}})$ as defined in [@geigle-lenzing]. Now the statement of the theorem follows from the general result of [@geigle-lenzing].
\[t:main1\] Let $i$ be a sink for $h$, and $S_i^+$ the reflection functor defined by . Then the following diagram is commutative: $$\xymatrixrowsep{4pt}
\xymatrixcolsep{40pt}
\xymatrix{
&{\mathcal{D}}^b(Q_{s_i^+h})\\
{\mathcal{D}}^b({\mathcal{C}})\ar[ur]^{R{\Phi}_{s_i^+h}}\ar[dr]^{R{\Phi}_{h}}&\\
&{\mathcal{D}}^b(Q_{h})\ar[uu]_{RS_i^+}
}$$ and similarly for $S_i^-$.
Let us first prove that if $q\succ Q_h$, then $$R{\Phi}_{s_i^+h}(X_q)=RS_i^+\circ R{\Phi}_h (X_q).$$ Indeed, in this case it follows from [Lemma [\[l:Ph\]]{}]{}, [Lemma [\[l:vanishing\_of\_homs\]]{}]{} that $R^i{\Phi}_h(X_q)=0$ for $i>0$, so $R{\Phi}_h(X_q)={\Phi}_h(X_q)$; similarly, $R{\Phi}_{s_i^+h}(X_q)={\Phi}_{s_i^+h}(X_q)$.
Let $i$ be a sink for $Q_h$. Then we have the Auslander–Reiten exact sequence $$0\to X_i(h_i)\to \bigoplus_{j} X_j(h_j)\to X_i(h_i+2)\to 0$$ Applying to this sequence functor $\operatorname{Hom}_{\mathcal{C}}(-, X_q)$ and using [Lemma [\[l:vanishing\_of\_homs\]]{}]{} which gives vanishing of $\operatorname{Ext}^1$, we get a short exact sequence $$0\to \operatorname{Hom}_{\mathcal{C}}(X_i(h_i+2), X_q)\to \bigoplus_{j} \operatorname{Hom}_{\mathcal{C}}(X_j(h_j), X_q)\to
\operatorname{Hom}_{\mathcal{C}}(X_i(h_i), X_q)\to 0$$ Comparing this with definition of $S_i^+$, we see that ${\Phi}_{s_i^+h}(X_q)=S_i^+({\Phi}_h(X_q))$.
Thus, we have shown that for $q\succ Q_h$, we have $R{\Phi}_{s_i^+h}(X_q)=RS_i^+\circ R{\Phi}_h (X_q)$.
To complete the proof, we now use the following easy result.
\[l:technical4\] Let ${\mathcal{D}}$, ${\mathcal{D}}'$ be triangulated categories, ${\Phi}_1,{\Phi}_2\colon
{\mathcal{D}}\to {\mathcal{D}}'$ triangle functors, and ${\alpha}\colon
{\Phi}_1\to{\Phi}_2$ a morphism of functors. Assume that there is a collection of objects $X_q\in {\mathcal{D}}$ which generate ${\mathcal{D}}$ as a triangulated category in the sense of [Lemma [\[l:generators\]]{}]{} and such that for each $X_q$, $${\alpha}\colon {\Phi}_1(X_q)\to {\Phi}_2(X_q)$$ is an isomorphism. Then ${\alpha}$ is an isomorphism of functors.
Applying this lemma to ${\mathcal{D}}={\mathcal{D}}^b({\mathcal{C}})$, ${\mathcal{D}}'={\mathcal{D}}^b(Q_{s_i^+h})$, ${\Phi}_1=R{\Phi}_{s_i^+ h}$, ${\Phi}_2=RC_i^+\circ R{\Phi}_h$ and the collection of objects $X_q, q\succ Q_h$ (which generate ${\mathcal{D}}^b({\mathcal{C}})$ by [Lemma [\[l:generators\]]{}]{}), we get the statement of the theorem.
\[c:coxeter\] We have the following commutative diagram $$\xymatrixrowsep{20pt}
\xymatrixcolsep{30pt}
\xymatrix{
{\mathcal{D}}^b({\mathcal{C}})\ar[r]^-{R{\Phi}_h}
&{\mathcal{D}}^b(Q_h)\simeq {\mathcal{D}}^b(Q_{h+2})\\
{\mathcal{D}}^b({\mathcal{C}})\ar[r]^{R{\Phi}_h}\ar[u]_{{\otimes}{\mathcal{O}}(-2)}
&{\mathcal{D}}^b(Q_h)\ar[u]_{RC_h^+}
}$$ where $RC_h^+$ is the Coxeter element , and similarly for $LC_h^-$.
It should be noted that while $R{\Phi}_h$ is an equivalence of derived categories, it is definitely not true that ${\Phi}_h$ is an equivalence of abelian categories. For example, there are no injective or projective objects in ${\mathcal{C}}$ while there are enough injectives and projectives in $\operatorname{Rep}Q_h$. Similarly, the set of simple modules is very much different in these two categories. However, the sets of indecomposable modules are effectively the same.
The root system and the Grothendieck group
==========================================
In this section, we list some important corollaries of the equivalence of categories constructed in the previous section. Again, many of these results can also be obtained form the equivalence of categories constructed by Lenzing; however, we choose to provide an independent exposition.
Thoroughout this section, we let $L=K({\mathcal{C}})$ be the Grothendieck group of category ${\mathcal{C}}$. We define the inner product on $L$ by $$\label{e:euler_form}
(x,y)={\langle}x,y{\rangle}+{\langle}y,x{\rangle}$$ where by definition $${\langle}[X],[Y]{\rangle}=\dim \operatorname{RHom}(X,Y)=\dim \operatorname{Hom}(X,Y) -\dim \operatorname{Ext}^1(X,Y)$$ (compare with [Theorem [\[t:reps\_of\_quivers\]]{}]{}). We define $\Delta\subset L$ by $$\Delta=\{[X], X \text{--- a non-zero indecomposable object in
}{\mathcal{D}}^b({\mathcal{C}})\}$$
Finally, we define the map $C\colon \Delta\to\Delta$ by $$C([X])=[X(-2)]$$
\[t:main3\]
1. The set $\Delta\subset L$ is an affine root system, and $C$ is a Coxeter element.
2. Recall the lattice $L(Q)$ and root system $\Delta(Q)$ from [Section [\[s:basic\]]{}]{}. Then for any height function $h$ on $Q$, the map $$\begin{aligned}
R{\Phi}_h\colon L&\to L(Q)\\
[{\mathcal{F}}]&\mapsto \bigoplus
\biggl(\dim \operatorname{RHom}_{\mathcal{C}}(X_i(h_i), {\mathcal{F}})\biggr) {\alpha}_i
\end{aligned}$$ is an isomorphism of abelian groups which identifies $\Delta\subset L$ with $\Delta(Q)\subset L(Q)$ and $C$ with the Coxeter element $c_h^+$ defined by .
The first part follows from the second one; the second part follows from the fact that $R{\Phi}_h$ is an equivalence of categories ([Theorem [\[t:main2\]]{}]{} and [Corollary [\[c:coxeter\]]{}]{}).
\[c:generators\_of\_K(C)\]
1. For any height function $h$, the classes $[X_q]$, $q\in Q_h$, are free generators of the Grothendieck group $K({\mathcal{C}})$.
2. $K({\mathcal{C}})$ is generated by the classes $[X_i(n)], n\equiv p(i)\mod 2$, and AR relations is the full list of all relations among classes $[X_i(n)]$.
By [Lemma [\[l:generators\]]{}]{}, classes $[X_q]$, $q\in Q_h$, generate $K({\mathcal{C}})$. On the other hand, by [Theorem [\[t:main3\]]{}]{}, $K({\mathcal{C}})$ is isomorphic to ${\mathbb{Z}}^I$ and thus has rank $|I|$, so these generators must be linearly independent.
To prove the second part, denote temporarily $L'=Span([X_i(n)])/J$, where $J$ is the subgroup generated by AR relations . Since $[X_i(n)]$ generate $K({\mathcal{C}})$ and AR relations hold in $K({\mathcal{C}})$, we see that $K({\mathcal{C}})$ is a quotient of $L'$.
Now choose some height function $h$. It follows from [Lemma [\[l:reflection\_functors1\]]{}]{} that $[X_q]$, $q\in Q_h$, generate $L'$, so it has rank at most $|I|$. On the other hand, $K({\mathcal{C}})$ has rank $|I|$. Thus, $L'$ has rank $|I|$ and $L'=K({\mathcal{C}})$.
\[x:standard2\] Let $h$ be the “standard” height function as defined in [Example [\[x:standard\]]{}]{}. Then the map $R{\Phi}_h\colon K({\mathcal{C}})\to L(Q)\simeq K(G)$ is given by $$\begin{aligned}
&[X_i]\mapsto {\alpha}_i, \quad i \in I_0\\
&[X_i(1)]\mapsto {\alpha}_i+\sum_{j-i}{\alpha}_j, \quad i \in I_1
\end{aligned}$$ and the corresponding Coxeter element is $C=(\prod_{i\in
I_1}s_i)(\prod_{i\in I_0}s_i)$.
This also implies that for this $h$, $[X_i(-1)]\mapsto -{\alpha}_i$, $i\in
I_1$; in particular, we see that classes ${\alpha}_i, i\in I_0$, and $-{\alpha}_i, i\in I_1$, form a set of representatives of $C$-orbits on on ${{\widehat{Q}}}$. An analogous statement for finite root system has been proved in [@kostant2].
For completeness, we also describe here the indecomposable sheaves corresponding to imaginary roots of $\Delta$.
\[t:imaginary\_root\] Let $x\in {\mathbb{P}^1}$ be a generic point: $\operatorname{Stab}_{{\bar G}}x=\{1\}$, and let $${\delta}=[{\mathcal{O}}_{[Gx]}]\in \Delta$$ see . Then:
1. ${\delta}$ does not depend on the choice of point $x$
2. ${\delta}={\delta}_0-{\delta}_1$, where $$\begin{aligned}
{\delta}_0&=\sum_{i\in I_0}d_i[X_i]=[R_0]\\
{\delta}_1&=\sum_{i\in I_1}d_i[X_i(-1)]=[R_1(-1)],\end{aligned}$$ where $d_i=\dim X_i$ and $R_0, R_1$ are even and odd parts of the regular representation defined by .
3. $C{\delta}={\delta}$; $C{\delta}_0={\delta}_0-2{\delta}$; $C{\delta}_1={\delta}_1-2{\delta}$
4. For any ${\alpha}\in L$, $({\delta},{\alpha})=0$
5. ${\delta}$ is a generator of the set of imaginary roots of $\Delta$: $$\Delta^{im}={\mathbb{Z}}{\delta}$$
We start by proving (2), by explicitly constructing a resolution of ${\mathcal{O}}_{[Gx]}$.
Let ${\varphi}_x$ be a holomorphic section of ${\mathcal{O}}(1)$ which has a simple zero at $x$. Then we have a short exact sequence of sheaves (not equivariant): $$0\to{\mathcal{O}}{\xrightarrow}{{\varphi}_x}{\mathcal{O}}(1)\to {\mathcal{O}}_{[x]}\to 0$$ Tensoring it with ${\mathcal{O}}(-1)$, we get a sequence $$0\to{\mathcal{O}}(-1){\xrightarrow}{{\varphi}_x}{\mathcal{O}}\to {\mathcal{O}}_{[x]}\to 0$$ Now let us apply to this sequence functor $\operatorname{Ind}$ defined by . Using [Lemma [\[l:frobenius\]]{}]{}, we see that it gives a ${{\bar G}}$-equivariant short exact sequence $$0\to R_1{\otimes}{\mathcal{O}}(-1)\to R_0{\otimes}{\mathcal{O}}\to {\mathcal{O}}_{[Gx]}\to 0$$ which gives equality ${\delta}={\delta}_0-{\delta}_1$, thus proving part (2) of the theorem.
Part (1) follows from (2).
Since ${\mathcal{O}}_{[Gx]}{\otimes}{\mathcal{O}}(-2)\simeq {\mathcal{O}}_{[Gx]}$, we get $C{\delta}={\delta}$. To compute $C{\delta}_0$, note that the same argument as in the proof of part (2) also gives a short exact sequence $$0\to R_0{\otimes}{\mathcal{O}}\to R_1{\otimes}{\mathcal{O}}(1)\to {\mathcal{O}}_{[Gx]}\to 0$$ thus giving $C^{-1}{\delta}_1={\delta}+{\delta}_0=2{\delta}+{\delta}_1$.
To prove part (4), recall notation ${\langle}[X],[Y]{\rangle}=\dim\operatorname{Hom}(X,Y)-\dim\operatorname{Ext}^1(X,Y)$. Then Serre duality immediately gives $${\langle}x,y{\rangle}=-{\langle}y,Cx{\rangle}.$$ Since $C{\delta}={\delta}$, we get $$({\delta},x)={\langle}x,{\delta}{\rangle}+{\langle}{\delta},x{\rangle}={\langle}x,{\delta}{\rangle}-{\langle}x,C{\delta}{\rangle}=0$$
Part (4) implies that ${\delta}$ is an imaginary root. Moreover, since by [Corollary [\[c:generators\_of\_K(C)\]]{}]{} classes $[X_i]$, $[X_i(-1)]$ are free generators of $L$. Since some of $d_i$ are equal to 1, it follows from part (2) that for any $k>1$, ${\delta}/k\notin L$; thus, ${\delta}$ must be a generator of the set of imaginary roots.
Since every indecomposable object in ${\mathcal{D}}^b({\mathcal{C}})$ is of the form ${\mathcal{F}}[n]$, where ${\mathcal{F}}$ is an indecomposable $G$-equivariant sheaf ([Theorem [\[t:indecomposable\]]{}]{}), it follows that every root ${\alpha}\in{\Delta}$ can be written as either ${\alpha}=[{\mathcal{F}}]$ or ${\alpha}=-[{\mathcal{F}}]$, thus giving some splitting of ${\Delta}$ into positive and negative roots. This polarization can be described explicitly.
Recall from algebraic geometry (see, e.g., [@hartshorne Exercises II.6.10, II.6.12]) that for any coherent sheaf, we can define two integer numbers, its [*rank*]{} and [*degree*]{}. In particular, for a locally free sheaf ${\mathcal{F}}=X{\otimes}{\mathcal{O}}(n)$ (where $X$ is a finite-dimensional vector space), we have $$\begin{aligned}
&\operatorname{rk}(X{\otimes}{\mathcal{O}}(n))=\dim X,\\
&\deg (X{\otimes}{\mathcal{O}}(n))= n\dim X.\end{aligned}$$ Degree and rank give well-defined linear maps $K\to {\mathbb{Z}}$, where $K$ is the Grothendieck group of the category of coherent sheaves.
In particular, we can define rank and degree for a $G$-equivariant sheaf, ignoring the equivariant structure; this gives linear maps $K({\mathcal{C}})\to{\mathbb{Z}}$, which we also denote by $\operatorname{rk}, \deg$.
\[l:rank\]
1. If ${\mathcal{F}}\in{\mathcal{C}}$ is a non-zero free sheaf, then $\operatorname{rk}{\mathcal{F}}>0$.
2. If ${\mathcal{F}}\in{\mathcal{C}}$ is a non-zero torsion sheaf, then $\operatorname{rk}{\mathcal{F}}=0$, $\deg{\mathcal{F}}>0$.
3. For any $x\in K({\mathcal{C}})$, we have $$\operatorname{rk}(x)=(x,{\delta}_0)=(x,{\delta}_1)$$ where ${\delta}_0$, ${\delta}_1$ are defined in [Theorem [\[t:imaginary\_root\]]{}]{}.
The first two parts are well-known.
To check $\operatorname{rk}(x)=(x,{\delta}_0)=(x,{\delta}_1)$, it suffices to check it for $x=[X_i]$, $i\in I_0$ and $x=[X_i(-1)], i\in I_1$ (by [Example [\[x:standard2\]]{}]{}, they generate $L$). If $i\in I_0$, then $$([X_i], {\delta}_0)=\dim \operatorname{Hom}_G(X_i,\sum_{j\in I_0} d_jX_j)=d_i=\operatorname{rk}X_i$$ thus proving $\operatorname{rk}(x)=(x,{\delta}_0)$. Since ${\delta}_0-{\delta}_1={\delta}$ is in the kernel of $(\, , \,)$ ([Theorem [\[t:imaginary\_root\]]{}]{}), this implies $(x,{\delta}_0)=(x,{\delta}_1)$.
If $i\in I_1$, then $$([X_i(-1)], {\delta}_1)=\dim \operatorname{Hom}_G(X_i(-1),\sum_{j\in I_1}
d_jX_j(-1))=d_i=\operatorname{rk}X_i$$ thus proving $\operatorname{rk}(x)=(x,{\delta}_1)$. Since ${\delta}_0-{\delta}_1={\delta}$ is in the kernel of $(\, , \,)$ ([Theorem [\[t:imaginary\_root\]]{}]{}), this implies $(x,{\delta}_0)=(x,{\delta}_1)$.
Note that the functional $\deg x$ can not be written in terms of the form $(\, , \,)$: indeed, $\deg {\delta}=|{{\bar G}}|=|G|/2$, but $({\delta},
\cdot)=0$.
Let ${\alpha}\in {\Delta}$.
1. ${\alpha}=[{\mathcal{F}}]$ for some indecomposable free sheaf ${\mathcal{F}}\in {\mathcal{C}}$ iff $\operatorname{rk}({\alpha})=({\alpha},{\delta}_0)>0$
2. ${\alpha}=-[{\mathcal{F}}]$ for some indecomposable free sheaf ${\mathcal{F}}\in {\mathcal{C}}$ iff $\operatorname{rk}({\alpha})=({\alpha},{\delta}_0)<0$
3. ${\alpha}=[{\mathcal{F}}]$ for some indecomposable torsion sheaf ${\mathcal{F}}\in {\mathcal{C}}$ iff $\operatorname{rk}({\alpha})=({\alpha},{\delta}_0)=0$, $\deg({\alpha})>0$
4. ${\alpha}=-[{\mathcal{F}}]$ for some indecomposable torsion sheaf ${\mathcal{F}}\in {\mathcal{C}}$ iff $\operatorname{rk}({\alpha})=({\alpha},{\delta}_0)=0$, $\deg({\alpha})<0$
Thus, we see that we have a triangular decomposition of ${\Delta}$: $$\label{e:polarization}
\begin{aligned}
&{\Delta}={\Delta}_+\sqcup{\Delta}_0\sqcup {\Delta}_-\\
&{\Delta}_+=\{{\alpha}\in {\Delta}{\; | \;}\operatorname{rk}({\alpha})>0\}=\{[{\mathcal{F}}],\ {\mathcal{F}}\text{ --- a free
indecomposable sheaf}\}\\
&\quad \text{(note that ${\Delta}_+$ is exactly the set of vertices of
${{\widehat{Q}}}$)}\\
&{\Delta}_-=\{{\alpha}\in {\Delta}{\; | \;}\operatorname{rk}({\alpha})<0\}=\{-[{\mathcal{F}}],\ {\mathcal{F}}\text{ --- a free
indecomposable sheaf}\}\\
&{\Delta}_0=\{{\alpha}\in {\Delta}{\; | \;}\operatorname{rk}({\alpha})=0\}=\{\pm[{\mathcal{F}}],\ {\mathcal{F}}\text{ --- a free
torsion sheaf}\}
\end{aligned}$$ The set ${\Delta}_+$ has been discussed by Schiffmann [@schiffmann2], who used notation ${{\widehat{Q}}}_+$ and denoted the corresponding subalgebra in the loop algebra by $\mathcal{L}\mathfrak{n}$. Note, however, that this notation is somewhat misleading: $\mathcal{L}\mathfrak{n}$ is not the loop algebra of a positive part of the finite dimensional algebra $\bar{\mathfrak{g}}$, which easily follows from the fact that there are real roots in ${\Delta}_0$ (see example in the next section).
\[t:C\^g\] Let $g=|{{\bar G}}|=|G|/2$. Then for any $x\in L$ we have $$\label{e:C^g}
C^g (x)=x-2(\operatorname{rk}x){\delta}$$
Let ${\varphi}_x$ be a section of the sheaf ${\mathcal{O}}(1)$ which has a single zero at generic point $x$. Then we have a short exact sequence $$0\to {\mathcal{O}}{\xrightarrow}{{\varphi}_x} {\mathcal{O}}(1)\to {\mathcal{O}}_{[x]}\to 0$$ which, however, is not equivariant even under the action of $\{\pm
I\}\subset {\mathrm{SU(2)}}$. To fix it we consider ${\varphi}_x^2$ which gives the following ${\mathbb{Z}}_2$-equivariant sequence $$0\to {\mathcal{O}}(-2){\xrightarrow}{{\varphi}^2_x} {\mathcal{O}}\to {\mathcal{O}}_{2[x]}\to 0$$ Now let us take product of pullbacks of ${\varphi}_x^2$ under all $g\in{{\bar G}}$ $$0\to {\mathcal{O}}(-2g){\xrightarrow}{\prod_{g\in{{\bar G}}}g^*{\varphi}^2_x} {\mathcal{O}}\to {\mathcal{O}}_{2[Gx]}\to 0$$
Tensoring it with any locally free sheaf ${\mathcal{F}}$, we get $$0\to {\mathcal{F}}(-2g){\xrightarrow}{\prod_{g\in{{\bar G}}}g^*{\varphi}^2_x} {\mathcal{F}}\to
{\mathcal{O}}_{2[Gx]}{\otimes}{\mathcal{F}}_x\to 0$$ which implies $C^g[{\mathcal{F}}]-[{\mathcal{F}}]+2(\operatorname{rk}{\mathcal{F}}){\delta}=0$.
This result — that $C^g$ is a translation — was known before and can be proved without the use of equivariant sheaves, see e.g. Steinberg [@steinberg]. However, the approach via equivariant sheaves also provides a nice interpretation for the corresponding functional as the rank of the sheaf.
Comparing with the description of the action of Coxeter element in the language of representations of the quiver, we see that rank is closely related to the notion of defect $\partial_c(x)$ as defined in [@drab-ringel], namely $$\operatorname{rk}(x)=-\frac{1}{2}\partial_c x$$ Therefore, ${\Delta}_0$ is exactly the set of indecomposable objects of defect zero, which shows that torsion sheaves correspond to regular representations.
1. For any ${\alpha}\in {\Delta}_0$, $C^gx=x$; in particular, $C$-orbit of ${\alpha}$ is finite.
2. $C$ acts freely on ${\Delta}_+$, and the set of orbits ${\Delta}_+/C$ is naturally in bijection with $Q$.
Example: $\widehat{A}_n$
========================
In this section, we consider the example of the cyclic group of even order: $G={\mathbb{Z}}_n$, $n=2k$.
The irreducible representations of this group are $X_i$, $i\in {\mathbb{Z}}_n$; all of them are one-dimensional. The corresponding Dynkin diagram $Q$ is the cycle of length $n$.
The root system $\Delta(Q)$ can be described as follows. Let $V$ be a real vector space of dimension $n+1$, with basis $\delta, e_i$, $i\in
{\mathbb{Z}}_n$. Define inner product in $V$ by $(e_i,e_j)={\delta}_{ij}$, $(v,{\delta})=0$. Then $$\Delta(Q)=\{e_i-e_j+a\delta, i\ne j\in {\mathbb{Z}}_n, a\in \frac{j-i}{n}+{\mathbb{Z}}\}$$ The simple roots are $${\alpha}_i=e_i-e_{i+1}+\frac{1}{n}\delta,\quad i\in {\mathbb{Z}}_n$$ so that $\sum_i{\alpha}_i={\delta}$. The simple reflections $s_i$ are given by $$\begin{aligned}
&s_i(e_i)=e_{i+1}-\frac{1}{n}\delta\\
&s_i(e_{i+1})=e_{i}+\frac{1}{n}\delta\\
&s_i(e_j)=e_j,\quad j\ne i,i+1\end{aligned}$$
It is easy to see that this description of $\Delta(Q)$, while unusual, is equivalent to the standard description of the affine root system $\widehat{A}_{n-1}$.
We choose standard height function $h$: $$h(i)=\begin{cases}0,& i\text{ even}\\
1, &i\text{ odd}
\end{cases}$$ The corresponding Coxeter element $C$ is $$C=\left(\prod_{i \text{ odd}} s_i\right)
\left(\prod_{i \text{ even}} s_i\right)$$ The action of $C$ on $\Delta(Q)$ is given by $$C(e_i)=\begin{cases}e_{i+2}-\frac{2}{n}\delta,& i\text{ even}\\
e_{i-2}+\frac{2}{n}\delta,& i\text{ odd}
\end{cases}$$ Thus, we have $$C^{n/2}(e_i)=\begin{cases}e_{i}-\delta,& i\text{ even}\\
e_{i}+\delta,& i\text{ odd}
\end{cases}$$ which implies $$\begin{aligned}
&C^{n/2}({\alpha})={\alpha}-({\alpha},{\varepsilon})\delta,\\
&\quad {\varepsilon}= \sum_{i \text{ even}}e_i-\sum_{i \text{ odd}}e_i\equiv
\sum_{i \text{ even}}{\alpha}_i\equiv -\sum_{i \text{ odd}}{\alpha}_i\mod {\mathbb{Z}}\delta
\end{aligned}$$ (compare with [Theorem [\[t:C\^g\]]{}]{}, [Lemma [\[l:rank\]]{}]{} ).
Explicitly, we can write $$\begin{aligned}
&C^{n/2}({\alpha})=\begin{cases}
{\alpha}, &i\equiv j\mod 2 \\
{\alpha}-2{\delta}, &(i,j)\equiv (0,1)\mod 2 \\
{\alpha}+2{\delta}, &(i,j)\equiv (1,0)\mod 2
\end{cases},\\
&\quad {\alpha}=e_i-e_j+a\delta\end{aligned}$$ Thus, in this case we have $$\begin{aligned}
{\Delta}_0=\{e_i-e_j+a{\delta}\}, \quad i\equiv j\mod 2\\
{\Delta}_+=\{e_i-e_j+a{\delta}\}, \quad i\text{ even}, j\text{ odd}\\
{\Delta}_-=\{e_i-e_j+a{\delta}\}, \quad i\text{ odd}, j\text{ even}\\\end{aligned}$$
[Figure [\[f:An\_graph\]]{}]{} shows a segment of the AR graph ${{\widehat{Q}}}$ for this root system.
$$\xy
(0,0)*+{X_{i-2}}="A"+(0,-3)*+{\scriptstyle
e_{i-2}-e_{i-1}+\frac{1}{n}\delta};
(30,0)*+{X_{i}}="B"+(0,-3)*{\scriptstyle
e_{i}-e_{i+1}+\frac{1}{n}\delta};
(60,0)*+{X_{i+2}}="C"+(0,-3)*{\scriptstyle
e_{i+2}-e_{i+3}+\frac{1}{n}\delta};
(90,0)*+{X_{i+4}}="D"+(0,-3)*{\scriptstyle
e_{i+4}-e_{i+5}+\frac{1}{n}\delta};
(15,15)*+{X_{i-1}(1)}="E"+(0,-3)*{\scriptstyle
e_{i-2}-e_{i+1}+\frac{3}{n}\delta}="EE";
(45,15)*+{X_{i+1}(1)}="F"+(0,-3)*{\scriptstyle
e_{i}-e_{i+3}+\frac{3}{n}\delta}="FF";
(75,15)*+{X_{i+3}(1)}="G"+(0,-3)*{\scriptstyle
e_{i+2}-e_{i+5}+\frac{3}{n}\delta}="GG";
(0,30)*+{X_{i-2}(2)}="H"+(0,-3)*+{\scriptstyle
e_{i-4}-e_{i+1}+\frac{5}{n}\delta}="HH";
(30,30)*+{X_{i}(2)}="I"+(0,-3)*{\scriptstyle
e_{i-2}-e_{i+3}+\frac{5}{n}\delta}="II";
(60,30)*+{X_{i+2}(2)}="J"+(0,-3)*{\scriptstyle
e_{i}-e_{i+5}+\frac{5}{n}\delta}="JJ";
(90,30)*+{X_{i+4}(2)}="K"+(0,-3)*{\scriptstyle
e_{i+2}-e_{i+7}+\frac{5}{n}\delta}="KK";
{\ar "A";"EE"};
{\ar "B";"EE"};
{\ar "B";"FF"};
{\ar "C";"FF"};
{\ar "C";"GG"};
{\ar "D";"GG"};
{\ar "E";"HH"};
{\ar "E";"II"};
{\ar "F";"II"};
{\ar "F";"JJ"};
{\ar "G";"JJ"};
{\ar "G";"KK"};
\endxy$$
[EFK]{} M. Auslander, I. Reiten, S.O. Smalø, [*Representation Theory of Artin Algebras*]{}, Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, UK, 1995.
P. Baumann, C. Kassel, [*The Hall algebra of the category of coherent sheaves on the projective line*]{}, J. reine angew. Math. [**533**]{} (2001), 207–233
T. Bridgeland, A. King, M. Reid, [*The McKay correspondence as an equivalence of derived categories*]{}, J. Amer. Math. Soc. [**14**]{} (2001), 535–554
R. Coquereaux, A. O. Garcia, [*On bialgebras associated with paths and essential paths on $ADE$ graphs*]{}, Int. J. Geom. Methods Mod. Phys. [**2**]{}(2005), no. 3, 441–466
V. Drab, C. Ringel, [*Indecomposable representations of graphs and algebras*]{}, Mem. Amer. Math. Soc., number 173, 1976.
W. Geigle, H. Lenzing, [*A class of weighted projective curves arising in the representation theory of finite-dimensional algebras*]{}, in [*Singularities, Representations of Algebras and Vector Bundles (Lambrecht, Germany, 1985)*]{}, Lecture Notes in Math. 1273, Springer, Berlin, 1987, 265–297
G. Gonzales-Springer, J.-L. Verdier, [*Construction géométrique de la correspondance de McKay*]{}, Ann. Sci. École Norm. Sup. [**16**]{} (1983), 409–449
D. Happel, [*Triangulated categories in the represntation theory of finite dimensional algebras*]{}, London Math. Soc. Lecture Note Ser., 119, Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 1988.
R. Hartshorne, [*Algebraic Geometry*]{}, Springer, New York, 1977.
M. Kapranov, [*Eisenstein series and quantum affine algebras*]{}, J. Math. Sci. [**84**]{} (1997), 1311–1360
B. Kostant, [*The McKay correspondence, the Coxeter element and representation theory*]{}, Astérisque, hors série, 1985, pp. 209–255
, [*The Coxeter element and the branching law for the finite subgroups of ${\mathrm{SU(2)}}$*]{}, [arXiv:math.RT/0411142]{}
H. Kraft, Ch. Riedtmann, [*Geometry of representations of quivers*]{}, in [*Representations of algebras (Durham, 1985)*]{}, 109–145, London Math. Soc. Lecture Note Ser., 116, Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 1986.
M. Kapranov, E. Vasserot, [*Kleinian singularities, derived categories and Hall algebras*]{}, Math. Ann. [**316**]{} (2000), 565–576
H. Lenzing, [*Curve singularities arising from the representation theory of tame hereditary algebras*]{}, in [*Representation theory, [I]{} (Ottawa, Ont., 1984)*]{}, 199–231, Lecture Notes in Math., 1177
L. Peng, J. Xiao, [*Triangulated categories and Kac–Moody algebras*]{}, Invent. Math. [**140**]{} (2000), 563–603
A. Ocneanu, [*Quantum subgroups, canonical bases and higher tensor structures*]{}, talk at the workshop [*Tensor Categories in Mathematics and Physics*]{}, Erwin Schrödinger Institute, Vienna, June 2004
I. Reiten, M. Van den Bergh, [*Noetherian hereditary abelian categories satisfying Serre duality*]{}, J. Amer. Math. Soc. [**15**]{} (2002), 295–366 (electronic).
C. M. Ringel, [*Representation theory of finite-dimensional algebras*]{}, in [*Representations of algebras (Durham, 1985)*]{}, 7–79, London Math. Soc. Lecture Note Ser., 116, Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 1986.
C. M. Ringel, [*Hall algebras and quantum groups*]{}, Invent. Math. [**101**]{} (1990), 583–592
O. Schiffmann, [*Noncommutative projective curves and quantum loop algebras*]{}, Duke Math. J. [**121**]{} (2004), no. 1, 113–168.
, preprint [arXiv:math.QA/0404032]{}
J.-Y. Shi, [*The enumeration of Coxeter elements*]{}, J. Algebraic Combin. [**6**]{} (1997), no. 2, 161–171.
R. Steinberg, [*Finite subgroups of $SU_2$, Dynkin diagrams and affine Coxeter elements*]{}, Pac. J. Math., [**118**]{} (1985), pp. 587–598
S. Terouanne, [*Sur la catégorie $\mathcal{D}^G(X)$ pour l’action d’un groupe fini avec quotient lisse*]{}, prepublication de l’Institut Fourier n$^\circ$ 569 (2002), [arXiv:math.AG/0206144]{}
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'In this paper, we conjecture an extension of the Hilbert basis theorem and the finite generation of invariants to commutative algebras in symmetric finite tensor categories over fields of positive characteristic. We prove the conjecture in the case of semisimple categories and more generally in the case of categories with fiber functors to the characteristic $p > 0$ Verlinde category of $SL_{2}$. We also construct a symmetric finite tensor category $\sVec_{2}$ over fields of characteristic $2$ and show that it is a candidate for the category of supervector spaces in this characteristic. We further show that $\sVec_{2}$ does not fiber over the characteristic $2$ Verlinde category of $SL_{2}$ and then prove the conjecture for any category fibered over $\sVec_{2}$.'
author:
- Siddharth Venkatesh
bibliography:
- 'Hilbert-Basis.bib'
title: Hilbert Basis Theorem and Finite Generation of Invariants in Symmetric Fusion Categories in Positive Characteristic
---
Introduction
============
Let $\k$ be an algebraically closed field of characteristic $p \ge 0$. We begin by recalling some basic definitions.
Recall that a *monoidal category* is a category $\C$ equipped with a tensor product bifunctor $\otimes$ and a unit object $\mathbf{1}$ that satisfy certain associativity and unit axioms (see [@EGNO 2.1] for more details.) A monoidal category is called *rigid* if left and right duals exist for every object in $\C$ (see [@EGNO 2.10]) and is called *braided* if there exists a natural commutativity isomorphism
$$c_{X, Y} : X \otimes Y \rightarrow Y \otimes X$$ satisfying certain compatibility conditions (see [@EGNO 8.1]). If $c$ also satisfies
$$c_{X, Y} \circ c_{Y, X} = \id_{Y \otimes X}$$ for each $X, Y \in \C$, then we say that the monoidal category $\C$ is *symmetric* ([@EGNO 9.9]).
Recall that a $\k$-linear abelian category $\C$ is said to be $\textit{locally finite}$ ([@EGNO 1.8]) if the following two conditions are satisfied:
- For any two objects $X, Y \in \C$, the $\k$-vector space $\Hom_{\C}(X, Y)$ is finite dimensional.
- Every object in $\C$ has finite length.
$\C$ is called *finite* if, in addition to the above two properties, the following two conditions also hold:
1. $\C$ has enough projectives, i.e., every simple object in $\C$ has a projective cover.
2. There are finitely many isomorphism classes of simple objects in $\C$.
\[tensor\]
A *tensor category* (see [@EGNO 4.1]) over $\k$ is a locally finite $\k$-linear abelian rigid monoidal category $\C$ such that the bifunctor $\otimes : \C \times \C \rightarrow \C$ is bilinear on morphisms and such that $\End_{\C}(\mathbf{1}) \cong \k$. A *fusion category* is a finite semisimple tensor category.
A *symmetric tensor category* is a tensor category $\C$ that is also a symmetric monoidal category. If $\C$ is additionally finite and semisimple as an abelian category, then we call $\C$ a *symmetric fusion category*. When $\C$ is a symmetric tensor category, we will use $c$ to denote the commutativity isomorphism (the braiding) and $c_{X, Y}$ to denote specifically the commutativity isomorphism $X \otimes Y \rightarrow Y \otimes X$.
For the benefit of the reader, we give some simple examples of tensor categories.
1. The simplest examples of symmetric tensor categories are $\Vec$ and $\sVec$ which are, respectively, the categories of finite dimensional $\k$-vector spaces and finite dimensional $\k$-vector superspaces. To define superspaces we assume $p \not= 2$. Here, the braiding is just the swap map and the signed swap map, respectively.
2. Similarly, the category of representations over $\k$ of a finite group is a symmetric finite tensor category over $\k$ with braiding given by the swap map.
3. A slightly more complicated category is the universal Verlinde category in characteristic $p$, which we denote as $\Ver_{p}$, which is constructed as a quotient of the category of finite dimensional representations of $\mathbb{Z}/p\mathbb{Z}$ over $\k$ of characteristic $p$. The full details regarding the construction is given in section 2.1 as the construction is slightly technical. This category will be extremely important in the sequel as it plays a central role in the statement of the main theorems of this paper.
We next recall the notion of a symmetric tensor functor. A *symmetric tensor functor* between symmetric tensor categories is a faithful, exact, additive monoidal functor that is compatible with the commutativitiy isomorphisms. In the special case when the target category is $\Vec$ (resp. $\sVec$, resp. $\Ver_{p}$) we call the functor a *fiber functor* (resp. *super fiber functor*, resp. *Verlinde fiber functor*.) In addition, if there exists a symmetric tensor functor from $\C$ to $\D$, we will say that $\C$ is fibered over $\D$.
An example of a fiber functor is the forgetful functor $\Rep_{\k}(G) \rightarrow \k$. On the other hand, $\Ver_{p}$ is an example of a symmetric fusion category that does not admit a fiber or super fiber functor.
For any symmetric tensor category $\C$, there is always a canonical full symmetric tensor functor $\Vec \rightarrow \C$, defined by sending the one-dimensional vector space to the unit object in $\C$. As a result, we can identify the subcategory of $\C$ consisting of objects that are direct sums of copies of $\mathbf{1}$, with the category of vector spaces over the base field. As a general principle, we call such objects trivial and commonly identify $X = V \otimes 1$, with the vector space $V = \Hom_{\C}(1, X)$.
Deligne, in [@De], introduced the notion of subexponential growth for a symmetric tensor category (though he does not explicitly use this term). We say that $\C$ has *subexponential growth* if for any object $X$, there exists a positive number $c_{X}$ such that the $\length(X^{\otimes n}) \le c_{X}^{n}$ for all $n \ge 0.$ Deligne then proved that a symmetric tensor category $\C$ in characteristic 0 has subexponential growth if and only if it admits a super fiber functor (see [@De; @EGNO; @O] for more details.)
As a consequence of Deligne’s theorem, every symmetric tensor category $\C$ of subexponential growth in characteristic zero has the Hilbert basis property, i.e., every finitely generated commutative algebra $A$ in $\C^{\ind}$ is Noetherian and for any object $X \in \C$, $A \otimes X$ is a Noetherian $A$-module (hence, so is every quotient). Additionally, in the case of a fusion category, Deligne’s theorem implies that $\C = \Rep(G, u)$, the $\Z/2\Z$-graded representation category of a finite group $G$ with parity operator given by a fixed central element $u$ of order $2$ in $G$. Hence, by standard invariant theory arguments, for any finitely generated commutative ind-algebra $A$, the ring of invariants of $A$ is finitely generated and $A$ is finitely generated as a module over its invariants.
Recently, in [@O], Victor Ostrik proved an extension of Deligne’s theorem to symmetric fusion categories in characteristic $p > 0$. More precisely, he proved that any symmetric fusion category in characteristic $p > 0$ admits a Verlinde fiber functor to $\Ver_{p}$. The main goal of this paper is to apply these results of Ostrik to the Hilbert basis problem and the problem of finite generation of invariants.
We now turn to the results of this paper. Recall first that in any symmetric tensor category, we have a notion of a commutative algebra, which is an object equipped with an associative unital multiplication morphism that is invariant under the braiding. Similarly, we also have a notion of a module over a commutative algebra. Henceforth, fix a symmetric finite tensor category $\C$ over a field $\k$ of characteristic $p > 0$, with braiding $c$. Leaving aside the technical definitions of finite generation, Noetherianity and ind-completions $\C^{ind}$ till the end of section 2.1, our first main result is as follows.
\[Hilb2\] If $\C$ admits a Verlinde fiber functor, then every finitely generated commutative ind-algebra $A \in \C^{\ind}$ is Noetherian as an algebra.
If $\C$ is any category for which the conclusion of Theorem \[Hilb2\] is true, then we say that $\C$ has the *Hilbert basis property*. In particular, Ostrik’s main result in [@O] gives us the following corollary of the above theorem.
\[Hilb3\] Symmetric fusion categories have the Hilbert basis property.
Next, recall the definition of the Chevalley property. We say that a tensor category has the Chevalley property if the tensor product of simple objects is semisimple. Using Corollary \[Hilb3\], we prove the following result:
\[Hilb4\] Suppose $\C$ is a symmetric tensor category fibered over a symmetric tensor category with finitely many isomorphism classes of simple objects, in which the Chevalley property holds. Then, $\C$ has the Hilbert basis property.
The above corollaries show that the Hilbert basis property holds in a very general setting, which may lead one to think that it should hold for arbitrary symmetric tensor categories. To show that this is not the case, we give an example of a category for which the Hilbert basis property fails. In particular, this category will contain infinitely many isomorphism classes of simple objects, which shows that the finiteness assumption in Corollary \[Hilb4\] is essential.
Consider the Deligne category $\Rep S_{t}$ (see [@E] for details) associated to the symmetric group at $t \notin \Z_{\ge 0}$. This category is a semisimple symmetric tensor category but there are infinitely many isomorphism classes of simple objects. These isomorphism classes are correspond bijectively to partitions (of arbitrary size) and are hence labeled by Young diagrams. Let $X$ be the simple object corresponding to the one box diagram. This object can be thought of as an interpolation of the reflection representation for $S_{n}$ as $n$ grows large ([@E 2.2]). One can check that $S(X)^{\inv}$ is isomorphic to the polynomial algebra in infinitely many variables and is hence not Noetherian as a module over itself, and thus is certainly not Noetherian as an algebra (we omit the proof as we do not use this result in the sequel). Thus, the Hilbert basis property fails for $\Rep S_{t}$ if $t \notin \Z$.
We next turn to the problem of invariants. Again, leaving aside the formal definition of invariants of ind-objects in symmetric tensor categories to the end of section 2.1, we just note that, as in the classical setting, the invariants of any commutative ind-algebra in a symmetric tensor category form a commutative ind-subalgebra. This brings us to our next main result of the paper.
\[Inv\] Suppose $\C$ is a symmetric finite tensor category that admits a Verlinde fiber functor $F : \C \rightarrow \Ver_{p}$. Let $A \in \C^{\ind}$ be a finitely generated commutative algebra and let $A^{\inv}$ be its invariant subalgebra. Then, $A^{\inv}$ is finitely generated and $A$ is a finitely generated $A^{\inv}$-module.
Following Ostrik’s result, this theorem has the following corollary.
Let $\C$ be a symmetric fusion category over $\k$ of characteristic $p$. Let $A$ be a finitely generated commutative algebra in $\C^{\ind}$. Then, $A^{\inv}$ is finitely generated and $A$ is a finitely generated $A^{\inv}$-module.
Note that a statement in characteristic 0 analogous to the theorem above fails to be true. More precisely, there exists a category $\C$ fibered over $\sVec$ and a finitely generated commutative ind-algebra $A \in \C$ such that $A^{\inv}$ is not finitely generated.
Let $\C$ be the category of complex representations of the $1$-dimensional purely odd Lie superalgebra, which is the category of super vector spaces
$$V = V_{+} \oplus V_{-}$$ with an odd linear map $D : V \rightarrow V$ that squares to $0$. Let $V$ be the representation with basis $\{x, y, z\}$ $x$ even and $y, z$ odd and $D$ defined by sending $x$ to $y$ and $y, z$ to $0$. Let $A$ be the symmetric algebra of $V$ in $\C^{\ind}$. Then,
$$A = \mathbb{C}[x] \otimes \bigwedge(y, z).$$ Now, $A^{\inv} = \Ker(D)_{\text{even}}$ has basis over $\mathbb{C}$ given by $\{1, x^{n}yz : n \ge 1\}$ and is hence not finitely generated. Additionally, $A$ is not finitely generated as a module over $A^{\inv}$.
The reason this example fails to give a counterexample to the theorem in characteristic $p > 0$ is because in characteristic $p$, $x^{p}$ is also in $A^{\inv}$. Thus, $A^{\inv}$ becomes finitely generated and $A$ becomes a finitely generated module over $A^{\inv}$.
The main strategy to proving Theorem \[Hilb2\] is to prove Theorem \[Hilb2\] for $\Ver_{p}$ and then to lift these properties along the Verlinde fiber functor. We then use this theorem, along with the construction of a Reynolds’ operator, i.e., an $A^{\inv}$-module projection from $A$ onto $A^{\inv}$, to prove finite generation of invariants for fusion categories.
Following this result, we turn to the question of finiteness of an algebra over its invariants and prove this using an analog of the Frobenius homomorphism in $\Ver_{p}$. This approach works uniformly for semisimple and non-semisimple categories. We then use this result to prove finite generation of invariants in an arbitrary tensor category, which also gives a different proof of the result in the fusion setting.
In this paper, the above results are proved only in the case of tensor categories over algebraically closed fields. There are straightforward generalizations of these results to non-algebraically closed fields. However, a discussion of the generalized results would require a discussion of tensor categories over non-algebraically closed fields, which is outside the scope of the paper.
After proving the above theorems for categories fibered over $\Ver_{p}$, we consider the case (in characteristic 2) of a category that does not admit a fiber functor to $\Ver_{2}$ (which is just $\Vec$ in characteristic $2$). Let $\k$ now be any field of characteristic $2$, not necessarily algebraically closed. Consider the commutative $\k$-algebra $D = \k[d]/(d^{2})$. This acquires the structure of a Hopf algebra with primitive $d$ (characteristic $2$ is required for the comultiplication to preserve the relation $d^{2} = 0$.)
We can give this Hopf algebra a triangular structure (see [@EGNO 8.3]) via the $R$-matrix
$$R := 1 \otimes 1 + d \otimes d.$$ Then, $\Rep D$, with the above triangular structure, acquires the structure of a symmetric finite tensor category.
There are two reasons this category is particularly interesting. First, $\Rep D$ does not fiber over $\Ver_{2}$ (which is just the category of $\k$-vector spaces). Hence not only is it not covered by the previous theorems in this paper but it is also a counterexample in characteristic $2$ to Conjecture 1.3 in [@O]. The second reason is that over fields of characteristic $2$, the ordinary definition of supervector spaces does not make sense as parity has no meaning. Instead, we can actually view $\Rep D$ as the correct category of supervector spaces over $\k$, as it is a nonsemisimple reduction of the category of supervector spaces over an ramified extension of the $2$-adics. Both the statements above will be elaborated upon and rigorously proved in section 2.3.
Let $\k$ now be an algebraically closed field of characteristic $2$. In section 2.3, we show that there is only one simple in $\Rep D$, the unit object $\mathbf{1}$. Hence, $\Rep D$ has the Chevalley property. Thus, by Corollary \[Hilb4\], if $\C$ is a symmetric finite tensor category fibered over $\Rep D$, then $\C$ has the Hilbert basis property. Our final goal of the paper is to show that an analog of Theorem \[Inv\] also holds for such $\C$. Before stating the result, we introduce some notation, by using $\sVec_{2}$ to denote $\Rep D$ (justified by the paragraph above and section 2.3). The following theorem now holds.
\[Inv2\] Suppose $\C$ is a symmetric finite tensor category fibered over $\sVec_{2}$ and let $A$ be a finitely generated commutative ind-algebra in $\C$. Then, $A^{\inv}$ is finitely generated and $A$ is finite as a module over $A^{\inv}$.
The strategy for proving this theorem will be to reduce the problem to the classical case of commutative $\k$-algebras.
Acknowledgements
----------------
I would like to thank Victor Ostrik for his generous advice regarding his results and the results of this paper. I would also like to thank Augustus Lonergan and Nathan Harman for many useful conversations. Above all, I am deeply grateful to Pavel Etingof for suggesting the problem and providing invaluable advice. In particular, I thank him for explaining to me the definition of $\sVec_{2}$, the proof that it does not fiber over $\Vec$, and its intepretation in characteristic 2 (see Subsection 1.5). I also wish to thank him for suggesting the Deligne categories $\Rep S_{t}$ at $t \notin \Z_{\ge 0}$ as an example of a symmetric tensor category in which the Hilbert basis property fails to hold. I also wish to think the referees who reviewed this paper for their helpful comments regarding its organization and for pointing out errors in some of the proofs. This work was partially supported by the NSF grant DMS-1000113.
Preliminaries
=============
We begin by recalling some technical facts about tensor categories and symmetric monoidal categories. We first recall two facts about tensor categories we will use in the sequel.
1. As a consequence of rigidity (existence of left and right duals), the tensor product bifunctor $\otimes$ is biexact (see [@EGNO 4.2] for a proof).
2. In any tensor category $\C$, the unit object $\mathbf{1}$ is simple (see [@EGNO 4.3] for a proof).
Next, note that the assumption that a monoidal category is symmetric also endows it with extra structure. Recall that a *pivotal structure* on a rigid monoidal category $\C$ is a natural monoidal isomorphism $X \rightarrow X^{**}$. Such a structure allows us to define left and right traces of any morphism $X \rightarrow X$ and the pivotal structure is called *spherical* if for every morphism, the left trace equals the right trace (see [@EGNO 4.7].) In particular, we can define for any object $X$, $\dim(X) = \mathrm{Tr}(\id_{X}).$ In the case of a symmetric monoidal category, we have a natural spherical structure given by
$$\begin{tikzpicture}
\matrix (m) [matrix of math nodes,row sep=6em,column sep=6em,minimum width=6em]
{ X & X \otimes X^{*} \otimes X^{**} & X^{*} \otimes X \otimes X^{**} & X^{**} \\};
\path[-stealth]
(m-1-1) edge node[auto] {$\id_{X} \otimes \coev_{X^{*}}$} (m-1-2)
(m-1-2) edge node[auto] {$c_{X, X^{*}} \otimes \id_{X^{**}}$} (m-1-3)
(m-1-3) edge node[auto] {$\ev_{X} \otimes \id_{X^{**}}$}(m-1-4);
\end{tikzpicture}$$ see [@EGNO 9.9]. If $\C$ is now a tensor category equipped with a spherical structure, we say that $\C$ is a spherical tensor category. Recall that for spherical monoidal $\C$, a morphism $f : X \rightarrow Y$ is said to be $\textit{negligible}$ if for any morphism $u : Y \rightarrow X$, the trace of $fu$ is $0$ (see [@O 2.5]). We will let $\N(X, Y)$ denote the space of negligible morphisms between $X$ and $Y$. We will also let $\N(\C)$ denote the objects $X$ in $\C$ for which $\id_{X}$ is negligible and call these objects negligible as well.
We now give a constructions related to symmetric tensor categories that will be extremely important in the sequel. As a special case of this construction, we will obtain the important universal Verlinde category $\Ver_{p}$ that is of central importance to the main theorems of this paper.
\[Ver\]
To any rigid monoidal $\k$-linear category $\C$ endowed with a spherical structure, we can associate a rigid monoidal quotient category $\overline{\C}$ whose objects are the objects in $\C$ and whose morphism spaces are $\Hom_{\C}(X, Y)/\N(X, Y).$ Additionally, if $\C$ is in fact a tensor category, then the collection of all $\N(X, Y)$ is a tensor ideal, i.e., that if either $f$ or $g$ is negligible, then so are $fg$ and $f \otimes g.$ Hence, in this case, the tensor structure, braiding and spherical structure on $\C$ descend to a tensor structure, braiding and spherical structure on $\overline{\C}$, which is hence a spherical tensor category. In particular, this quotient category is semisimple and the simple objects are the indecomposables $X \in \C$ that are not in $\N(\C)$.
We now use this construction to define the universal Verlinde category $\Ver_{p}$ ($p > 0$) as the quotient of $\Rep_{\k}(\Z/p\Z)$ by the negligible morphisms. This category is semisimple with $p-1$ simple objects $L_{1}, \ldots, L_{p-1}$, where $L_{1} = \mathbf{1}$ and the fusion rules are given by
$$L_{r} \otimes L_{s} \cong \sum_{i=1}^{\min(r, s, p-r, p-s)} L_{|r -s| + 2i - 1}.$$ See [@O 3.2] for more details. Later in the paper, we will give an alternative description of $\Ver_{p}$ in terms of tilting modules for $SL_{2}$ in characteristic $p$ that will prove to be more useful for the problems considered in this paper.
We next discuss the connection of fiber functors to Hopf algebras.
\[Tannakian\] **Tannakian Reconstruction**
Let $\C$ be a symmetric finite tensor category and let $\D$ be a symmetric tensor category such that there exists a symmetric tensor functor $F: \D \rightarrow \C$. Then, $\D$ is isomorphic as a symmetric tensor category to the category of finite dimensional comodules of $\mathrm{Coend}(F)$, which is a commutative Hopf algebra in $\C^{\ind}$. If $\D$ is finite, then $\mathrm{Coend}(F)$ is a commutative Hopf algebra in $\C$ and not just a commutative Hopf ind-algebra.
For a proof of this fact in the case where $\C$ is the category of $\k$-vector spaces, see [@EGNO 5.2, 5.4]. The proof in the case of general $\C$ is completely analogous.
We next introduce some technical definitions that are used in the statement of the main theorems of this paper. We begin by defining the ind-completion of a symmetric tensor category.
\[ind\]
Let $\C$ be a symmetric tensor category. By $\C^{\ind}$, we denote the ind-completion of $\C$, i.e., the closure of $\C$ under taking filtered colimits of objects in $\C$. Since the tensor product in $\C$ is exact, it commutes with taking filtered colimits and hence extends to a tensor product on $\C^{\ind}$. Additionally, naturality of the braiding implies that the braiding extends to a symmetric structure on $\C^{\ind}$. $\C^{\ind}$ is thus a symmetric $\k$-linear abelian monoidal category in which the tensor product structure $\otimes$ is exact (but it is neither rigid nor locally finite).
A specific example of $\C^{\ind}$ that we will repeatedly use in the sequel is in the case where $\C$ is a symmetric fusion category, i.e., when $\C$ is finite and semisimple. In this case, the objects of $\C^{\ind}$ are precisely the (possibly infinite) direct sums of the simple objects in $\C$.
As a matter of convention, if $\C$ is a symmetric finite tensor category, when we use the word “object", we will mean an object in $\C$, i.e., an object of finite length in $\C^{\ind}$ and we will use the term ind-object whenever referring to objects in $\C^{\ind}$ that may have infinite length. Sometimes, for emphasis, we will use the phrase “actual object" to refer to the finite length objects.
We now define the notions of finite generation and Noetherianity for commutative ind-algebras in symmetric tensor categories and their modules. Recall that in any symmetric tensor category, the notion of the symmetric algebra of an object is well defined as a commutative ind-algebra. For any object $X$ in $\C^{\ind}$, let $S(X)$ denote its symmetric algebra.
We say that a commutative algebra $A$ in $\C^{\ind}$ is *finitely generated* if there exists some actual object $X \in \C$ and a surjective morphism of algebras
$$S(X) \rightarrow A.$$ For an arbitrary commutative algebra $A \in \C^{\ind}$, we say that an $A$-module $M \in \C^{\ind}$ is finitely generated if there exists an object $X \in \C$ and a surjective morphism of $A$-modules
$$A \otimes X \rightarrow M$$ where the module structure on $A \otimes X$ comes from the module structure on $A$.
\[Noetherian\] For a commutative ind-algebra $A$, we say that an $A$-module $M$ is *Noetherian* if its $A$-submodules satisfy the ascending chain condition, i.e., that for any sequence of submodules
$$M_{0} \rightarrow M_{1} \rightarrow M_{2} \rightarrow \cdots$$ in which the morphisms are mono, there exists some $n$ such that for all $N \ge n$, the map $M_{N} \rightarrow M_{N+1}$ is an isomorphism. We say that $A$ is a *Noetherian algebra* if all of its finitely generated modules are Noetherian.
We will prove in section 2.2 that Noetherianity of a module is equivalent to finite generation of submodules.
Unlike the classical case, in the general setting of an arbitrary tensor categories we don’t know if an algebra which is Noetherian as a module over itself is necessarily Noetherian in the sense of Definition \[Noetherian\].
We end this subsection by formally defining the invariants of an ind-object in a symmetric tensor category $\C$.
Let $X \in \C^{\ind}$. Then, we define the *object of invariants* of $X$ to be the sum of all subobjects in $X$ that are isomorphic to $\mathbf{1}$. We denote this by $X^{\inv}$. Since a sum of simple objects is always a direct sum, $X^{\inv}$ is a direct sum of copies of $\mathbf{1}$, i.e., it is trivial. Thus, following the general principle as stated earlier, we view $X^{\inv}$ as an ordinary vector space by identifying it with $\Hom_{\C}(\mathbf{1}, X).$
If $\C$ is a symmetric finite tensor category with a Verlinde fiber functor $F$, then by Remark \[Tannakian\] $\C$ is equivalent as a symmetric tensor category to the category of finite dimensional comodules of a commutative Hopf algebra $H$ in $\Ver_{p}$. In this case, for any comodule $X$ with coaction $\Delta$, $X^{\inv}$ is the sum of all subobjects $Y$ such that $\Delta|_{Y}$ coincides with the inclusion of $Y$ into $X \otimes H$ as $Y \otimes \mathbf{1}$ (with $\mathbf{1}$ in $\Ver_{p}$ identified with the unit object in $H$).
We now prove some preliminary facts about commutative ind-algebras in tensor categories.
Let $F : \C \rightarrow \D$ be a symmetric tensor functor between symmetric tensor categories. Since this is exact, it extends to a functor $F : \C^{\ind} \rightarrow \D^{\ind}$.
\[funct:symm\] Let $X \in \C^{\ind}$. Then,
$$F(S(X)) \cong S(F(X))$$ as objects in $\D^{\ind}$.
This follows from the fact that symmetric tensor functors preserve tensor products and the commutativity isomorphisms.
We next show that taking symmetric algebra of a direct sum gives a tensor product of symmetric algebras. First, we need to make a definition.
Let $A$ and $B$ be commutative ind-algebras in $\C$. Then, we define a commutative multiplication on $A \otimes B$
$$A \otimes B \otimes A \otimes B \rightarrow A \otimes B$$ as $(m_{A} \otimes m_{B}) \circ (\id_{A} \otimes c_{B, A} \otimes \id_{B})$.
It is clear that $A \otimes B$ satisfies the same universal property in the category of commutative ind-algebras in $\C$ as it does in the standard case when $\C = \Vec$. Hence, we have the following lemma.
\[symm:sum\] Let $X, Y \in \C^{\ind}$. Then, we have a natural isomorphism
$$S(X \oplus Y) \cong S(X) \otimes S(Y)$$ of commutative ind-algebras.
The proof follows by showing that both objects satisfy the same universal property. Let $\C'$ be the category of commutative ind-algebras in $\C$ and let $A \in \C'$. Then, we have natural isomorphisms,
$$\begin{aligned}
\Hom_{\C'}(S(X \oplus Y), A) &\cong \Hom_{\C}(X \oplus Y, A) \\
&\cong \Hom_{\C}(X, A) \oplus \Hom_{\C}(Y, A) \\
&\cong \Hom_{\C'}(S(X), A) \oplus \Hom_{\C'}(S(Y), A) \\
&\cong \Hom_{\C'}(S(X)\otimes S(Y), A).\end{aligned}$$
We next prove a claim we made in the introduction: Noetherianity is equivalent to finite generation of submodules.
\[Noeth:finite\] Let $A$ be a commutative ind-algebra in $\C$. Let $M$ be an $A$-module. Then, $M$ is Noetherian if and only if every submodule $N$ of $M$ is finitely generated.
We first prove the forward direction. Suppose $M$ is Noetherian and assume for contradiction that there exists a submodule $N$ of $M$ that is not finitely generated. We inductively create an infinite ascending chain of finitely generated submodules $\{N_{i}\}$ of $N$ that does not terminate.
Since $N$ is an ind-object in $\C$, it must contain an actual object $X_{0}$. Let $N_{0}$ be the submodule generated by $X_{0}$, i.e., let it be the submodule given by the image of $A \otimes X \rightarrow M$ under the action map. Then, as $X_{0}$ is a subobject of $N$, $N_{0}$ is a submodule of $N$ and is finitely generated. This is the first step of the construction. Now, suppose $N_{r}$ has been defined as a finitely generated submodule of $N$. Then, the inclusion of $N_{r}$ into $N$ is not an isomorphism as $N$ would then have been finitely generated. Hence, the cokernel of this inclusion is not $0$ and thus contains a nonzero object $Y \in \C$. Take the submodule generated by this object and call it $\overline{N_{r+1}}$, which is a submodule of $N/N_{r}$. Hence, we can find a submodule $N_{r+1}$ of $N$ such that the inclusion of $N_{r}$ into $N$ factors properly through $N_{r+1}$, and the quotient $N_{r+1}/N_{r}$ is $\overline{N_{r+1}}$.
We need to show that $N_{r+1}$ is finitely generated. We know that $N_{r}$ is finitely generated and so is $N_{r+1}/N_{r}$. Let $X_{r}$ and $Y$ be actual objects in $\C$ with $X_{r} \subseteq N_{r}$ and $Y \subseteq \overline{N_{r+1}}$ such that the natural maps
$$A \otimes X_{r} \rightarrow N_{r}$$ and
$$A \otimes Y \rightarrow \overline{N_{r+1}}$$ are epimorphisms. We claim that there exists some subobject $Z$ of $N_{r+1}$, with $Z \in \C$, such that the projection from $Z$ to $\overline{N_{r+1}}$ contains $Y$. This is because the direct limit of the images of subobjects of $N_{r+1}$ under the projection map is $\overline{N_{r+1}}$ and hence any object of finite length must be contained in the direct limit of some finite subset of these images. So, if $Z_{1}, \ldots, Z_{n}$ are subobjects of $N_{r+1}$, the sum of whose images contains $Y$, then we take $Z = \sum_{i=1}^{n} Z_{i}$.
We now claim that $X_{r}$ and $Z$ together generate $N_{r+1}$. Let $X_{r+1} = Z + X_{r}$. Then, the submodule generated by $X_{r+1}$ contains $N_{r}$ (as it contains $X_{r}$) and surjects under projection to $\overline{N_{r+1}}$ (as it contains $Z$). Hence, $X_{r+1}$ generates $N_{r+1}$, which is therefore finitely generated.
We now prove the reverse direction. Suppose every submodule of $M$ is finitely generated. Let
$$M_{0} \rightarrow M_{1} \rightarrow \cdots$$ be a sequence of monomorphisms of $A$-submodules of $M$. Then, since $\C^{\ind}$ is closed under filtered colimits, we can take the colimit (in this case the union) of this sequence to get an ind-subobject $M'$ of $M$. Additionally, since the $A$-module structure on $M_{i}$ commutes with the morphisms that we take the colimit of, $M'$ acquires a natural structure of an $A$-module. Hence, by the assumption that $A$-submodules of $M$ are finitely generated, there exists an object $X \in \C$ and an epimorphism $A \otimes X \rightarrow M'$ of $A$-modules.
But now, such a morphism has to come from a morphism in $\C^{\ind}$ from $X$ to $M'$. As $X$ is an actual object in $\C$, its image in $M'$ has finite length and hence must lie in some $M_{i}$ (as otherwise, taking the intersection of the image with $M_{i}$ gives an infinite ascending chain of subobjects of $X$ that does not stabilize, which cannot exist). Hence, as $M_{i}$ is an $A$-module, the image of $A \otimes X \rightarrow M'$ lies in $M_{i}$ and hence the inclusion of $M_{i}$ into $M'$ is an isomorphism. Hence, for all $N \ge i$, the inclusion $M_{N} \rightarrow M_{N+1}$ is an isomorphism. This proves that $M$ is Noetherian.
Recall that any symmetric tensor category $\C$ contains the category of vector spaces as the symmetric tensor subcategory consisting of direct sums of copies of $\mathbf{1}$. Hence, for any $n$, $\k[x_{1}, \ldots, x_{n}]$ can be viewed as an ind-algebra in $\C^{\ind}$ via this embedding of $\Vec$ into $\C$. Our final goal of this section is to prove that tensoring with this polynomial algebra preserves Noetherianity. The proof of this assertion is very similar to the proof of the classical Hilbert basis theorem but is stated in a categorical manner. We give the statement and proof below. If the proof seems complicated, just translate the statements to the case when everything is actually a vector space and it will make sense.
\[poly\] Let $A$ be a commutative ind-algebra in $\C$. Let $M$ be a Noetherian $A$-module. Then, $\k[x_{1}, \ldots, x_{r}] \otimes M$ has a natural structure of a Noetherian $\k[x_{1}, \ldots, x_{r}] \otimes A$-module.
By induction on $r$, we may assume $r = 1$. We can then write
$$\k[x] \otimes M = M \oplus xM \oplus x^{2}M \oplus \cdots$$ Here $xM$ can be viewed as $x \otimes M$ or as the image of $M$ under the action of $x$. This clearly has a natural structure of a $\k[x] \otimes A$-module defined as $\id_{\k[x]} \otimes c_{A, \k[x]} \otimes \id_{M}$ followed by componentwise action. Using Lemma \[Noeth:finite\], we will show that this is Noetherian by showing that any $\k[x] \otimes A$-submodule $N$ of $\k[x] \otimes M$ is finitely generated.
For $n \ge 0$, define $M_{n} = M \oplus \cdots \oplus x^{n}M$ and let $\pi_{n}$ be the projection $\k[x] \otimes M \rightarrow x^{n}M \cong M$. For each finitely generated $A$-submodule $X$ of $N$, we define the associated object of leading coefficients $LC(X)$ , which will be an $A$-submodule of $M$. Any such finitely generated submodule must be contained in $M_{n}$ for some $n$. Let $n(X)$ be the minimal such $n$ for $X$ and define $LC(X) = \pi_{n(X)}(X) \subseteq x^{n(X)}M$, which we identify with $M$ by the multiplication isomorphism $x^{n(X)} : M \rightarrow x^{n(X)}M.$
Define $LC_{N}$ to be the sum of $LC(X)$ over all finitely generated $A$-submodules $X$ of $N$. This is an $A$-submodule of $M$ and is hence finitely generated by Noetherianity of $M$. If $A \otimes Z \rightarrow LC_{N}$ is a surjection of $A$-modules with $Z \in \C$, then this comes from a morphism $Z \rightarrow LC_{N}$ in $\C$. Let $X_{1}, \ldots, X_{m}$ be finitely generated $A$-submodules of $N$ such that $\sum_{i=1}^{m} LC(X_{i})$ contains the image of the morphism from $Z$ (some such finite list must exist as $Z$ has finite length). Then, $LC_{N} = \sum_{i=1}^{m} LC(X_{i})$.
Let $d_{i} = n(X_{i})$ and let $d$ be the maximum of the $d_{i}$. Finally, define
$$B: = k[x](N \cap M_{d}).$$ Clearly $B \subseteq N$ and by choice of $d$, we also have
$$\sum_{i=1}^{m} k[x]X_{i} \subseteq B.$$ We claim that $B = N$. Suppose for contradiction that $B \not = N$. Since $N \in \C^{\ind}$, it is the sum of all the objects it contains. Hence, we can find some object $Y \in \C$ that is a subobject of $N$ but is not contained in $B$. Taking the $A$-submodule of $N$ generated by $Y$, we see that there exist finitely generated $A$-submodules of $N$ that are not contained in $B$. Let $N'$ be such a submodule such that $h = n(N')$ is minimal amongst all such submodules. Note that $h > d$ as otherwise $N' \subseteq N \cap M_{d} \subseteq B$.
Consider now the finitely generated $A$-submodule $B \cap M_{h}$ of $B$. Note that
$$\sum_{i=1}^{m}x^{h-d_{i}} X_{i} \subseteq B \cap M_{h}$$ and hence, $LC_{N} \subseteq \pi_{h}(B \cap M_{h})$. From this, it follows that
$$\pi_{h}(N') = LC(N') \subseteq LC(B \cap M_{h}) = \pi_{h}(B \cap M_{h}) = \sum_{i=1}^{m} LC(X_{i}) = LC_{N}.$$
We show this implies the existence of a finitely generated $A$-submodule $N''$ of $(B \cap M_{h}) + N'$ that is not contained in $B \cap M_{h}$ and has $n(N'') < n(N')$. For this purpose, consider the inclusion of $B \cap M_{h}$ into $(B \cap M_{h}) + N'$. Since $B \cap M_{h}, N' \subseteq M_{h}$, we have a commutative diagram
$$\begin{tikzpicture}
\matrix (m) [matrix of math nodes,row sep=3em,column sep=3em,minimum width=3em]
{ 0 & B \cap M_{h-1} & B \cap M_{h} & \pi_{h}(B) & 0 \\
0 & ((B \cap M_{h}) + N') \cap M_{h-1} & (B \cap M_{h}) + N' & \pi_{h}((B \cap M_{h}) + N') & 0 \\};
\path[-stealth]
(m-1-1) edge (m-1-2)
(m-1-2) edge (m-1-3)
(m-1-3) edge (m-1-4)
(m-1-4) edge (m-1-5)
(m-2-1) edge (m-2-2)
(m-2-2) edge (m-2-3)
(m-2-3) edge (m-2-4)
(m-2-4) edge (m-2-5)
(m-1-2) edge node[auto] {$\alpha$} (m-2-2)
(m-1-3) edge node[auto] {$\beta$} (m-2-3)
(m-1-4) edge node[auto] {$\gamma$} (m-2-4);
\end{tikzpicture}$$ where the rows are exact and the vertical maps are induced by the inclusion of $B \cap M_{h}$ into $(B \cap M_{h}) + N'$. All three vertical maps are monomorphisms. $\gamma$ is an epimorphism based on the argument above. But, by choice of $N'$, $\beta$ is not an epimorphism. Hence, $\alpha$ cannot be an epimorphism by the five lemma. Hence, we can find a finitely generated nonzero $A$-submodule $N''$ of $((B \cap M_{h}) + N') \cap M_{h-1} \subseteq N \cap M_{h-1}$ that is not contained in $B \cap M_{h}$. Since $N''$ is contained in $M_{h-1} \subseteq M_{h}$, this implies that $N''$ is not contained in $B$. This contradicts the minimality of $n(N')$. Hence, $N=B$ is hence finitely generated as a $\k[x] \otimes A$-module.
We end section 2 by proving the claims made in section 1.5. Let $\k$ be a field of characteristic $2$ and let $D$ be the Hopf algebra $\k[d]/(d^{2})$ defined as in section 1.5, with the $R$-matrix
$$R = 1 \otimes 1 + d \otimes d.$$
We first show that $\Rep D$ does not fiber over $\Ver_{2}$, which is just the category of vector spaces over $\k$. This proof was suggested by Victor Ostrik. Note that objects in $\Rep D$ are $\k$-vector spaces $V$ equipped with endomorphisms $d : V \rightarrow V$ such that $d^{2} = 0$. Thus, $\Rep D$ has two indecomposables: the one dimensional vector space $\mathbf{1}$ with $d = 0$, and the two dimensional vector space $W$ with $d$ the strictly upper triangular matrix
$$\left(\begin{array}{cc}
0 & 1\\
0 & 0 \end{array}\right).$$ Now, $W$ is a self extension of $\mathbf{1}$. Thus, if there existed a fiber functor $F: \Rep D \rightarrow \Ver_{2}$, then, $F(W) \cong \mathbf{1} \oplus \mathbf{1}$. Hence, if $U$ is the copy of $\mathbf{1}$ that is a subobject of $W$, then the existence of a fiber functor would imply that the natural map
$$S(U) \rightarrow S(W)$$ is a monomorphism, as the natural map $S(F(U)) \rightarrow S(F(W))$ is a monomorphism. But we can show that this fails to be true. $W$ has a basis $\{x, y\}$ with $d(y) = 0$, $d(x) = y$. Then, $\k\{y\} = U$. Using the definition of the $R$-matrix, we can see that for $a, b \in S(X)$,
$$[a, b] = d(a)d(b).$$ Hence, in $S(X)$,
$$0 = [x, x] = d(x)d(x) = y^{2}.$$ Thus, the natural map $S(U) \rightarrow S(W)$ is not a monomorphism and $\Rep D$ is not fibered over $\Ver_{2}$.
Note that algebras of the form $S(W \otimes V)$ (with $W$ the 2 dimensional indecomposable in $\Rep D$ as above and $V$ a multiplicity space) appeared as $\widetilde{\Omega}(V)$ in the study of lower central series of free associative algebras in [@BEJKL].
We next show that for $\k = \F_{2}$, the field with $2$ elements, $\Rep D$ can be constructed as a nonsemisimple reduction of the category of supervector spaces over a ramified extension of $\Q_{2}$, the $2$-adics. Hence, over any field of characteristic $2$, we can consider $\Rep D$ to be a nonsemisimple analog of supervector spaces (by extension of scalars).
Let $\F = \Q_{2}[\sqrt{2}]$ and let $\O = \Z_{2}[\sqrt{2}]$ be the ring of integers in $\F$. Consider the group algebra $H$ of $\Z/2\Z = \langle 1, g \rangle$ (over $\F$) with $R$-matrix
$$R = \frac{1}{2}(1 \otimes 1 + 1 \otimes g + g \otimes 1 - g \otimes g).$$ Then, $\Rep H$ is the category of supervector spaces over $\F$.
Let $b = g - 1$. Then, we can rewrite $R$ as
$$R = 1 \otimes 1 - \frac{2}b \otimes b.$$ Let $a =\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} b$. Then, $a^{2} = -\sqrt{2}a$,
$$R = 1 \otimes 1 - a \otimes a$$ and
$$\Delta(a) = a \otimes 1 +1 \otimes a + \sqrt{2}(a \otimes a).$$
This defines an order in $H$ over $\O$ and reducing this order modulo the maximal ideal in $\O$ (the ideal generated by $\sqrt{2}$) gives us our Hopf algebra $D$ over $\F_{2}$. Thus, $\Rep D$ (over $\F_{2}$) is a nonsemisimple reduction of the category of supervector spaces over $\F$.
Proof of Theorems \[Hilb2\] and \[Inv\] for $\C = \Ver_{p}$.
============================================================
Description of finitely generated algebras in $\Ver_{p}$.
---------------------------------------------------------
From this section on, $p$ will be a prime. Before we begin the proof of the theorems for $\Ver_{p}$, we briefly describe a different construction of this category. This construction is fairly involved so we refer the reader to [@O 3.2, 4.3] and the additional references [@GK; @GM] contained within for more details. Consider the category of rational $\k$-representations of a simple algebraic group $G$ of Coxeter number less than $p$, the characteristic of $\k$. This has a full subcategory consisting of tilting modules, which are those representations $T$ such that $T$ and its contragredient both have filtrations whose composition factors are Weyl modules $V_{\lambda}$ corresponding to dominant integral weights $\lambda$. This is only a Karoubian symmetric monoidal category and not a symmetric tensor category but since it is symmetric monoidal, it is still equipped with a spherical structure. Hence, we can still take its quotient by negligible morphisms. This gives us a symmetric fusion category which we denote $\Ver_{p}(G)$, the Verlinde category corresponding to $G$.
We are now ready to prove the following proposition.
\[Ver:finite\] Let $X$ be an object in $\Ver_{p}$ and let $n$ be the multiplicity of $\mathbf{1}$ in $X$. Then,
$$S(X) \cong \k[x_{1}, \ldots, x_{n}] \otimes Y$$ for some object $Y \in \Ver_{p}.$
For $p = 2$, $\Ver_{p}$ is just the category of vector spaces over $\k$ and the proposition is hence trivial. So, we assume $p > 2$. It is known (see for example [@O 4.3]) that $\Ver_{p}$, as described in the Example \[Ver\], is equivalent as a symmetric tensor category to $\Ver_{p}(SL_{2})$ and that $L_{i}$ corresponds to $V_{i-1}$ (where $i-1$ is the highest weight of the corresponding tilting module) under the equivalence. Additionally, for $p \ge 3$ and $n > 1$, Ostrik also showed in [@O 4.3] that the fiber functor from $\Ver_{p}(SL_{n})$ to $\Ver_{p}$ takes the standard module of $SL_{n}$ to $L_{n}$ (note that here $n \le p - 1$).
Thus, by Lemma \[funct:symm\], we can compute the symmetric algebra of $L_{n}$ by computing the symmetric algebra of the standard module $V$ of $SL_{n}$. Now, we have a monoidal functor from the Karoubian monoidal category of tilting modules of $SL_{n}$ to $\Ver_{p}(SL_{n})$. In general, symmetric powers do not exist in a Karoubian category in positive characteristic, as quotients do not exist. However, for $n < p$, for any object $X$, we can identify $S^{n}(X)$ as a direct summand of $X^{\otimes n}$ and direct summands do exist in a Karoubian category. Hence, by a slight variation of Lemma \[funct:symm\], $S^{p-n +1}(V)$ is just the image under the quotient functor of the tilting module $S^{p-n+1}(V)$ in the category of $SL_{n}$-representations.
Now, the dimension of $S^{r}(V)$ is $\binom{n+r-1}{n-1}$, so plugging in $r = p-n+1$ gives us $\binom{p}{n-1} = 0$. Hence, $S^{p-n+1}(V)$ is negligible and thus goes to $0$ under the quotient functor to $\Ver_{p}(SL_{n})$. For $k \ge p - n+2$, $S^{k}(V)$ is a quotient of $V^{\otimes k - p+n-1} \otimes S^{p-n+1}(V)$ in $\Ver_{p}(SL_{n})$ and is hence also $0$. Thus, the symmetric algebra of $V$ and therefore the symmetric algebra of $L_{n}$ is an actual object and not an ind-object, for every $1 < n \le p-1$.
Now, suppose $X \in \Ver_{p}$ is of the form $n \mathbf{1} \oplus Z$, where $Z$ is a direct sum of copies of $L_{2}, \ldots, L_{p-1}$. Using Lemma \[symm:sum\] and the argument in the previous paragraph, we see that $Y = S(Z)$ has finite length, i.e., it is an actual object in $\Ver_{p}$. Hence, by Lemma \[symm:sum\] again,
$$S(X) \cong S(n\mathbf{1}) \otimes Y = \k[x_{1}, \ldots, x_{n}] \otimes Y$$ with $Y \in \Ver_{p}$, as desired.
Proof of Theorems \[Hilb2\] and \[Inv\] for $\Ver_{p}$.
-------------------------------------------------------
We are now ready to finish the proof of these two theorems for $\Ver_{p}$. The first step in the proof is a reduction to the graded case. This is immediate for Theorem \[Hilb2\] because any finitely generated $A$-module is also a finitely generated $S(X)$-module if $S(X)$ surjects onto $A$. The same holds for Theorem \[Inv\]. Suppose $A$ is a finitely generated commutative ind-algebra in $\Ver_{p}$. Then, we have an epimorphism
$$\phi : S(X) \rightarrow A$$ for some $X \in \Ver_{p}$. Additionally, as $\Ver_{p}$ is semisimple, $\phi$ also restricts to a surjection $S(X)^{\inv} \rightarrow A^{\inv}$ by definition of the invariant subobject. Suppose now that we have proved the theorem for $S(X)$. Then, $S(X)^{\inv}$ is finitely generated and hence so is $A^{\inv}$. Additionally, there exists some object $Y \in \Ver_{p}$ and an epimorphism
$$\psi: S(X)^{\inv} \otimes Y \rightarrow S(X)$$ of $S(X)^{\inv}$-modules. Composing with $\phi$ and noting that $\ker(\phi|_{S(X)^{\inv}}) \otimes Y$ goes to $0$, we get an epimorphism
$$A^{\inv} \otimes Y \rightarrow A$$ of $A^{\inv}$-modules. Hence, we have reduced the proof of the theorems to the case where $A = S(X)$ for some $X \in \Ver_{p}$. But, by Proposition \[Ver:finite\],
$$S(X) \cong \k[x_{1}, \ldots, x_{r}] \otimes Y$$ for some $r \ge 0$ and some object $Y$ in $\Ver_{p}$. We now apply Lemma \[poly\]. Since $Y$ has finite length, we see that $S(X)$ is finitely generated over $\k[x_{1}, \ldots, x_{r}]$ in $\Ver_{p}$ and is hence a Noetherian algebra. Additionally, the invariants of $S(X)$ are finitely generated as a module over $\k[x_{1}, \ldots, x_{r}]$ and are hence certainly finitely generated. Finally, as $S(X)$ is finitely generated over $\k[x_{1}, \ldots, x_{r}]$ it is finitely generated over its invariants. $\hfill\square$.
Proof of Theorem \[Hilb2\] for general $\C$ fibered over $\Ver_{p}$.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Let $\C$ now be a symmetric finite tensor category that admits a Verlinde fiber functor $F$. Extend $F$ canonically to a fiber functor $\C^{\ind} \rightarrow \Ver_{p}^{\ind}$. Let $A$ be a finitely generated commutative ind-algebra in $\C$. Then, $F(A)$ is a finitely generated commutative ind-algebra in $\Ver_{p}$ (by Lemma \[funct:symm\]). Similarly, if $M$ is a finitely generated $A$-module, then $F(M)$ is a finitely generated $F(A)$-module. Suppose we have an ascending chain
$$M_{0} \subseteq \cdots$$ of submodules of $M$. Then, for large enough $N$, the inclusion $F(M_{N}) \rightarrow F(M_{N+1})$ is an isomorphism. Hence, the cokernel of this morphism is $0$. But as $F$ is exact, the cokernel of this morphism is $F(\coker (M_{N} \rightarrow M_{N+1}))$. As $F$ is faithful, $M_{N} \rightarrow M_{N+1}$ must be an epimorphism and hence an isomorphism for large enough $N$. Hence, $M$ is a Noetherian $A$-module. Since this holds for all finitely generated $A$-modules $M$, $A$ is a Noetherian commutative algebra in $\C$. $\hfill \square$
Proof of Corollary \[Hilb4\]
----------------------------
The proof of Theorem \[Hilb2\] for categories fibered over $\Ver_{p}$ immediately implies Corollary \[Hilb3\]. We use this corollary to prove Corollary \[Hilb4\], i.e., that the Hilbert basis property holds for symmetric tensor categories fibered over symmetric tensor categories with finitely many isomorphism classes of simple objects, in which the Chevalley property holds. Let $\C'$ be such a category and let $\C$ be the symmetric tensor category (with the finiteness and Chevalley properties) that $\C'$ fibers over. Using the same argument as in the previous subsection, to show that $\C'$ has the Hilbert basis property it suffices to show that $\C$ has the Hilbert basis property.
Recall that the Chevalley property holds in a tensor category if the tensor product of simple objects is semisimple. Thus, $\C_{\text{ss}}$, the subcategory consisting of semisimple objects, is a symmetric tensor subcategory of $\C$. Additionally, the finite number of isomorphism classes of simple objects in $\C$ ensures that $\C_{\text{ss}}$ is a finite abelian category and is hence a symmetric fusion category. Hence, by Corollary \[Hilb3\], $\C_{\text{ss}}$ has the Hilbert basis property.
To prove Corollary \[Hilb4\] for $\C$, it again suffices to prove that $S(X)$ is Noetherian as an algebra, with $X$ an actual object in $\C$. Now, $X$ has a socle filtration
$$X = X_{m} \supseteq X_{m-1} \supseteq \cdots \supseteq X_{0} = 0$$ whose associated graded object $\gr X$ lies in $\C_{\text{ss}}$. Additionally, this socle filtration induces an ascending filtration on $S(X)$ and we have a canonical epimorphism
$$S(\gr X) \rightarrow \gr S(X).$$ Since $\C_{\text{ss}}$ is closed under the tensor product, $S(\gr X)$ is a finitely generated commutative ind-algebra in $\C_{\text{ss}}$. Thus, by Corollary \[Hilb3\], $S(\gr X)$ and thus $\gr S(X)$ are both Noetherian commutative algebras.
To now prove that $S(X)$ is Noetherian, it suffices to prove that $S(X) \otimes Y$ is a Noetherian $S(X)$-module for any actual object $Y$ in $\C$. Now, the filtration on $S(X)$ induces a filtration of $S(X)$-modules on $S(X) \otimes Y$. The associated graded module $\gr (S(X) \otimes Y)$ is equipped with a canonical epimorphism of $\gr S(X)$-modules
$$\gr (S(X))\otimes Y \rightarrow \gr (S(X) \otimes Y)$$ and hence the latter is finitely generated over $\gr S(X)$ and thus Noetherian as a $\gr S(X)$-module. But this implies that $S(X) \otimes Y$ is Noetherian as an $S(X)$-module, as desired. Hence, $S(X)$ is a Noetherian algebra and the Hilbert basis property holds for $\C$.
Proof of Finite Generation of Invariants for Fusion $\C$
========================================================
A Reynolds’ operator.
---------------------
Let $\C$ be a symmetric fusion category. Then, $\C$ has the Hilbert basis property by Corollary \[Hilb3\]. We will use this to prove finite generation of invariants for $\C$. The first step in the proof is a reduction to the graded case. This is done in exactly the same manner as in subsection 3.2 (the $\Ver_{p}$ case).
Let $A$ be a finitely geerated commutative algebra in $\C^{\ind}$. We now define a suitable projection from $A$ onto $A^{\inv}$.
If $A$ is a commutative ind-algebra in $\C$, a *Reynolds’ Operator* on $A$ is an $A^{\inv}$-module map $\rho : A \rightarrow A^{\inv}$ that is the identity on $A^{\inv}$.
Since $\C$ is a fusion category, then $A = A^{\inv} \oplus A^{\not=\mathbf{1}}$ and hence the canonical projection onto $A^{\inv}$ is a Reynolds’ operator.
Using the Reynolds’ operator, we can now show that $A^{\inv}$ is Noetherian as a module over itself (but a priori not as an algebra, although this will be true as a consequence of finite generation and Corollary \[Hilb3\] applied to $\C$.) Suppose we have an ideal $I$ in $A^{\inv}$. Let $AI$ be the ideal it generates in $A$. Then, it is immediate that $\rho(AI) = I$ as $AI = I \oplus AI^{\not=\mathbf{1}}$. Hence, as $AI$ (the image of $A \otimes I$ in $A$ under multiplication) is a finitely generated ideal of $A$ (Corollary \[Hilb3\] and Lemma \[Noeth:finite\] applied to $A$), $I = \rho(AI)$ is a finitely generated ideal. Hence, $A^{\inv}$ is Noetherian as a module over itself.
But $A^{\inv}$ is a trivial object, i.e., it is a direct sum of copies of $\mathbf{1}$, and hence can be viewed as an ordinary algebra in the category of vector spaces over $\k$. In particular, as we have reduced the problem to the case where $A$ was a $\Z_{\ge 0}$ graded algebra, $A^{\inv}$ is also a $\Z_{\ge 0}$ graded algebra. Thus, $A^{\inv}$ is a $\Z_{\ge 0}$ graded commutative ordinary algebra in the category of vector spaces that is Noetherian as a module over itself and therefore finitely generated as an algebra, as any set of generators of the ideal $A^{\inv}_{>0}$ also generates $A^{\inv}$ as an algebra. This proves the first part of Theorem \[Inv\], the finite generation of invariants, for symmetric fusion categories $\C$.
We next turn to the question of finiteness of an algebra over its invariants. This result will be independent of the techniques developed in this section and will hold for any $\C$ that has a Verlinde fiber functor.
Proof of Theorem \[Inv\] for General $\C$ Fibered over $\Ver_{p}$
=================================================================
In this section, we relax the assumption that $\C$ is a fusion category and just assume that $\C$ is a symmetric finite tensor category fibered over $\Ver_{p}$. We will give a proof of Theorem $\ref{Inv}$ for such $\C$ that will also give a different proof of finite generation of invariants for fusion $\C$.
Let $\C$ be a symmetric finite tensor category with a Verlinde fiber functor $F$. Let $A$ be a finitely generated commutative ind-algebra in $\C$. We wish to prove that $A$ is finitely generated as a module over $A^{\inv}$ and that $A^{\inv}$ is a finitely generated algebra. We do so by proving a different result: $F(A)^{\inv}$ is finitely generated as a module over $A'$, a finitely generated $\k$-subalgebra of $F(A^{\inv})$ (which we view as a $\k$-algebra as it is trivial). We subsequently show that this result implies Theorem \[Inv\] for $\C$.
**A Frobenius operator.** We prove this result using the Frobenius endomorphism for characteristic $p$ commutative algebras. We begin by introducing some notation. For any $V \in \Ver_{p}$, we write
$$V = \sum_{i} V_{i} \otimes L_{i}$$ where where $L_{1}, \ldots, L_{p-1}$ are the simples in $\Ver_{p}$ and $V_{i} = \Hom(L_{i}, V)$ is a vector space giving the multiplicity. To simplify notation, we write
$$F(A) = \bigoplus_{i=1}^{p-1} A_{i} \otimes L_{i}.$$ Using the standard abuse of notation for trivial objects, we identify $A_{1}$ with $F(A)^{\inv}$. Since $F$ is a fiber functor from $\C$ to $\Ver_{p}$, we can identify $\C$ with the category of finite dimensional comodules over a commutative Hopf algebra $H$ in $\Ver_{p}$ (This is an actual object in $\Ver_{p}$ by finiteness of $\C$. See Remark \[Tannakian\] for a reference). Then, we have a comodule morphism
$$\rho: F(A) \rightarrow F(A) \otimes H$$ which is a homomorphism of commutative ind-algebras in $\Ver_{p}$. Now, $F(A)^{\inv}$ is a commutative $\k$-algebra and hence we have a Frobenius ring homomorphism $x \mapsto x^{p}$ from $F(A)^{\inv}$ to itself. Let $A_{1}^{p}$ denote the image of this endomorphism. This is a commutative ind-algebra in the category of $\k$-vector spaces (as $\k$ is algebraically closed). Similarly, using the notation $H_{i} = \Hom(L_{i}, H)$ we introduced above, we define $H_{1}^{p}$ to be the image of the Frobenius endomorphism in $H_{1}$. Then, $H_{1}^{p}$ is a commutative $\k$-subalgebra of $H_{1}$.
We claim that $H_{1}^{p}$ is a Hopf subalgebra of $H$. It is clear that $H_{1}^{p}$ is closed under the antipode (as the antipode is an algebra homomoprhism in $H$ and must preserve $H_{1}$, the $\mathbf{1}$-isotypic component of $H$). Thus, we just need to show that it is closed under comultiplication. Let $\Delta$ be the comultiplication morphism in $H$. We need to show that $\Delta(H_{1}^{p}) \subseteq H_{1}^{p} \otimes H_{1}^{p}$. Note that $\Delta$ gives us a homomorphism of $\k$-algebras
$$H_{1} \rightarrow (H \otimes H)_{1}$$ where
$$H \otimes H = \bigoplus_{i=1}^{p-1}(H \otimes H)_{i} \otimes L_{i}$$ Using the fusion rules for $\Ver_{p}$, we see that $\mathbf{1}$ is a subobject of $L_{i} \otimes L_{j}$ if and only if $i = j$, and then it has multiplicity $1$. Hence,
$$(H \otimes H)_{1} = \bigoplus_{i=1}^{p-1} H_{i} \otimes H_{i}.$$ Let $x \in H_{1}^{p}$ with $x = y^{p}$. Since $\Delta$ is an algebra homomorphism, we see that if
$$\Delta(y) = \sum_{i=1}^{p-1}\sum_{j=1}^{n_{i}} y_{ij} \otimes y'_{ij}$$ where $y_{ij}, y'_{ij}$ are elements in $H_{i}$, then
$$\Delta(x) = \sum_{j} y_{ij}^{p} \otimes (y'_{ij})^{p}.$$ But now, for each $i$, $y_{ij} \otimes y'_{ij}$ is an element in a copy of $\mathbf{1}$ sitting inside $L_{i} \otimes L_{i} \subseteq H$ and hence $y_{ij}^{p} \otimes (y'_{ij})^{p}$ is an element in a copy of $\mathbf{1}$ sitting inside the image of the corresponding componentwise multiplication morphism $S^{p}(L_{i}) \otimes S^{p}(L_{i}) \rightarrow H \otimes H$. In the proof of Proposition \[Ver:finite\], we showed that $S^{n}(L_{i})$ is $0$ for any $i > 1$ if $n \ge p$. Hence, for $i > 1$, $y_{ij}^{p} \otimes (y'_{ij})^{p} = 0$ and thus,
$$\Delta(H_{1}^{p}) \subseteq H_{1}^{p} \otimes H_{1}^{p}.$$ Thus, $H_{1}^{p}$ is a commutative Hopf algebra in the category of $\k$-vector spaces. Exactly the same argument also shows that $A_{1}^{p}$ is a comodule for $H_{1}^{p}$, where the comodule morphism is obtained by restricting the $H$-comodule morphism associated to $A$.
Since $F(A)$ is a finitely generated commutative ind-algebra in $\Ver_{p}$, Theorem \[Inv\] for $\Ver_{p}$ shows that $A_{1} = F(A)^{\inv}$ is a finitely generated commutative ind-algebra in $\Vec \subseteq \Ver_{p}$, and thus so is $A_{1}^{p}$. Additionally, $F(A)^{\inv}$ is integral over $A_{1}^{p}$ and is hence a finite module over $A_{1}^{p}$. Let $A'$ be the invariants of $A_{1}^{p}$ under the coaction of $H_{1}^{p}$. Because the $H_{1}^{p}$-comodule morphism of $A_{1}^{p}$ is defined by restricting the $H$-comodule morphism of $A$ to $A_{1}^{p}$, $A' \subseteq F(A^{\inv})$. Also, as $H_{1}^{p}$ is an finite dimensional commutative Hopf algebra in the category of $\k$-vector spaces, and $A_{1}^{p}$ is a finitely generated commutative algebra in $\Rep(H_{1}^{p})^{\ind}$, a classical theorem of Demazure and Gabriel [@DG Ch. III, 2, 6.1] now states that $A_{1}^{p}$ is finitely generated as a module over $A'$, which is a finitely generated algebra in $\Rep(H_{1}^{p})^{\ind}$.
Hence, as $F(A)^{\inv}$ is finite as a module over $A_{1}^{p}$, $F(A)^{\inv}$ is finitely generated as a module over $A'$, a finitely generated $\k$-subalgebra of $F(A^{\inv})$. We now use this to imply Theorem \[Inv\] for $\C$. The classical Hilbert basis theorem for commutative $\k$-algebras implies that $F(A)^{\inv}$ is a Noetherian module over $A'$. Thus, $F(A^{\inv})$ is a finitely generated module over $A'$ and is hence a finitely generated commutative $\k$-algebra. Also, as $F(A)^{\inv}$ is finite as a module over $A'$, it is finite over $F(A^{\inv})$. Hence, by Theorem \[Inv\] for $\Ver_{p}$, $F(A)$ is finite as a module over $F(A)^{\inv}$ and is thus also finite over $F(A^{\inv})$.
We show that this implies that $A$ is finite as a module over $A^{\inv}$. Let $X$ be a subobject of $F(A)$ in $\Ver_{p}$ such that the canonical multiplication map
$$F(A^{\inv}) \otimes X \rightarrow F(A)$$ is an epimorphism. Since $A^{\inv}$ is an ind-object in $\C$, it is the sum of its subobjects. Hence, there exists some subobject $Y$ of $A^{\inv}$ in $\C$ such that $F(Y)$ contains $X$. Thus, if $\eta$ is the natural multiplication morphism
$$A^{\inv} \otimes Y \rightarrow A$$ in $\C$, then
$$F(\eta) : F(A^{\inv} \otimes Y) \cong F(A) \otimes F(Y) \rightarrow F(A)$$ is an epimorphism. This implies that $\coker F(\eta) = 0$, which, by exactness of $F$, implies that $F(\coker \eta) = 0$. As $F$ is faithful, this implies that $\coker \eta = 0$ and hence $\eta$ is an epimorphism. Thus, $A$ is a finite module over $A^{\inv}$. Additionally, since $F(A^{\inv})$ is finitely generated commutative algebra, we can find a subobject $X$ of $F(A^{\inv})$ in $\Ver_{p}$ that generates it as an ind-algebra in $\Ver_{p}$. Choosing a subobject $Y$ of $A^{\inv}$ in $\C$ such that $F(Y)$ contains $X$, a similar argument to the one above shows that $Y$ generates $A^{\inv}$ as an ind-algebra in $\C$. Thus, $A^{\inv}$ is finitely generated, which proves Theorem \[Inv\] for $\C$.
Proof of Theorem \[Inv2\]
=========================
Let $\k$ now be an algebraically closed field of characteristic $2$ and consider the category $\sVec_{2}$ defined as in the introduction. To recall, $\sVec_{2}$ was the category of representations of the Hopf algebra $D = \k[d]/(d^{2})$ (with $d$ primitive) equipped with $R$-matrix
$$1 \otimes 1 + d \otimes d.$$ Let $\C$ be a symmetric finite tensor category fibered over $\sVec_{2}$. Our goal is to show that finitely generated commutative ind-algebras in $\C$ have finitely generated invariants and are finite over their invariants.
Note that commutative algebras in $\sVec_{2}$ are $\k$-algebras $A$ equipped with a derivation $d$, with $d^{2} = 0$, such that for any $a, b \in A$,
$$[a, b] = d(a)d(b).$$ We call this property $d$-commutativity. When we say that $A$ is commutative, we will mean commutative as a $\k$-algebra. We will specifically use the term $d$-commutativity when we refer to algebras that are commutative in $\sVec_{2}$.
Now, as $\C$ is a symmetric finite tensor category fibered over $\sVec_{2}$, it is the category of comodules of a $d$-commutative Hopf algebra $H$ in $\sVec_{2}$ (Remark \[Tannakian\] again). Let $A$ be a finitely generated $d$-commutative algebra in $\C$, which we can view as a $d$-commutative $H$-comodule algebra in $\sVec_{2}$. To prove Theorem \[Inv2\], we need to show that $A^{\inv}$ is finitely generated and $A$ is a finite $A^{\inv}$-module.
We first prove that
$$A^{4} := \{a^{4} : a \in A\}$$ is a commutative $H$-comodule subalgebra of $A$ that is contained in $\ker(d)$. The fact that $A^{4} \subseteq \ker(d)$ is trivial, as $d(a^{4}) = 4a^{3}d(a) = 0.$ In addition, since $A$ is $d$-commutative, this implies that elements in $A^{4}$ commute with each other. Hence, it suffices to prove that $A^{4}$ is a $\k$-algebra and $\Delta(A^{4}) \subseteq A^{4} \otimes H$, where $\Delta : A \rightarrow A \otimes H$ is the comodule structure morphism. In fact, we will show that $\Delta(A^{4}) \subseteq A^{4} \otimes H^{4}$.
We prove that $A^{4}$ is a $\k$-algebra, i.e., that is is closed under sums and products. First, note that for any $a \in A$,
$$0 = [a, a] = d(a)^{2}.$$ Now, let $a, b \in A$. Then, by $d$-commutativity of $A$,
$$(ab)^{2} = a^{2} b^{2} + ab\,d(a)d(b).$$ Thus, using $d$-commutativity and the fact that $d(a)^{2} = d(b)^{2} = 0$,
$$(ab)^{4} = a^{2}b^{2}a^{2}b^{2} = a^{4}b^{4}.$$ Let $a_{1}, \ldots, a_{n} \in A$. Then,
$$(a_{1} + \cdots + a_{n})^{2} = \sum_{i} a_{i}^{2} + \sum_{i < j} d(a_{i})d(a_{j}).$$ Every term in the above sum is in the kernel of $d$ (as $d^{2} = 0$) and is hence central in $A$. Thus, again using the fact that $d(a_{i})^{2} = 0$
$$(a_{1} + \cdots + a_{n})^{4} = \sum_{i} a_{i}^{4}.$$ Hence, we see that $A^{4}$ contains the unit and is closed under sums and products. Thus, $A^{4}$ is a $\k$-subalgebra of $A$.
We next show that $\Delta(A^{4}) \subseteq A^{4} \otimes H^{4}$. Since $A \otimes H$ is also a $d$-commutative algebra, our computation above regarding sums of fourth powers works here as well. Hence, for arbitrary $a \in A$, if
$$\Delta(a) = \sum_{i} a_{i} \otimes h_{i},$$ then
$$\Delta(a^{4}) = (\Delta(a))^{4} = \sum_{i} a_{i}^{4} \otimes h_{i}^{4}.$$ This shows that $\Delta(A^{4}) \subseteq A^{4} \otimes H^{4}$. By the same computation as in the case of $A$, $H^{4}$ is a commutative $\k$-algebra. In fact, since the comultiplication in $H$ is the $H$-comodule map for $H$, using the same computation as for $\Delta$ above, we see that $H^{4}$ is closed under comultiplication. Finally, if $S$ is the antipode, and $h \in H$, then it is clear that
$$S(h^{4}) = S(h)^{4}$$ and hence $H^{4}$ is closed under the antipode as well. Thus, $H^{4}$ is a commutative Hopf algebra over $\k$ and $A^{4}$ is a commutative $H^{4}$-comodule algebra. Hence, since $A^{4}$ is finitely generated (because $A$ is finitely generated), by [@DG Ch. III, 2, 6.1], $(A^{4})^{\inv}$ is finitely generated over $\k$ and $A^{4}$ is finite over $(A^{4})^{\inv}$.
Thus, since $A$ is finite as a module over $A^{4}$, it is finite as a module over $(A^{4})^{\inv} \subseteq A^{\inv}$. Since $(A^{4})^{\inv}$ is a finitely generated commutative $\k$-algebra, the classical Hilbert basis theorem implies that $A$ is a Noetherian $(A^{4})^{\inv}$-module. Thus, as
$$(A^{4})^{\inv} \subseteq A^{\inv} \subseteq A$$ $A^{\inv}$ is a finitely generated $(A^{4})^{\inv}$-module and hence a finitely generated $\k$-algebra. Additionally, as $A$ is finite over $(A^{4})^{\inv}$, $A$ is finite over $A^{\inv}$. This proves Theorem \[Inv2\] for $\C$.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'We perform imaging and analyses of SMA 1.3 mm continuum, C$^{18}$O (2–1) and $^{12}$CO (2–1) line data of 17 Class 0 and 0/I protostars to study their gas kinematics on a 1,000-AU scale. Continuum and C$^{18}$O (2–1) emission are detected toward all the sample sources and show central primary components with sizes of $\sim$600–1,500 AU associated with protostars. The velocity gradients in C$^{18}$O (2–1) have wide ranges of orientations from parallel to perpendicular to the outflows, with magnitudes from $\sim$1 to $\sim$530 km s$^{-1}$ pc$^{-1}$. We construct a simple kinematic model to reproduce the observed velocity gradients, estimate the infalling and rotational velocities, and infer the disk radii and the protostellar masses. The inferred disk radii range from $<$5 AU to $>$500 AU with estimated protostellar masses from $<$0.1 $M_\sun$ to $>$1 $M_\sun$. Our results hint that both large and small disks are possibly present around Class 0 protostars, which could be a sign of disk growth at the Class 0 stage. In addition, the directions of the overall velocity gradients in 7 out of the 17 sources are close to perpendicular to their outflow axes ($\Delta\theta > 65\degr$), which is a signature of significant rotational motions. From our model fitting, the specific angular momenta in these sources are estimated to be $>$2 $\times$ 10$^{-4}$ km s$^{-1}$ pc, suggesting that magnetic braking is unlikely efficient on a 1,000-AU scale in these Class 0 and 0/I sources. In a sub-sample with observed magnetic field orientations, we find no source with large specific angular momenta together with closely aligned magnetic field and outflow axes. This possibly hints that the magnetic field, if originally aligned with the rotational axis, can play a role in removing angular momentum from infalling material at the Class 0 stage. We discuss our results in comparison with theoretical models of collapsing dense cores with and without magnetic fields in the context of disk formation.'
author:
- 'Hsi-Wei Yen, Patrick M. Koch, Shigehisa Takakuwa, Paul T. P. Ho, Nagayoshi Ohashi, and Ya-Wen Tang'
title: 'Observations of Infalling and Rotational Motions on a 1,000-AU Scale around 17 Class 0 and 0/I Protostars: Hints of Disk Growth and Magnetic Braking?'
---
Introduction
============
Circumstellar disks around young stellar objects are sites of planet formation (Williams & Cieza 2011). Interferometric observations in the CO lines show that the motions of these disks are well explained by Keplerian rotation, and that the disk radii range from $\sim$100 AU to $\sim$800 AU (e.g., Guilloteau & Dutrey 1994; Dutrey et al. 1998; Simon et al. 2000; Piétu et al. 2007). The disk masses traced by dust continuum emission at millimeter and submillimeter wavelengths range from 10$^{-4}$ $M_\sun$ to 10$^{-1}$ $M_\sun$ (e.g., Qi et al. 2003, 2004; Andrews & Williams 2007; Guilloteau et al. 2011; Andrews et al. 2012; Pérez et al. 2012). Keplerian disks have also been observed around several Class I protostars (e.g., Brinch et al. 2007; Lommen et al. 2008; J[ø]{}rgensen et al. 2009; Lee 2010, 2011; Takakuwa et al. 2012; Yen et al. 2013; Brinch & J[ø]{}gensen 2013; Harsono et al. 2014; Chou et al. 2014). The Keplerian disks around Class I protostars have outer radii ranging from $\sim$60 AU to $\sim$300 AU and masses from 10$^{-3}$ $M_\sun$ to $\sim$10$^{-1}$ $M_\sun$, comparable to those of disks around T Tauri stars. Therefore, Keplerian disks with a size of a 100-AU scale are likely already well developed at the Class I stage.
Disks around protostars at earlier evolutionary stages are likely deeply embedded in protostellar envelopes, and are difficult to directly image (e.g., Looney et al. 2003; Chiang et al. 2008). Recent interferometric observations have successfully revealed Keplerian disks around a Class 0/I protostar, B59\#11(Hara et al. 2013), and several Class 0 protostars, L1527 IRS (Tobin et al. 2012a; Ohashi et al. 2014), VLA 1623 (Murillo et al. 2013) and HH 212 (Lee et al. 2014; Codella et al. 2014). The disks observed around these Class 0 and 0/I protostars have outer radii ranging from $\sim$50 AU to $\sim$350 AU, comparable to those of disks around more evolved protostars and T Tauri stars. On the other hand, around several Class 0 protostars, such as B335 (Yen et al. 2010, 2011, 2013), NGC 1333 IRAS 4B (Yen et al. 2013), and NGC 1333 IRAS 2A (Brinch et al. 2009; Maret et al. 2014), there is no clear sign of rotational motion in their protostellar envelopes within a scale of 1,000 AU, which suggests that the Keplerian disks in these sources (if present) likely have outer radii smaller than 10 AU. It is still unclear as to how and when Keplerian disks form around protostars and whether Keplerian disks with a size of 100 AU are common among Class 0 protostars.
As protostars form through gravitational collapse of dense cores ($n \sim 10^{4} - 10^{5}$ cm$^{-3}$) in molecular clouds (e.g., André et al. 2000; Myers et al. 2000), a Keplerian disk is expected to form when collapsing material rotates fast enough to become centrifugally supported (e.g., Shu et al. 1987). Theoretical models of collapsing dense cores without magnetic fields suggest that the outer radius of the Keplerian disk increases as the collapse proceeds toward outer regions and material with a higher angular momentum falls in (Ulrich 1976; Cassen & Moosman 1981; Terebey et al. 1984; Basu 1998; Bate 1998). On the other hand, previous magnetohydrodynamic (MHD) simulations show that the magnetic field can effectively remove the angular momentum of collapsing material by magnetic braking, and suppress the outer radii of Keplerian disks to within $\sim$10 AU (e.g., Allen et al. 2003; Mellon & Li 2008, 2009; Machida et al. 2011; Li et al. 2011; Dapp et al. 2012; Tomida et al. 2013). Several mechanisms have been proposed and demonstrated with numerical simulations to reduce the efficiency of magnetic braking and enable formation of large-scale disks, such as dissipation of protostellar envelopes (e.g., Machida et al. 2011; Machida & Hosokawa 2013), misalignment between the magnetic field and rotational axis of collapsing dense cores (e.g., Hennebelle & Ciardi 2009; Joos et al. 2012; Li et al. 2013), and turbulence (e.g., Seifried et al. 2012, 2013; Joos et al. 2013). Recent theoretical simulations by Machida et al. (2014), investigating the dependence of disk formation on the initial model settings such as the sink radius and the density profile, successfully form Keplerian disks with properties similar to those observed in protostellar sources. However, there is still a discrepancy in gas motions between their simulations and those by Li et al. (2011) with similar initial density profiles. Recent single-dish and interferometric polarimetric surveys toward protostellar sources show that the magnetic field tends to be misaligned with outflows on inner-envelope scales of a few thousand AU, and that the magnetic field orientations might change from the dense-core scale of 0.1 pc to the inner-envelope scale (e.g., Hull et al. 2013, 2014). The results of this polarimetric survey might support the idea that the misalignment between magnetic field and outflow enables the formation of large-scale Keplerian disks. These results further suggest the presence of an interplay between magnetic field and gas motions as seen in MHD simulations (e.g., Machida et al. 2005). Therefore, to investigate the role of the magnetic field in disk formation, a comparison between magnetic field structures and gas motions in a sample of protostellar sources is needed.
Formation and evolution of Keplerian disks in collapsing dense cores are likely closely related to angular momentum transfer from dense cores on a 10,000-AU scale, to inner infalling envelopes on a 1,000-AU scale and to central disks on a 100-AU scale. Single-dish observations in the NH$_3$ and N$_2$H$^+$ lines show that dense cores exhibit velocity gradients over a 10,000-AU scale with a mean magnitude of $\sim$1–2 km s$^{-1}$ pc $^{-1}$, suggestive of large-scale rotational motions (Goodman et al. 1993; Caselli et al. 2002; Tobin et al. 2011). Interferometric observations in the N$_2$H$^+$ lines have revealed a larger amount of velocity gradients with a mean magnitude of $\sim$7–8 km s$^{-1}$ pc $^{-1}$ in the inner protostellar envelopes on thousands of AU scale (Chen et al. 2007; Tobin et al. 2011), suggestive of faster rotational motions on smaller scales. We note that the overall velocity gradients seen in the dense cores and the protostellar envelopes should reflect combinations of rotational motion and other systematic gas motions, such as infalling and/or outflowing motions, as well as the envelope morphologies (Tobin et al. 2012b). Systematical studies and comparisons of gas motions from large to small scales in a large sample of Class 0 protostars are essential to understand disk formation at the early evolutionary stages.
In order to investigate disk formation in infalling envelopes, we studied radial profiles of rotational motions in four Class 0 and two Class I protostellar sources. We find an evolutionary trend from slow to fast rotational motions and from rotation with a conserved angular momentum to Keplerian rotation (Yen et al. 2013). Such an evolutionary trend can be explained with the conventional picture of an inside-out collapse where the angular momentum is conserved (e.g., Terebey et al. 1984). In the present paper, we enlarge our sample and focus on protostars at the Class 0 stage and in transition from Class 0 to I stages, to (1) investigate whether the presence of 100-AU-scale Keplerian disks is common among Class 0 protostars – as those in L1527 IRS, B59\#11, VLA 1623, and HH 212 – or not, and to (2) study the relation between gas kinematics and magnetic field.
On large scales from thousands of AU to 0.1 pc, the presence of non-axisymmetric structures, such as filaments, in protostellar envelopes have been seen in 8 $\mu$m extinction maps (e.g., Tobin et al. 2010) and millimeter observations (e.g., Tobin et al. 2011). For non-axisymmetric structures, it is not straightforward to extract kinematic information from observed images in molecular lines (Tobin et al. 2012b). On the other hand, on smaller scales of $\sim$1,000 AU, the envelope structures appear to be more or less symmetric (e.g., Tobin et al. 2011, 2012b). Assuming that molecular-line emission traces axisymmetric flattened envelopes around protostars and that outflow axes represent rotational axes, the velocity gradients perpendicular to the outflow directions can be interpreted as rotational motion, and those along the outflow directions can be due to infalling motion or contamination from the outflows (e.g., Arce & Sargent 2006; Yen et al. 2010, 2013). Hence, the observed velocity structures can be decomposed into infalling and rotational motions. Such analyses have been applied to the observational data of several protostellar sources, such as B335 (Yen et al. 2010), HH 212 (Lee et al. 2006), L1527 IRS (Ohashi et al. 1997), L1551 IRS 5 (Momose et al. 1998), and IRAS 16293$-$2422 (Takakuwa et al. 2007). Their observational results can, indeed, be explained by axisymmetric models of a combination of infalling and rotational motions.
In the present paper, we use the data of the C$^{18}$O (2–1; 219.560358 GHz) line obtained with the Submillimeter Array (SMA) to trace envelope kinematics. C$^{18}$O can be abundant in inner protostellar envelopes as it is evaporated from dust grains when the inner envelopes are heated up to $\sim$20 K through a proceeding collapse. On the other hand, the abundances of other dense-gas tracers, as e.g., N$_2$H$^+$ and NH$_3$, typically decrease as they are directly or indirectly destroyed by CO (e.g., Lee et al. 2004; Aikawa et al. 2008). We apply axisymmetric models to our C$^{18}$O data, measure velocities of infalling and rotational motions on a 1,000-AU scale, and estimate the ranges of possible protostellar masses and Keplerian disk sizes around 17 Class 0 and 0/I protostars. Some of our sample sources were observed in polarized dust emission, revealing their magnetic field orientations (Attard et al. 2009; Matthews et al. 2009; Dotson et al. 2010; Davidson et al. 2011; Chapman et al. 2013; Hull et al. 2013, 2014). Our results are discussed in comparison with theoretical models without magnetic fields, with MHD simulations, and with observational results of magnetic field orientations.
Sample
======
The 17 sources studied in this project are Class 0 and 0/I low-mass protostars selected from the source lists of Froebrich (2005), Tachihara et al. (2007), and Enoch et al. (2009). Froebrich (2005) searched the literatures and compiled a list of 95 confirmed or candidate Class 0 and 0/I protostars using the following criteria: (1) the bolometric temperature is less than 80 K, (2) the ratio of submillimeter ($>$350 $\mu$m) to bolometric luminosities is larger than 0.5%, and (3) no near infrared ($<$5 $\mu$m) counterpart is present. Sources that satisfy all the criteria are classified as Class 0 sources. Sources that satisfy two out of the three criteria are classified as Class 0/I sources. Tachihara et al. (2007) found a Class 0 protostar with a low bolometric temperature of 40 K and a low bolometric luminosity of 0.16 $L_\sun$ from the molecular line, millimeter continuum, and infrared surveys of the Lupus 3 cloud. Enoch et al. (2009) identified protostars in Perseus, Serpens, and Ophiuchus using the data from the “From Molecular Cores to Planet-forming Disks” [*Spitzer*]{} Legacy program and the 1.1 mm Bolocam continuum surveys with the Caltech Submillimeter Observatory (Evans et al. 2003; Enoch et al. 2006, 2007; Young et al. 2006). They classified 39 sources having bolometric temperatures less than 70 K as Class 0 protostars. We selected low-mass protostars from these Class 0 and 0/I source lists, searched the SMA data archive, and conducted new SMA observations toward seven sources. Combining the archival data and our observations, we find 17 sources detected in the C$^{18}$O (2–1) line ($>$3$\sigma$) in more than three velocity channels. Our sample is composed of these 17 sources, which are all nearby (with a distance $d \lesssim 250$ pc except one source at $d = 400$ pc), have a range of bolometric temperatures from 25 to 90 K and a range of bolometric luminosities from 0.2 to 7.7 $L_\sun$. L1527 IRS, B59\#11, and HH 212, where the presence of 100-AU Keplerian disks is reported (Tobin et al. 2012a; Hara et al. 2013; Lee et al. 2014; Codella et al. 2014; Ohashi et al. 2014), are also included in our analyses for uniform comparison with other sources observed with the SMA. Table \[sample\] shows a summary of our sample sources. Table \[oblog\] lists all the data used for the work here.
Observations
============
We have conducted observations with the SMA$\footnotemark$ at 225 GHz toward seven sources in our sample: L1448-mm, NGC 1333 IRAS 4A and 4B, L1527 IRS, Lupus 3 MMS, B228 and IRAS 16253$-$2429. Details of our SMA observations with the subcompact and compact configurations toward L1448-mm, NGC 1333 IRAS 4B and L1527 IRS are described by Yen et al. (2013). Our new SMA observations with the very extended configuration were conducted toward L1527 IRS in 2011, September 9 and toward L1448-mm and NGC 1333 IRAS 4A and 4B in 2011, September 11. In these observations, 3c111 and 3c84 were observed as gain calibrators, 3c454.3 as a bandpass calibrator, and Callisto as a flux calibrator. The typical system temperature during the observations was 80–150 K. Our new SMA observations with the subcompact configuration toward B228 and IRAS 16253$-$2429 were conducted in 2013, April 30, and those with the compact configuration toward Lupus 3 MMS in 2013, March 14. 1517$-$243 and 1626$-$298 were observed as gain calibrators, and 3c279 as a bandpass calibrator. Neptune and Titan were observed as flux calibrators in the subcompact and compact observations, respectively. The typical system temperature during these observations was 100–220 K. In our observations with the compact configuration, 512 channels were assigned to a chunk with a bandwidth of 104 MHz for the C$^{18}$O (2–1) line, and 1024 channels in the observation with the subcompact configuration, resulting in velocity resolutions of 0.28 km s$^{-1}$ and 0.14 km s$^{-1}$, respectively. 1.3 mm continuum and $^{12}$CO (2–1) line emission were observed simultaneously in all the observations. The rest of the data of our sample sources were obtained from the SMA data archive. The observing dates and PIs of those observations are listed in Table \[oblog\]. All the data were calibrated using the MIR software package (Scoville et al. 1993). The calibrated visibility data were Fourier-transformed and CLEANed with MIRIAD (Sault et al. 1995) to produce images. The resolutions and noise levels of the 1.3 mm and C$^{18}$O (2–1) images of all the sample sources are listed in Table \[obsum1\], and those of the $^{12}$CO (2–1) images of a subset of the sample are listed in Table \[obsum2\]. The $^{12}$CO (2–1) results are presented in Appendix \[12co\]. Inclination angles in this subset of sources are estimated based on morphologies and velocity structures of their $^{12}$CO outflows (Appendix \[i\]).
Results
=======
1.3 mm Continuum Emission
-------------------------
Figure \[config\] shows the 1.3 mm continuum images of the sample sources. L1448-mm, NGC 1333 IRAS 4A and 4B, and L1527 IRS have been additionally observed with the very extended configuration of the SMA at 1.3 mm, with an angular resolution of $\sim$05 probing only the innermost ($\lesssim$3) regions. The 1.3 mm continuum images of these four sources are shown in Figure \[config2\]. Toward all the sample sources, central compact components with sizes of $\sim$100–1,000 AU are observed, and several sources additionally display extended structures. L1448-mm shows an extended component with a size of $\sim$20$\arcsec$ ($\sim$5,000 AU) elongated along the northwest–southeast direction In L1527 IRS, several clumps with sizes of $\sim$2$\arcsec$ ($\sim$300 AU) are seen around the central component. B335 shows extensions with a length of $\sim$5$\arcsec$ ($\sim$650 AU) pointing toward the northwest and the southwest. L1157-mm displays an extension with a length of $\sim$3$\arcsec$ ($\sim$750 AU) pointing toward the southwest. Nevertheless, the presence of a dominant central component in all these sources is evident.
Moreover, L1448 IRS 3, L1448-mm, NGC 1333 IRAS 4A and 4B, IRAS 03282$+$3035, and HH212 are known to be binary or multiple systems (e.g., Looney et al. 2000; Launhardt 2004; J[ø]{}rgensen et al. 2007; Lee et al. 2008; Chen et al. 2013). The reported secondary components are seen in our 1.3 mm continuum images of L1448 IRS 3, L1448-mm, and NGC 1333 IRAS 4A and 4B. L1448 IRS 3 exhibits three components: A to the north, B to the south, and NW to the northwest. NW is outside the plotting area of Figure \[config\]. In the present paper, we focus on L1448 IRS 3B, where the associated C$^{18}$O emission is detected, as will be shown below. In L1448-mm, there is a 9$\sigma$ peak located in the southeast, $\sim$7$\arcsec$ ($\sim$1,750 AU) away from the main component. This component embedded in the extended structure corresponds to the reported companion (Chen et al. 2013). In NGC 1333 IRAS 4A, the central condensation exhibits two peaks, 4A1 to the east and 4A2 to the west. In NGC 1333 IRAS 4B, the two components have a projected separation of $\sim$103 ($\sim$2,600 AU). There is no previous estimate of the inclination angle of the secondary component located to the east. Its morphology and outflow velocity structures are not clearly detected with the present SMA data (J[ø]{}rgensen et al. 2007) and the CARMA+FCRAO data (Plunkett et al. 2013). More recent CARMA $^{12}$CO (2–1) observations show a clear detection (Hull et al. 2014), but details of kinematics and structures are not given. Thus, no sufficient information of the outflow is available to estimate its inclination angle. Hence, in the present paper, we focus on the primary component in the west. Our continuum images of IRAS 03282$+$3035 and HH212 only show a single component. The projected binary separations of these two sources are reported to be 16 (400 AU) and 03 (120 AU), respectively (Chen et al. 2013), which are too small to be resolved by the SMA observations with the compact configuration (Table \[obsum1\]).
A two-dimensional Gaussian distribution is fitted to the central components in all the sample sources. Depending on the intensity distributions in individual sources, pixels with values below 3$\sigma$–10$\sigma$ are excluded from the fitting to avoid contamination from the surrounding diffuse emission. The derived total flux, de-convolved size, and position angle of the major axis are shown in Table \[contable\]. In the present paper, we adopt the Gaussian-fitted peak positions of the 1.3 mm continuum emission as the protostellar locations. Comparing the de-convolved position angles and the outflow directions, the central components of the 1.3 mm continuum emission in L1448 IRS2, L1448 IRS 3B, IRAS 03292$+$3039, B59\#11, and B335 are elongated perpendicularly to the outflow directions within $\lesssim$20$\degr$, suggesting that their protostellar envelopes are flattened and normal to the outflows or that the 1.3 mm continuum primarily arises from the circumstellar disks. Although the 1.3 mm continuum image of Lupus 3 MMS also shows a component elongated perpendicularly to the outflow direction, this component is not resolved with the SMA. Hence, its apparent elongation is due to the convolution with the synthesized beam which is elongated perpendicularly to the outflow direction. On the other hand, those in B228 and L1157-mm are elongated along the outflow directions within $\lesssim$25, which could be due to the contamination from the outflows. The 1.3 mm continuum emission in other sources, such as Per-emb 9, Per-emb 16, IRAS 03282$+$3035, HH 212, and IRAS 16253$-$2429, does not show a clear elongation or orientation preferentially parallel or perpendicular to the outflow directions.
For the sources where we have both low- and high-resolution images, we can compare the structures of the continuum emission on scales of a few hundred AU with the innermost 100 AU. In the low-resolution images of L1448-mm, NGC 1333 IRAS 4A2, and L1527 IRS, the 1.3 mm continuum emission on a scale of 1$\arcsec$–2$\arcsec$ ($\sim$140–500 AU) does not show an elongation perpendicular to the outflow directions. However, interestingly, in the high-resolution images, the elongation of the continuum emission on smaller scales of $\sim$05 ($\lesssim$125 AU) becomes more perpendicular to the outflow directions. In addition, the aspect ratios between the major and minor axes of the 1.3 mm continuum emission also vary from the larger to smaller scales. These changes in orientations and aspect ratios could suggest that the 1.3 mm continuum emission on the 05 scale in these sources traces a component that is different from the one on the 1$\arcsec$–2$\arcsec$ scale. On the 05-scale, the 1.3 mm continuum emission in these sources, which is elongated perpendicularly to the outflow directions, could primarily trace the circumstellar disks with less contamination from the protostellar envelopes and the outflows, as compared to that on the 1$\arcsec$–2$\arcsec$ scale. On the other hand, in NGC 1333 IRAS 4B, both the low- and high-resolution images show similar orientations and aspect ratios, suggesting that the 1.3 mm continuum emission from 1$\arcsec$–2$\arcsec$ to 05 scales observed with the SMA most likely traces the same component.
The mass of the circumstellar material traced by the 1.3 mm continuum emission ($\tbond$$M_{\rm dust}$) can be estimated as $$M_{\rm dust} = \frac{F_{\rm 1.3mm}d^{2}} {\kappa_{\rm 1.3 mm} B(T_{\rm dust})},$$ where $F_{\rm 1.3mm}$ is the total 1.3 mm flux, $d$ is the distance to the sources, $\kappa_{\rm 1.3 mm}$ is the dust mass opacity at 1.3 mm, $T_{\rm dust}$ is the dust temperature, and $B(T_{\rm dust})$ is the Planck function at a temperature of $T_{\rm dust}$. Under the assumption that the wavelength ($\tbond$$\lambda$) dependence of the dust mass opacity ($\equiv \kappa_{\lambda}$) is $\kappa_{\lambda} = 0.1 \times (0.3\ {\rm mm}/\lambda)^{\beta}$ cm$^{2}$ g$^{-1}$ (Beckwith et al. 1990), the mass opacity at 1.3 mm is 0.023 cm$^{2}$ g$^{-1}$ with $\beta = 1.0$ (e.g., J[ø]{}rgensen et al. 2007) and a gas-to-dust mass ratio of 100. $T_{\rm dust}$ is adopted to be the temperature at a radius of 500 AU of our best-fit kinematic model (Section \[fitting\]). The 1.3 mm continuum components in L1448-mm, NGC 1333 IRAS 4A, and L1527 IRS observed with the SMA at the high angular resolution could trace the circumstellar disks in the inner 100 AU regions around the protostars. For typical circumstellar disks around T Tauri stars, the temperatures at a radius of 100 AU range from $\sim$20 to $\sim$50 K (e.g., Piétu et al. 2007). Hence, $M_{\rm dust}$ traced by the high-resolution observations is estimated with $T_{\rm dust}$ = 50 K, leading to lower limits of $M_{\rm dust}$. With the same $F_{\rm 1.3mm}$, $T_{\rm dust}$ = 50 K gives three times smaller dust masses as compared to $T_{\rm dust}$ = 20 K. $M_{\rm dust}$ is shown in Table \[contable\].
C$^{18}$O (2–1) Emission {#c18oresult}
------------------------
Figure \[c18ofig\] shows moment-0 (i.e., integrated-intensity) maps overlaid on moment-1 (i.e., intensity-weighted mean velocity) maps of the C$^{18}$O (2–1) emission in our sample sources. Toward all the sources, the C$^{18}$O (2–1) emission shows compact components with sizes ranging from 1,000 AU to 3,000 AU associated with the protostellar positions. Elongated emission along the outflow directions is seen in NGC 1333 IRAS 4B, IRAS 03292$+$3039, Lupus 3 MMS, IRAS 16253$-$2429, B335, and L1157-mm. Directions orthogonal to the outflow axes are found in L1448 IRS 2, L1448 IRS 3B, IRAS 03282$+$3035, B228, and B59\#11. In addition to the central components, in L1527 IRS and L1448-mm, extended emission with sizes of $\sim$20$\arcsec$ (2,800 and 5,000 AU) is seen along the outflow cavity and the outflow direction, respectively.
The moment-1 maps of the C$^{18}$O (2–1) emission in this sample show wide ranges of orientations and magnitudes of velocity gradients. To measure these orientations and magnitudes, a linear relation, $$\label{vgeq}
V_{\rm los} = M_{\rm vg} \cdot L + V_{\rm c},$$ is fitted to the moment-1 maps, where $V_{\rm los}$ is the line-of-sight velocity, $M_{\rm vg}$ is the magnitude of the velocity gradient, $V_{\rm c}$ is a constant, and $L$ denotes the positional offset as $$L = \Delta\alpha \cdot \sin \theta_{\rm vg} + \Delta\delta \cdot \cos \theta_{\rm vg},$$ where $\Delta\alpha$ and $\Delta\delta$ are the RA and Dec offsets with respect to the protostellar position and $\theta_{\rm vg}$ is the position angle of the direction of the velocity gradient. $M_{\rm vg}$ and $\theta_{\rm vg}$ are determined by minimizing $\Sigma\ (V_{\rm ob}(\alpha, \delta) - V_{\rm los}(\alpha, \delta))$, where $V_{\rm ob}$ is the observed mean velocity in the moment-1 maps. The minimization is done using the IDL routine, $MPFIT$ (Markwardt 2009). To focus on the velocity gradients in the central components with minimum contamination from surrounding extension or diffuse emission, we first fit a two-dimensional Gaussian distribution to the central component in the C$^{18}$O moment-0 map. Subsequently, the fitting of velocity gradients is only performed on the central region within a radius of twice the standard deviation ($=$FWHM$/2\sqrt{2\ln 2}$) along the major axis of the fitted Gaussian distribution. The measured orientations and magnitudes of the overall velocity gradients are listed in Table \[c18ovg\], and their uncertainties are estimated based on the covariance matrixes. In L1448 IRS 3B, NGC 1333 IRAS 4A, Per-emb 9, IRAS 03292$+$3039, L1527 IRS, HH 212, and B59\#11, the directions of the velocity gradients of the central components are perpendicular to the outflow directions with $\Delta\theta \gtrsim 65\degr$, and their magnitudes range from $\sim$22 km s$^{-1}$ pc$^{-1}$ in HH 212 to $\sim$529 km s$^{-1}$ pc$^{-1}$ in B59\#11. On the other hand, the directions of the velocity gradients of the central components in NGC 1333 IRAS 4B, IRAS 03282$+$3035, B228, B335, and L1157-mm are along the outflow directions with $\Delta\theta \lesssim 20\degr$, and the magnitudes are from $\sim$9 km s$^{-1}$ pc$^{-1}$ in L1157-mm to $\sim$115 km s$^{-1}$ pc$^{-1}$ in B335. The directions of the velocity gradients of the central components in L1448 IRS 2, L1448-mm, Per-emb 16, Lupus 3 MMS, and IRAS 16253$-$2429 do not show a preference to be either parallel or perpendicular to the outflow directions. Their magnitudes range from $\sim$1 km s$^{-1}$ pc$^{-1}$ in Lupus 3 MMS to $\sim$78 km s$^{-1}$ pc$^{-1}$ in Per-emb 16. Previous interferometric observations in N$_2$H$^+$ and NH$_3$ lines at lower angular resolutions of $\sim$3–11also found orientations of velocity gradients that vary from perpendicular to parallel to the outflow axes, with magnitudes that differ by an order of magnitude in a sample of protostellar sources (Tobin et al. 2011). The varying orientations of the [*overall*]{} velocity gradients could be a measure for the significance of the rotational motions relative to the infalling motions and possible contaminations from the outflows. The sources with the velocity gradients perpendicular to the outflows likely exhibit more dominant rotational motions. (e.g., Arce & Sargent 2006; Yen et al. 2013). Therefore, the wide ranges of orientations and magnitudes of velocity gradients suggest that low-mass Class 0 and 0/I protostars likely exhibit a variety of infalling and rotational motions in their envelopes, even though they are at similar evolutionary stages.
In order to further assess the rotational motions in the protostellar envelopes in our sample sources, we isolate the velocity gradients [*perpendicular*]{} to the outflow axes and passing through the protostellar positions. This gradient primarily consists of rotational motions with a minimal contamination from infalling motions and outflows (e.g., Yen et al. 2013). We first extract the mean velocities along the axis perpendicular to the outflow axis from the moment-1 maps, and fit the mean velocities with Equation \[vgeq\] using $MPFIT$. Here, $L$ is the positional offset along the axis perpendicular to the outflow axis. The measured velocity gradients perpendicular to the outflow axes are shown in Table \[c18ovgpa\]. In our sample, 5 out of 17 sources, L1448 IRS 3B, NGC 1333 IRAS 4A, IRAS 03292$+$3039, Per-emb 16, and B59\#11, show very significant velocity gradients with magnitudes larger than 90 km s$^{-1}$ pc$^{-1}$, suggesting the presence of fast rotational motions. On the other hand, NGC 1333 IRAS 4B, Lupus 3 MMS, and L1157-mm do not show significant velocity gradients perpendicular to their outflows, and the magnitudes are $\lesssim$15 km s$^{-1}$ pc$^{-1}$. Besides that, in B335, the direction of the velocity gradient perpendicular to the outflow is different from that of the rotational motion on scales of thousands of AU (Saito et al. 1999; Yen et al. 2011; Kurono et al. 2013). These results suggest that there is no clear signature of rotational motions on the inner 1,000-AU scale in these sources. Hence, even after isolating the velocity gradients perpendicular to the outflow axes, the results still suggest that the protostellar envelopes in our sample likely exhibit different rotational velocities, spanning over an order of magnitude.
Kinematic Model {#fitting}
===============
Measuring Infalling and Rotational Velocities
---------------------------------------------
To investigate the infalling and rotational velocities of the protostellar envelopes and the sizes of the embedded Keplerian disks from the observed velocity gradients in the C$^{18}$O (2–1) line, we construct a simple model of infalling and rotational motions with the geometrically-thin approximation. This model is compared against our observational results. Theoretical models of collapsing dense cores without magnetic field show that more flattened inner regions (e.g., Ulrich 1976; Terebey et al. 1984). Including magnetic fields, the MHD simulations predict that the ratio of radius over height of the inner envelopes can grow to as large as five in regions with densities larger than 10$^{6}$ cm$^{-3}$ (e.g., Machida et al. 2014). The C$^{18}$O (2–1) emission in protostellar sources is typically optically thin ($\tau \lesssim 0.3$) on a 1,000-AU scale as inferred from the observed C$^{18}$O (3–2) and (2–1) line ratio ($\sim$1–2) in several protostellar sources (Hogerheijde et al. 1998). Therefore, the geometrically-thin kinematic model can be applied to the C$^{18}$O (2–1) emission to study the velocity field on the equatorial plane. However, we note that if the inner envelope is highly flattened, the inner region could shield the outer region from being heated by the protostellar luminosity, and C$^{18}$O (2–1) may be frozen out on the equatorial plane, as in the case of protoplanetary disks (e.g., de Gregorio-Monsalvo et al. 2013; Rosenfeld et al. 2013). In addition, photons from the central region tend to escape along the outflow cavity, resulting in a warm region along the cavity (e.g., Spaans et al. 1995). The emission from the outflow cavity can then enhance and contaminate the velocity features of the inner envelope.
To minimize the influence of the outflow contamination on the velocity structures in C$^{18}$O (2–1), our models are only applied to the central compact C$^{18}$O (2–1) components, excluding outer extensions which could be associated with outflow activities. For typical molecular outflows, their outflowing velocities grow with radius $\propto R$ (e.g., Shu et al. 1991), while the free-falling velocity is $\propto R^{-0.5}$. Hence, in the central components at smaller radii, the velocity features of the outflows are expected to be minimal. With our model, we estimate the masses of protostars and the specific angular momenta of their surrounding infalling envelopes based on the infalling and rotational motions on a 1,000-AU scale observed with the SMA. Although the Keplerian disks (if present) in our sample sources may not be resolved with the present SMA observations at angular resolutions of $\sim$2$\arcsec$–8$\arcsec$, the possible radius of the Keplerian disk ($R_{\rm d}$) can be derived from the estimated protostellar mass ($M_*$) and the angular momentum of the infalling envelope ($j$) as $$\label{rd}
R_{\rm d} = \frac{j^2}{GM_*},$$ under the assumption that the angular momentum of the infalling material is conserved. Infalling motions with conserved angular momenta are observed in several protostellar sources without large-scale ($>$100 AU) Keplerian disks (e.g., Yen et al. 2013, 2014; Ohashi et al. 2014). We note that in these cases, the gas motions of the outer envelopes observed with the SMA are assumed to be smoothly connected to those of the inner disks. Such smooth connections of gas motions are observed around a few protostars, such as L1527 IRS (Ohashi et al. 2014), TMC-1A (Aso et al. 2014), and L1551 IRS 5 (Chou et al. 2014). MHD simulations, however, suggest that infalling and rotational motions could be dramatically braked in inner envelopes on a 100-AU scale due to an increasing magnetic pressure (e.g., Mellon & Li 2008, 2009). Nevertheless, abruptly braking gas motions have not yet been observed. On the other hand, if our sample sources exhibit Keplerian disks with outer radii of several hundred AU, the disks can be resolved with the present SMA observations, and the protostellar mass can be estimated from the Keplerian rotation directly with our model.
The radial profiles of the C$^{18}$O surface density ($\Sigma$) and the gas kinetic temperature ($T$) of our model are described as $$\Sigma(r) = \Sigma_0 \cdot (\frac{r}{r_0})^p,$$ $$T(r) = T_0 \cdot (\frac{r}{r_0})^q,$$ where $r_0$ is arbitrarily chosen to be 500 AU. $p$ is adopted to be $-1$, which is an approximated radial profile of the column density of a spherical envelope during an inside-out collapse having a radial density profile $\propto$ $r^{-1.5}$ (Shu 1977). $q$ is adopted to be $-0.4$, which is the typical profile observed in protostellar sources (e.g., Shirley et al. 2000, 2001). The protostellar positions are adopted as the centres of mass, except for NGC 1333 IRAS 4A, where two protostars are located in a common envelope. Here, the peak position in the moment-0 map of the C$^{18}$O emission is adopted as the center of mass of the envelope. Similarly to the fitting of the velocity gradients described in Section \[c18oresult\], the outer radius of our model ($\tbond$$R_{\rm out}$) is adopted to be twice the standard deviation along the major axis of the fitted Gaussian distribution of the central component in the C$^{18}$O moment-0 map. In our model, at $r > R_{\rm d}$, the gas is assumed to be infalling and rotating with a conserved angular momentum, and the infalling velocity is assumed to be a fraction ($\tbond$$f$) of the relevant free-fall velocity. Thus, the infalling and rotational velocities are described as $$V_{\rm rot}(r) = \frac{j}{r},$$ $$\label{vin}
V_{\rm in}(r) = f \cdot \sqrt{\frac{2GM_*}{r} - V_{\rm rot}^2(r)}.$$ At $r < R_{\rm d}$, the gas motion in our model is assumed to be a Keplerian rotation without any infalling component: $$V_{\rm rot}(r) = \sqrt{\frac{GM_*}{r}},$$ $$V_{\rm in}(r) = 0.$$ The line-of-sight velocity is given by $$\label{project}
V_{\rm los}(x,y) = V_{\rm rot}(r) \cdot \sin i \cdot \frac{x}{r} + V_{\rm in}(r) \cdot \sin i \cdot \frac{y}{r} + V_{\rm sys},$$ where $x$ and $y$ are the coordinates along the major and minor axes with respect to the center of mass, respectively, and $i$ is the inclination angle, defined as the angle between the disk plane and the outflow axis. The line profile ($\phi_v$) of the C$^{18}$O line as a function of velocity ($v$) is assumed to be a Gaussian function as $$\label{vphi}
\phi_v \propto \exp(-\frac{(v-V_{\rm los})^2}{2{\sigma_v}^2}),$$ where $\sigma_v$ is the velocity dispersion. We assume $\sigma_v$ to be the thermal dispersion as $$\sigma_v = \sqrt{\frac{2kT(r)}{m}},$$ where $m$ is the C$^{18}$O molecular mass and $k$ is the Boltzmann constant. In our models, the thermal dispersion at a radius of 500 AU ranges from $\sim$0.07 to $\sim$0.17 km s$^{-1}$. The critical density of the C$^{18}$O (2–1) emission is $\sim$10$^4$ cm$^{-3}$, which is lower than the typical density of protostellar envelopes and disks on hundreds of AU scale ($\gtrsim$10$^5$ cm$^{-3}$). Hence, the C$^{18}$O emission is likely thermalized (e.g., Yen et al. 2011). Under the assumption of LTE, the C$^{18}$O (2–1) line intensity ($I_\nu$) of our model is computed with the radiative transfer equation $$I_{\nu} = B_{\nu}(T) \cdot (1 - \exp^{-\tau_\nu}),$$ with $$\label{rad}
\tau_\nu = \Sigma(r)\kappa_\nu\phi_v,$$ where $B_{\nu}(T)$ is the Planck function at a temperature of $T$, and $\tau_\nu$ and $\kappa_\nu$ are the optical depth and absorption coefficient of the C$^{18}$O (2–1) line, respectively. The population and absorption coefficient of the C$^{18}$O emission are computed with $$\label{Nj}
\frac{N_j}{N_{\rm C^{18}O}} = \frac{(2J+1)\exp^{-hB_{\rm e} J(J+1)/kT}}{kT/hB_{\rm e}},$$ $$\kappa_\nu=-\frac{c^2}{8\pi {\nu_0}^2}\frac{g_{J+1}}{g_J}\frac{N_J}{N_{\rm C^{18}O}} A_{J+1,J} (1-\exp^{-h\nu_0/kT}),$$ where $J$ is the lower energy level, $N_J$ is the number density at the energy level $J$, $N_{\rm C^{18}O}$ is the total number density of C$^{18}$O molecules, $h$ is the Planck constant, $B_{\rm e}$ is the rotational constant of 54.89 GHz, $c$ is the speed of light, $\nu_0$ is the rest frequency, $g_J$ is the statistical weight of the energy level $J$, and $A_{J+1,J}$ is the Einstein coefficient.
There are five free parameters in our model: $\Sigma_0$, $T_0$, $M_*$, $j$, and $f$. The parameter $f$ in protostellar sources is not well understood. Without the effect of the magnetic field, infalling motions in protostellar sources are expected to be almost free fall, i.e., $f = 1$ (e.g., Ulrich 1976; Terebey et al. 1984). Theoretical studies incorporating magnetic fields show that the infalling velocity in protostellar envelopes is slower than the free-fall velocity (e.g., Krasnopolsky & Königl 2002; Li et al. 2011). As shown with Equation \[vin\], $M_*$ is proportional to ${V_{\rm in}}^2/f^2+{V_{\rm rot}}^2$. If infalling dominates over rotational motion, the estimated protostellar mass is approximately $\propto f^{-2}$. With the same amount of specific angular momenta, the inferred disk radius is $\propto f^2$ (Equation \[rd\]). Therefore, the uncertainty in $f$ can introduce significant errors in the estimated protostellar mass and disk radius. In recent observations revealing Keplerian disks embedded in infalling envelopes around L1527 IRS, L1551 NE, L1551 IRS 5, TMC-1A, and L1489 IRS, their protostellar masses can be estimated from Keplerian rotation. Hence, the infalling motions observed in these envelopes can be compared against expected free-fall motions. In the Class 0 protostar L1527 IRS, the infalling velocity is found to be half of the free-fall velocity ($f = 0.5$; Ohashi et al. 2014), while those in L1551 NE, L1551 IRS 5 and TMC-1A, which are Class I protostars, are about one third ($f = 0.3$; Takakuwa et al. 2013; Chou et al. 2014; Aso et al. 2014). On the other hand, in the Class I protostar L1489 IRS, the infalling motion can be explained with free-fall motion with a conserved angular momentum (Yen et al. 2014). Therefore, we perform two sets of model fitting, fixing $f$ to (1) $f = 0.5$ and (2) $f = 1$ which is often adopted to analyze the gas kinematics around protostars (e.g., Ohashi et al. 1997; Momose et al. 1998; Lee et al. 2006). In each model, $R_{\rm d}$ is derived with the fitted $M_*$ and $j$ (Equation \[rd\]). Then, we compute model image cubes and generate model P–V diagrams along and perpendicular to the outflow axes. The purpose of our model is to reproduce the observed velocity structures but not the entire intensity distributions which require more sophisticated models incorporating three-dimensional temperature and density structures and detailed radiative transfer calculations. Therefore, the fitting is performed on the P–V diagrams along and perpendicular to the outflow axes. To that purpose, we subtract the model P–V diagrams from the observed P–V diagram, sum the square of the residuals and search for the minimum of that to obtain the best fit.
Two sets of best-fit parameters are obtained with $f=0.5$ and 1, listed as ranges of values in Table \[c18ofit\]. Detailed results of individual sources are discussed in Appendix \[ind\]. In sources, such as Per-emb 9 and IRAS 03292$+$3039, where the rotational motion is dominant over the infalling motion, the fitting with the two different $f$-values results in almost the same best-fit $M_*$. Even though a different $f$ is adopted in the fitting, the best-fit models necessarily yield similar $V_{\rm rot}(r)$ and $V_{\rm in}(r)$ in order to explain the observed velocity structures. Hence, the fitting with different $f$ also results in similar model images, where the difference in peak intensity is typically less than 10%. Figure \[fitfig\] presents the comparison between the observed P–V diagrams and the best-fit model with $f$ = 0.5. The model images of the best-fit models with $f$ = 1 are almost identical to those with $f$ = 0.5 in a visual inspection. Hence, the images are not shown here.
The velocity gradients perpendicular to the outflow axes are typically considered as an indication of rotational motions in protostellar envelopes (e.g., Ohashi et al. 1997; Momose et al. 1998; Yen et al. 2013). In Figure \[mvgfig\], we compare the measured magnitude of the velocity gradients perpendicular to the outflow axes with the specific angular momenta estimated using our simple kinematic models. Figure \[mvgfig\] shows a clear correlation. Note that the measured magnitudes originate from the projected gas motions, while in our kinematic models, we correct for the inclination angles to estimate the specific angular momenta. In addition, we assume that the rotational motions are either Keplerian rotation or rotation with a conserved angular momentum in our kinematic models. Hence, it is expected that in individual sources, the velocity gradients perpendicular to the outflow axes may not be fully attributed to rotational motions. These two effects cause the data points to scatter around the correlation, as seen in Figure \[mvgfig\]. Nevertheless, the obvious correlation shows that the velocity gradient perpendicular to the outflow axis can be a tracer for rotational motions on these scales.
Uncertainty and Robustness of Fitting Results
---------------------------------------------
To assess possible uncertainties and shortcomings introduced by our simplified kinematic model and the low resolution of the data as compared to the observed disk sizes ($\sim$100–300 AU, e.g., Brinch et al. 2007; Lommen et al. 2008; Takakuwa et al. 2012), we compare our results of the kinematics in HH 212 and L1527 IRS with those by Lee et al. (2014) and Ohashi et al. (2014), respectively. They analyzed the kinematics of HH 212 and L1527 IRS observed with the Atacama Large Millimeter/Submillimeter Array (ALMA) at $\lesssim$1$\arcsec$ resolutions with three-dimensional models and more sophisticated radiative transfer calculations. In HH 212, the infalling and rotational velocities at a radius of 400 AU are estimated to be 0.9 km s$^{-1}$ and 0.35 km s$^{-1}$ with the ALMA data in HCO$^+$ (4–3), respectively. This corresponds to a protostellar mass of $\sim$0.2 $M_\sun$, a specific angular momentum of $\sim$6.8 $\times$ 10$^{-4}$ km s$^{-1}$ pc and a disk radius of 120 AU. Under the same assumption, namely the infalling motion being free fall as adopted by Lee et al. (2014), our model fitting of the lower resolution SMA data shows a protostellar mass of 0.12 $M_\sun$, a specific angular momentum of 4.6 $\times$ 10$^{-4}$ km s$^{-1}$ pc and a disk radius of 80 AU. Therefore, our results are consistent with the ALMA results within 50%. On the other hand, the protostellar mass and the specific angular momentum in the infalling envelope in L1527 IRS are estimated to be 0.33 $M_\sun$ and 6.1 $\times$ 10$^{-4}$ km s$^{-1}$ pc with the ALMA C$^{18}$O (2–1) line data. The disk radius is estimated to be 54 AU. The infalling velocity is found to be half of the free-fall velocity (Ohashi et al. 2014). With $f = 0.5$, our SMA model fitting shows a protostellar mass of 0.24 $M_\sun$, a specific angular momentum of 5.8 $\times$ 10$^{-4}$ km s$^{-1}$ pc and a disk radius of 70 AU in L1527 IR. Thus, our results are also consistent with the ALMA results within 50%. We remark that the estimated $M_*$ and $j$ from the SMA data are systemically lower than those from the ALMA data. This could be due to limited resolutions and sensitivity of the SMA to detect the inner components at higher velocities. However, the comparison here suggests that our assumptions, such as the geometrically-thin approximation and the optically-thin and LTE conditions, are likely valid and do not introduce a significant error, as compared to the uncertainty due to the $f$ parameter, which can introduce a systematic error as large as a factor of four.
We have additionally probed the dependence of our results on $p$, $q$, and $R_{\rm out}$. Three representative cases, B335, L1527 IRS and B59\#11 with inferred disk radii $<$5 AU, $\sim$70–140 AU, and $\sim$230–340 AU, are analyzed with $p$ = $-0.5$ and $-1.5$, $q$ = $-0.2$ and $-0.8$, and varying $R_{\rm out}$ by 20%. We find that the best-fit $M_*$ and $j$ with different $p$ and $q$ are consistent within 10%. In the cases of B335 and B59\#11, where no extended emission surrounding the central main components and only weak extensions are found, the changes in the best-fit $M_*$ and $j$ due to the 20% variation of $R_{\rm out}$ are less than 10%. For L1527, the change is less than 20%. The larger change in L1527 compared to those in the other two sources is likely due to the presence of the significant extended emission in this source. We, thus, conclude that our fitting results likely do not significantly depend on the assumptions of $p$, $q$, and $R_{\rm out}$.
Another uncertain variable is the inclination angle $i$ which is a fixed parameter in our model. Both $V_{\rm rot}$ and $V_{\rm in}$ are approximately proportional to $1/\sin(i)$. Hence, $M_*$ and $j$ are expected to approximately scale with $1/\sin^2(i)$ and $1/\sin(i)$, respectively. For the four sources, Per-emb 9, IRAS 03282$+$3035, IRAS 03292$+$3039, and Per-emb 16, whose inclination angles are estimated in this work (Appendix \[i\]), we test the robustness of our results by increasing $i$ by 20$\degr$, i.e., source is closer to edge on than in our original assumptions. We find that $M_*$ and $j$ follow the above simple scalings within 30%, except for $j$ in IRAS 03282$+$3035. This is likely because the velocity structures in the P–V diagram perpendicular to the outflow axis in IRAS 03282$+$3035 are only marginally resolved. With the larger inclination angle, the model fitting tends to interpret the velocity structures as no clear rotational motion ($j < 5 \times 10^{-5}$ km s$^{-1}$ pc) instead of the slow rotational motion ($j \sim 7 \times 10^{-4}$ km s$^{-1}$ pc) from the original model where IRAS 03282$+$3035 is closer to face on. In summary, our test shows that $M_*$ and $j$ follow the simple scaling relations with a small change in the inclination angle if the velocity structures are resolved. We finally note that these results can deviate from the simple scaling relations, if the uncertainty in the inclination angle is more significant due to a more complex change in the two-dimensional intensity distribution.
Discussion
==========
The SMA observations in the C$^{18}$O (2–1) line of the 17 Class 0 or 0/I protostars show that the velocity gradients on a scale of 500 AU to 1,500 AU (4–7) have a wide range of magnitudes from no clear gradient ($\sim$1 km s$^{-1}$ pc$^{-1}$) to $\sim$529 km s$^{-1}$ pc$^{-1}$ together with different orientations from parallel to perpendicular to the outflow directions. These results suggest that the protostellar envelopes around the low-mass Class 0 and 0/I protostars likely exhibit a variety of infalling and rotational motions, even though they are at a similar evolutionary stage. We construct simple models to reproduce the observed velocity gradients, estimate the infalling and rotational velocities, and infer the disk radii and the protostellar masses in the sample sources. Below, we discuss the possibility of disk growth at the Class 0 stage and the role of the magnetic field through comparison between our results, observational results of more evolved protostars, and theoretical models with and without the effect of the magnetic field.
Possible Sign of Disk Growth at the Class 0 Stage {#noB}
-------------------------------------------------
Figure \[rdfig\] shows the estimated specific angular momenta as a function of $T_{\rm bol}$ and possible disk radii as a function of the estimated protostellar mass. The left panel in Figure \[rdfig\] hints a trend that sources having higher $T_{\rm bol}$, which are expected to be more evolved, exhibit larger specific angular momenta on a 1,000-AU scale in their protostellar envelopes. Such a trend is consistent with the theoretical model of inside-out collapsing dense cores where the angular momentum is conserved (e.g., Terebey et al. 1984). In this picture, the inner protostellar envelopes rotate faster as the outer material with a higher angular momentum starts to collapse. (e.g., Yen et al. 2013). In our sample, the possible disk radii range from $<$5 AU to $>$700 AU under the assumption that the angular momenta of the infalling envelopes are conserved. There is no clear correlation between the possible disk radii and protostellar masses estimated from our kinematic models, as seen in the right panel in Figure \[rdfig\]. Previous observations in CO emission show that disks around T Tauri stars have outer radii ranging from $\sim$100 AU to $\sim$800 AU (e.g., Guilloteau & Dutrey 1994; Dutrey et a. 1998; Simon et al. 2000; Piétu et al. 2007). Observations of several Class I protostars show that the outer radii of disks range from $\sim$50 AU to $\sim$300 AU (e.g., Brinch et al. 2007; Lommen et al. 2008; J[ø]{}rgensen et al. 2009; Takakuwa et al. 2012; Chou et al. 2014). In our sample of Class 0 and 0/I protostars, 11 out of the 17 protostars possibly exhibit large-scale disks with outer radii $>$100 AU up to $\sim$700 AU, comparable to the disk radii at the later evolutionary stages. Especially L1448 IRS 3B, Per-emb 9, IRAS 03292$+$3039, and B59\#11 show clear velocity gradients perpendicular to the outflow axes, and their rotational motions are most likely dominant over the infalling motions, suggesting the presence of Keplerian disks with outer radii of hundreds of AU (Table \[c18ovg\] and \[c18ofit\]). In addition, L1527 and HH 212 are known to exhibit Keplerian disks with an outer radius of $\sim$50–90 AU and $\sim$90–120 AU, respectively (Tobin et al. 2012a; Ohashi et al. 2014, Lee et al. 2014; Codella et al. 2014). Therefore, our results could suggest that large-scale disks are already developed at the Class 0 stage. On the other hand, no observational signature of rotational motion is detected in NGC 1333 IRAS 4B, B335, and L1157-mm, suggesting that the disk radii (if present) in these sources are likely small ($<$5 AU). Millimeter continuum observations at sub-arcsecond resolutions also suggest that the disk radii are smaller than 60 AU in B335 (Harvey et al. 2003) and smaller than 40 AU in L1157-mm (Chiang et al. 2012). The presence of both large and small disks might suggest that the Class 0 stage could be the stage to build a large-scale disk. Note that the sample size in the present paper is still limited. A larger sample of protostellar sources with directly imaged disks at the Class 0 stage is required to estimate the time scale of disk growth.
Theoretical models of disk formation in collapsing dense cores without the effect of magnetic fields, where the angular momentum is conserved, show that the size of Keplerian disks around protostars grows very fast as $R_{\rm d} \propto \omega^2c_{\rm s}t^3$, where $\omega$, $c_{\rm s}$, and $t$ are the angular velocity, the sound speed and the age of the collapsing cores (Terebey et al. 1984; Basu 1998). Here, $\omega$ describes the initial angular momentum of the dense cores, and $c_{\rm s}$ is related to the mass of the dense cores and their mass infalling rates. With the observed mean $\omega$ of 7.5 $\times$ 10$^{-14}$ s$^{-1}$ (e.g., Tobin et al. 2011) and typical $c_{\rm s}$ of 0.2 km s$^{-1}$ at 10 K, a Keplerian disk with a radius of 100 AU can form in $\sim$10$^5$ years, which is comparable to the time scale of the Class 0 stage (e.g., Enoch et al. 2009; Dunham et al. 2014a). The disk radii as a function of protostellar mass of this theoretical model are shown as dashed lines in Figure \[rdfig\]b. Although the possible disk sizes in B335 and L1157-mm are small, their associated dense cores have rotational motions and masses similar within a factor of two to three to those of other sources which possibly exhibit larger disks with radii $\gtrsim$100 AU (Table \[comtable\]). Their estimated protostellar masses and upper limits of disk radii are also within the expected relation between protostellar mass and disk radii in the theoretical model. The last source showing a slow rotational motion, NGC 1333 IRAS 4B, is in a cluster region, and its large-scale rotational motion in the associated dense core is less clear (Volgenau et al. 2006). One possibility is that these three sources, where the disk radii are inferred to be small, are younger than the other sources, and the disk sizes in these sources will grow as the collapse proceeds. Future high-resolution and high-sensitivity observations to directly image disks around Class 0 protostars are required to compare their properties with those around more evolved sources and to study disk evolution. Moreover, the comparison between the directly measured disk sizes, those inferred under the assumption of angular momentum conservation, and those in theoretical models incorporating magnetic fields (e.g., Mellon & Li 2008, 2009; Machida et al. 2014) can reveal detailed physics in infalling envelopes.
Gas Motion vs Magnetic Braking and Magnetic Field Orientation
-------------------------------------------------------------
MHD simulations show that the magnetic field can effectively remove the angular momenta of collapsing material and/or disks by magnetic braking and suppress the radii of Keplerian disks to within 10 AU (e.g., Mellon & Li 2008, 2009; Machida et al. 2011; Li et al. 2011; Dapp et al. 2012). In our sample, L1448 IRS 3B, NGC 1333 IRAS 4A, IRAS 03292$+$3039, Per-emb 16, and B59\#11 show large velocity gradients ($M_{\rm vg} > 90$ km s$^{-1}$ pc$^{-1}$) perpendicular to their outflow axes and passing through their protostellar positions on a 1,000-AU scale. Their specific angular momenta in their protostellar envelopes are estimated to be $>$10$^{-3}$ km s$^{-1}$ pc from our kinematic models. Furthermore, from the entire sample, the specific angular momenta on a 1,000-AU scale in 11 out of the 17 Class 0 or 0/I protostars are estimated to be $\gtrsim$5 $\times$ 10$^{-4}$ km s$^{-1}$ pc. This all suggests that large-scale disks ($>$100 AU) possibly can form around these protostars. Therefore, effective magnetic braking is unlikely common on a 1,000-AU scale among Class 0 protostellar sources. On the other hand, the disks around NGC 1333 IRAS 4B, B335, and L1157-mm likely have outer radii $<$5 AU, which could be the result of effective magnetic braking in these sources. Several mechanisms have been proposed to reduce the efficiency of magnetic braking and enable formation of large-scale disks, such as dissipation of protostellar envelopes (e.g., Machida et al. 2011), misalignment between the magnetic field and rotational axis of collapsing dense cores (e.g., Joos et al. 2012; Li et al. 2013), turbulence (e.g., Seifried et al. 2012, 2013; Joos et al. 2013), initial density profiles of dense cores and even simulation setups (e.g., Machida et al. 2014).
The MHD simulations by Machida et al. (2011) show that a 100-AU disk can form when its surrounding envelope is mostly dissipated and both the envelope and the disk have comparable masses, even though the parental dense core is strongly magnetized. In their more recent simulations with improved simulation setups (Machida et al. 2014), a 100-AU disk can form even when the surrounding envelope is more massive than the disk. In our observational results, the mass of the circumstellar material (protostellar envelope + disk) traced by the continuum emission can be considered as the upper limit of disk mass. L1527, surrounded by a Keplerian disk with a radius of $\sim$50–90 AU (Tobin et al. 2012a; Ohashi et al. 2014), and sources such as L1448 IRS 3B and L1448-mm with possible 100-AU disks, are still embedded in their envelopes which are one order of magnitude more massive than the disks (Table \[comtable\]). Therefore, envelope dissipation is unlikely an important effect to resolve the problem of magnetic braking in disk formation.
MHD simulations have also shown that if the magnetic field and rotational axis of a dense core are misaligned, the angular momentum can be more efficiently transported to the vicinity of protostars with infalling motions to form a large-scale Keplerian disk (e.g., Joos et al. 2012; Li et al. 2013). Some of our sample sources have been observed in polarized continuum emission from dust grains. Here, the polarization orientation is expected to be orthogonal to the orientation of the magnetic field (Attard et al. 2009; Matthews et al. 2009; Dotson et al. 2010; Davidson et al. 2011; Chapman et al. 2013; Stephens et al. 2013; Hull et al. 2013, 2014; Zhang et al. 2014). The axes of outflows are expected to trace the rotational axes in protostellar sources. The differences in position angles of their outflow axes and magnetic field mean orientations from Hull et al. (2014) on 10,000- AU and 1,000-AU scales are listed in Table \[poltab\]. Figure \[polfig\] shows a comparison between the specific angular momenta estimated from our kinematic models and the outflow–magnetic field misalignments at 10,000-AU and 1,000-AU scales. Although there is not a very clear correlation between the angular momenta and the misalignments, all the data points tend to fall into a zone below a diagonal. The absence of sources with large specific angular momenta together with closely aligned magnetic field and outflow axes (zone above diagonal) can possibly hint that the magnetic field, if originally aligned with the rotational axis, can play a role in removing angular momentum from infalling material. A larger sample for such a comparison is needed to reveal the genuine relation between the gas motion and the magnetic field.
Below, we compare the gas motions and magnetic field orientations in individual sources. In L1157-mm, without a clear sign of rotational motions and with a possible disk radius $<$5 AU, the magnetic field orientation is well aligned with the outflow axis within 14$\degr$ from 10,000-AU to 1,000-AU scales. In L1448 IRS 3B, which shows a clear signature of fast rotation and possibly exhibits a large-scale disk, the magnetic field orientation and the outflow axis are clearly misaligned by more than 70. These two sources could be examples illustrating that alignment suppresses and misalignment enables formation of large-scale disks. L1448-mm possibly exhibits a disk with an outer radius of $\sim$100 AU as estimated from our kinematic models, and has its magnetic field moderately misaligned with the outflow axes by $\sim$45$\degr$ at both 10,000 AU and 1,000 AU scales. In L1527 IRS, there is a Keplerian disk with a radius of $\sim$50–90 AU, as revealed with the ALMA observations (Tobin et al. 2012a; Ohashi et al. 2014), and the misalignment between the magnetic field orientation and the outflow axis increases from 32$\degr$ on a 10,000-AU scale to 87$\degr$ on a 1,000-AU scale. The observational results of these two sources are also consistent with the theoretical expectation that the misalignment helps disk formation. On the other hand, in NGC 1333 IRAS 4B, there is no clear sign of rotational motion, and the magnetic field orientation is misaligned with the outflow axis by more than 60. This result could be contradictory to the scenario where the misaligned magnetic field suppresses the efficiency of magnetic braking. However, NGC 1333 IRAS 4B is located in a cluster region, where the large-scale rotational motion in the associated dense core and the environmental influence, such as impact by nearby outflows, are not clear. The other source showing no clear sign of rotational motion, B335, has complex magnetic field orientations from $>$10,000-AU to 1,000-AU scales. On a scale larger than 10,000 AU, the magnetic field orientation is inclined toward the outflow axis within 25$\degr$, as revealed with optical and near-infrared observations (Bertrang et al. 2014), while the single-dish observations at submillimeter wavelengths show that the magnetic field orientation on a scale of a few thousand AU is perpendicular to the outflow axis ($\Delta\theta_{\rm core}$ = 75). On a 1,000-AU scale, its magnetic field is aligned with the outflow axis within 33$\degr$ as observed with CARMA at 1.3 mm. The effect of the magnetic field in these last two sources is not clear. As discussed in Section \[noB\], evolutionary effects might complicate the picture. A counter-example to the scenario that disk formation requires the magnetic field to be misaligned with the rotation axis could be L1448 IRS 2. The magnetic field orientation in L1448 IRS 2 is well aligned with the outflow axis from 10,000-AU to 1,000-AU scales within 15, as in the case of L1157-mm. There is a clear velocity gradient perpendicular to the outflow ($M_{\rm vg} \sim 65$ km s$^{-1}$ pc$^{-1}$), which is the signature of significant rotational motion in its protostellar envelope. In L1448 IRS 2, the specific angular momentum on a 1,000-AU scale is estimated to be $\sim 8 \times 10^{-3}$ km s$^{-1}$ pc, and the radius of the central Keplerian disk (if present) is possibly $\gtrsim$100 AU based on our kinematic model. Nevertheless, as shown in MHD simulations, the influence of the magnetic field is also related to its strength and the ionization degree in the collapsing cores (e.g., Mellon & Li 2008, 2009), which are both observationally difficult to measure. If the ionization degree in the inner envelopes is low, material can effectively decouple from the magnetic field (e.g., Padovani et al. 2013, 2014). In this case, efficient magnetic braking cannot occur, and large-scale disks may form. To further observationally investigate the role of the magnetic field in disk formation, future observations revealing the distribution of angular momenta from 10,000-AU to 1,000-AU scales in Class 0 protostellar sources with different magnetic field orientations are essential.
Summary
=======
We perform imaging and analyses on SMA 1.3 mm continuum, C$^{18}$O (2–1) and $^{12}$CO (2–1) line data of 17 Class 0 and 0/I protostars to study their gas kinematics on a 1,000-AU scale in comparison with theoretical models of collapsing dense cores with and without magnetic fields. Our main results are summarized below.
1. [Compact components with sizes of $\sim$100–1,400 AU are detected in the 1.3 mm continuum emission toward all the sample sources. The masses of the circumstellar material traced by the continuum emission range from 0.003 $M_\sun$ to 0.56 $M_\sun$, estimated from dust temperatures of 20–50 K. C$^{18}$O components with sizes of $\sim$500–1,500 AU associated with the continuum peaks are also seen toward all the sample sources. Our sources show a variety of velocity gradients in the C$^{18}$O emission. Their orientations range from parallel to perpendicular to the outflows, and the magnitudes are from $\sim$1 km s$^{-1}$ pc$^{-1}$ to $\sim$529 km s$^{-1}$ pc$^{-1}$. Clear velocity gradients perpendicular to the outflow axes with magnitudes larger than 90 km s$^{-1}$ pc$^{-1}$ are seen in L1448 IRS 3B, NGC 1333 IRAS 4A, IRAS 03292$+$3039, Per-emb 16, and B59\#11, suggestive of the presence of clear rotational motions.]{}
2. [Assuming the C$^{18}$O (2–1) emission traces the axisymmetric flattened structures around the protostars, we construct a simple kinematic model of outer infalling and rotational motions and inner Keplerian rotation with the geometrically-thin assumption. We generate model images to explain the velocity gradients in the observed P–V diagrams along and perpendicular to the outflow axes in the C$^{18}$O (2–1) emission. With this method, we estimate the infalling and rotational velocities on a 1,000-AU scale and infer the disk radii and the protostellar masses under the assumption that the angular momentum of the infalling material is conserved. Our results show wide ranges of inferred disk radii from $<$5 AU to $>$500 AU and protostellar masses from $<$0.1 $M_\sun$ and $>$1 $M_\sun$. In particular, no sign of rotational motions is detected in NGC 1333 IRAS 4B, B335, and L1157-mm, which leads to inferred disk radii smaller than 5 AU. Rotational motions dominating over infalling motions are seen in L1448 IRS 3B, IRAS 03292$+$3039, and B59\#11, suggesting the presence of Keplerian disks with radii larger than 200 AU.]{}
3. [Our results suggest that both large ($>$100 AU) and small ($<$ 5 AU) disks are possibly present around Class 0 protostars, which hints a sign of disk growth at the Class 0 stage. Theoretical models without the effect of magnetic fields show that a Keplerian disk can grow to have an outer radius of 100 AU in a time scale of 10$^5$ years, which is comparable to the life time of the Class 0 stage. In this case, protostars with small disks can be younger than others, and their disk sizes will grow as the collapse proceeds. On the other hand, MHD simulations show that the magnetic field can suppress disk growth. Therefore, the small inferred disk radii in NGC 1333 IRAS 4B, B335, and L1157-mm may suggest that efficient magnetic braking is occurring in these sources. Nevertheless, 11 out of the 17 sources show signs of rotational motions with specific angular momenta larger than 5 $\times$ 10$^{-4}$ km s$^{-1}$ pc. They possibly exhibit Keplerian disks with radii larger than 100 AU. This suggests that efficient magnetic braking is unlikely common on a 1,000-AU scale among the Class 0 and 0/I sources.]{}
4. [The magnetic field orientations in a subset of our sample have been revealed with single-dish and interferometric polarimetric observations. By comparing the magnetic field orientations and our measured gas motions, we find no source with large specific angular momenta together with closely aligned magnetic field and outflow axes. This possibly hints that the magnetic field, if originally aligned with the rotational axis, can play a role in removing angular momentum from infalling material. L1157-mm, showing a slow rotational motion and a magnetic field aligned with the outflow, and L1448 IRS 3B, showing a fast rotational motion and a magnetic field misaligned with the outflow, are examples for a scenario where alignment suppresses and misalignment enables the formation of large-scale disks. A counter-example to this scenario could be L1448 IRS 2, which possibly exhibits a 100-AU Keplerian disk together with a magnetic field aligned with the outflow.]{}
We thank all the SMA staff supporting this work. The SMA is a joint project between the Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory and the Academia Sinica Institute of Astronomy and Astrophysics and is funded by the Smithsonian Institute and the Academia Sinica. S.T. acknowledges a grant from the Ministry of Science and Technology (MOST) of Taiwan (MOST 102-2119-M-001-012-MY3) in support of this work. P.M.K. acknowledges support through grant MOST 103-2119-M-001-009.
$^{12}$CO (2–1) Emission {#12co}
========================
The outflows associated with the sample sources have been studied in details (see Table 1) except for Per-emb 9, IRAS 03282$+$3035, IRAS 03292$+$3039, Per-emb 16, and Lupus 3 MMS, where the orientation and/or inclination angles of the outflows have not been estimated before. The panels in the left column in Figure \[12cofig\] show the moment-0 maps of the $^{12}$CO (2–1) emission at the red- and blue-shifted velocities in these sources. The red- and blue-shifted $^{12}$CO (2–1) emission in IRAS 03282$+$3035 and IRAS 03292$+$3039 show V-shaped structures with the apices approximately coincident with the protostellar positions, elongated along a northwest–southeast direction like the large-scale outflows observed with the JCMT in the $^{12}$CO (3–2) line (Hatchell et al. 2007, 2009). These V-shaped structures likely trace the walls of the outflow cavities and the material entrained in the outflows. The outflow in IRAS 03282$+$3035 has also been observed in the $^{12}$CO (1–0) emission with the OVRO (Arce & Sargent 2006). Their $^{12}$CO (1–0) emission shows a structure consistent with the $^{12}$CO (2–1) emission from the SMA. The SMA $^{12}$CO (2–1) data of IRAS 03292$+$3039 were first published by Schnee et al. (2012). Our results show consistent structures with theirs. From the V-shaped structures, the opening angles of the outflow cavities in IRAS 03282$+$3035 and IRAS 03292$+$3039 are estimated from our observations to be $\sim$45$\degr$ and $\sim$35$\degr$, respectively. In Per-emb 9, the $^{12}$CO (2–1) emission observed with the SMA appears to be clumpy and is distributed along the northeast–southwest direction. The weaker clumps located to the northwest and the southeast are not coincident with the side lobes of the stronger components, and are likely real emission. The distribution of these clumpy components could delineate V-shaped structures with an opening angle of $\sim$50$\degr$ at the blue- and red-shifted velocities. In Per-emb 16, the blue-shifted $^{12}$CO (2–1) emission also shows V-shape features with an opening angle of $\sim$40$\degr$, while it is less clear in the red-shifted emission. In Lupus 3 MMS, the red- and blue-shifted $^{12}$CO (2–1) emission is not aligned. The blue-shifted emission is elongated along the east–west direction with a position angle of $\sim$275$\degr$. The red-shifted emission is primarily elongated along the northeast–southwest direction with a position angle of $\sim$65$\degr$. As the distance to the protostar increases, the orientation of the eastern part becomes closer to the east–west direction. Part of the red-shifted emission is also seen to the west of the protostar. The blue-shifted emission together with the red-shifted emission in the west forms a V-shaped structure with an opening angle of $\sim$45$\degr$. The distribution of the $^{12}$CO (2–1) emission, with the red-shifted emission primarily to the east and the blue-shifted emission to the west, is consistent with the large-scale outflow observed with the ASTE in the $^{12}$CO (3–2) line (Dunham et al. 2014b). In the ASTE $^{12}$CO (3–2) map, the red- and blue-shifted emission are aligned along a position angle of $\sim$80$\degr$. Therefore, the $^{12}$CO (2–1) emission observed with the SMA likely traces only part of the wall of the outflow cavity in Lupus 3 MMS.
Inclination Angles {#i}
==================
Except for Per-emb 9, IRAS 03282$+$3035, IRAS 03292$+$3039, Per-emb 16, and Lupus 3 MMS (Table \[sample\]), the inclination angles of the sample sources have been estimated in the literature based on SEDs, morphology and velocity structures of outflows or proper motions of jets. For these sources, we investigate their inclination angles based on the morphologies and velocity structures of the outflows in the $^{12}$CO (2–1) emission. We compare the moment-0 maps and the P–V diagrams of the $^{12}$CO emission (Figure \[12cofig\]) with those of model outflows having bipolar conical shapes computed by Cabrit et al. (1986). For a bipolar conical outflow with an opening angle of $\theta_{\rm o.a.}$, if one side of the outflow only shows blue-shifted emission and the other red-shifted emission, its inclination angle ($\tbond$$i$) is $\theta_{\rm o.a.}/2 < i < \pi/2-\theta_{\rm o.a.}/2$. In addition, a bipolar conical outflow with a velocity structure of $V_{\rm outflow} \propto r$ shows two aligned fan-shaped structures with their apices pointing toward the protostellar position and a systemic velocity in its P–V diagram along the outflow axis. If the axis passing through the two fan-shaped structures is oriented closer to the axis of the systemic velocity in the P–V diagram, the inclination of the source is closer to edge-on. If the axis is oriented closer to the axis of the zero position in the P–V diagram, the inclination of the source is closer to face-on. The orientation of the fan-shaped structures in the P–V diagram is also related to the ratio $V_{\rm outflow}/r$. If the ratio is large, the axis passing through the two fan-shaped structures is oriented closer to the axis of the zero position, if small, closer to the axis of systemic velocity. Considering the projection into the line of sight, an observed $V_{\rm outflow}/r$ scales with inclination as $\tan i$ $\times$ intrinsic $V_{\rm outflow}/r$. The $^{12}$CO (2–1) emission in these five sources observed with the SMA most likely traces the walls of the outflow cavities. Typical $V_{\rm outflow}/r$ of the walls of outflow cavities in low-mass protostellar sources seen in the $^{12}$CO (2–1) emission is a few $\times$ 10$^{-3}$ km s$^{-1}$ AU$^{-1}$, such as those in B335 (Yen et al. 2010) and HH 211 (Gueth & Guilloteau 1999). Based on these observational signatures, we estimate the inclination angles of these five sources to be closer to edge-on, intermediately inclined, or face-on, and we assume that the outflows in these five protostellar sources all have typical $V_{\rm outflow}/r$ of the order of 10$^{-3}$ km s$^{-1}$ AU$^{-1}$.
[*Per-emb 9.*]{} The red- and blue-shifted $^{12}$CO (2–1) emission is seen in the west and the east, respectively. Although it is less extended, this suggests that the outflow lobes emit both red- and blue-shifted emission and the inclination angle is $\lesssim$25$\degr$ or $\gtrsim$65$\degr$, where the opening angle is $\sim$50$\degr$. In the P–V diagram of the $^{12}$CO (2–1) emission along the outflow axis, the emission primarily appears in the second and fourth quadrants, and the emission in the second quadrant extends to the third quadrants, which is the signature of an inclination angle of an outflow closer to 25$\degr$ as shown in Cabrit et al. (1986). From the slope of the axis passing through the two strongest peaks and the center in the P–V diagram, the observed $V_{\rm outflow}/r$ is estimated to be $\sim$1 $\times$ 10$^{-3}$ km s$^{-1}$, which corresponds to $\sim$2 $\times$ 10$^{-3}$ km s$^{-1}$ with an inclination angle of 25which is consistent with the typical values. Therefore, we assume the inclination angle of Per-emb 9 is 25$\degr$. In addition, assuming the 1.3 mm continuum emission in Per-emb 9 traces the flattened structures normal to the outflow axis around the protostar, from the aspect ratio of the major and minor axes, the inclination is estimated to be 29, which is consistent with that from the outflow structures.
[*IRAS 03282$+$3035.*]{} The eastern and western outflow lobes primarily show blue- and red-shifted emission, respectively, without a clear overlap, suggesting $23\degr \lesssim i \lesssim 68\degr$, where the opening angle is $\sim$45$\degr$. In the P–V diagram, two fan-shaped structures point toward the upper left and the lower right along a direction with a position angle of $\sim$30. From the slope of the axis passing through the two strongest peaks and the center in the P–V diagram, the observed $V_{\rm outflow}/r$ is estimated to be $\sim$6 $\times$ 10$^{-3}$ km s$^{-1}$. Therefore, we assume that IRAS 03282$+$3035 has an intermediate inclination angle of $\sim$40, which is an intermediate value between $23\degr$ and $68\degr$ in the sine function. From the aspect ratio of the major and minor axes of the 1.3 mm conitnuum emission in IRAS 03282$+$3035, the inclination is estimated to be 40which is consistent with the one from the outflow structures.
[*IRAS 03292$+$3039.*]{} Similar to IRAS 03282$+$3035, there is no clear overlap between the red- and blue-shifted emission in the outflow, suggesting $18\degr \lesssim i \lesssim 73\degr$, where the opening angle is $\sim$35$\degr$. The two fan-shaped structures seen in the P–V diagram are tilted along the axis with a position angle of almost 45$\degr$, suggesting IRAS 03292$+$3039 has an intermediate inclination angle between a face-on and an edge-on geometry. From the slope of the axis passing through the two strongest peaks and the center in the P–V diagram, the observed $V_{\rm outflow}/r$ is estimated to be $\sim$2 $\times$ 10$^{-3}$ km s$^{-1}$. Therefore, the inclination angle of IRAS 03292$+$3039 is assumed to be 40$\degr$, an intermediate value between $73\degr$ and $18\degr$ in the sine function. From the aspect ratio of the major and minor axes of the 1.3 mm conitnuum emission in IRAS 03292$+$3039, the inclination is estimated to be 67, which is within the range we consider ($18\degr \lesssim i \lesssim 73\degr$).
[*Per-emb 16.*]{} Both blue- and red-shifted emission is seen in the northern outflow lobe, suggesting its inclination angle is $\lesssim$20$\degr$ or $\gtrsim$70$\degr$, where the opening angle is $\sim$40$\degr$. In the P–V diagram, the emission is primarily in the first and third quadrants and extends to the forth and second quadrants, respectively, with some emission in the third quadrant also extending to the fourth quadrant. Overall, the emission components in the P–V diagram are tilted closer to the axis of the protostellar position than to the systemic velocity, suggesting that the inclination of Per-emb 16 is closer to face-on than edge-on. From the slope of the axis passing through the two strongest peaks and the center in the P–V diagram, the observed $V_{\rm outflow}/r$ is estimated to be $\sim$2 $\times$ 10$^{-3}$ km s$^{-1}$, corresponding to $\sim$1 $\times$ 10$^{-2}$ km s$^{-1}$ with an inclination angle of 20. Therefore, we assume that the inclination angle of Per-emb 16 is 20$\degr$. From the aspect ratio of the major and minor axes of the 1.3 mm conitnuum emission in Per-emb 16, the inclination is estimated to be 33, comparable to that from the outflow structures.
[*Lupus 3 MMS.*]{} The outflow observed with the SMA appears to be asymmetric. The eastern lobe is tilted away from the outflow axis as revealed with the single-dish observations (Dunham et al. 2014b) and could only trace part of the wall of the outflow cavity. On the other hand, the western lobe shows a V-shaped structure and is aligned with the outflow axis, which likely traces the conical wall of the outflow cavity. Hence, we discuss the inclination of Lupus 3 MMS based on the velocity structure of the western outflow lobe. The western outflow is seen in both red- and blue-shifted emission, suggesting $\lesssim$23$\degr$ or $\gtrsim$68$\degr$, where the opening angle is $\sim$45$\degr$. In the P–V diagram, the red-shifted emission of the western outflow lobe is located close to the systemic velocity, which is an observational signature for the inclination to be closer to edge-on than face-on, as shown by Cabrit et al. (1986). From the slope of the axis passing through the two strongest peaks and the center in the P–V diagram, the observed $V_{\rm outflow}/r$ is estimated to be $\sim$2 $\times$ 10$^{-3}$ km s$^{-1}$, corresponding to $\sim$7 $\times$ 10$^{-4}$ km s$^{-1}$ with an inclination angle of 70. Therefore, we assume the inclination angle of Lupus 3 MMS is $\sim$70$\degr$, approximately $\sim$ $\pi/2-\theta_{\rm o.a.}/2$.
Specific Comments on Individual Sources {#ind}
=======================================
The emission distributions in our model P–V diagrams tend to be less extended than those in the observed P–V diagrams because our models are only applied to the central components of the C$^{18}$O (2–1) emission. This is especially the case for L1448-mm, L1527 IRS, Lupus 3 MMS, and IRAS 16253$-$2429, where extended emission of 10$\arcsec$–20$\arcsec$ is clearly seen in addition to the central components (Figure \[c18ofig\]). In L1448 IRS 2, NGC 1333 IRAS 4B, Per-emb 9, IRAS 03282$+$3035, IRAS 03292$+$3039, Per-emb 16, L1527 IRS, HH 212, B59\#11, B335, and L1157-mm, the morphologies, peak positions and velocity gradients of the C$^{18}$O (2–1) emission in their P–V diagrams both along and perpendicular to the outflow axes are well reproduced with our simple kinematic model. Below, we discuss the discrepancies between the model and observed P–V diagrams for the rest of the sources together with a comparison with previous results of gas motions in the individual sources.
[*L1448 IRS 3B.*]{} The peak positions and distributions of the red-shifted emission in the P–V diagrams both along and perpendicular to the outflow axis are reproduced with our model. Even though there is an apparent offset between modelled and observed peak positions in the blue-shifted emission, the overall velocity gradients along and perpendicular to the outflow axis are reproduced with the model. A clear velocity gradient is present along the outflow axis, while no clear velocity gradient is seen perpendicular to the outflow axis. This suggests that in L1448 IRS 3B the rotational motion is dominant over the infalling motion. On large scales of $\sim$4$\arcmin$ ($\sim$60,000 AU), single-dish observations in the C$^{18}$O (1–0), H$^{13}$CO$^+$ (1–0), and N$_2$H$^+$ (1–0) lines show a velocity gradient from the north and the west to the south, and the southern region is more red-shifted than the northern and western regions (Volgenau et al. 2006). The direction of the large-scale velocity gradient is identical to the outflow direction.
[*L1448-mm.*]{} The observed P–V diagram perpendicular to the outflow axis is well reproduced with the model. The P–V diagram along the outflow axis shows an extended structure with a size of $\sim$25$\arcsec$, which is not included in our model fitting. The extended structure ($R > 5\arcsec$) exhibits a feature with a velocity $\propto R$, different from the central component where the velocities increase as radii decrease. The extended structure is likely related to the outflow activity. Nevertheless, the velocity feature of the central component along the outflow axis is reproduced with the model. We have measured the radial profile of the rotational velocities in L1448-mm, which is found to be $V_{\rm rot} \propto 1.3\cdot(R/100\ {\rm AU})^{-1.02}$ km s$^{-1}$, corresponding to an angular momentum of $j = 6.3 \times 10^{-4}$ km s$^{-1}$ pc, with an analytical method (Yen et al. 2013). The two independent methods show a consistent result of the rotational motion. On larger scales of thousands of AU, VLA observations in the NH$_3$ lines have found velocity gradients both along and perpendicular to the outflow axis, which are interpreted as rotational and infalling motions (Curiel et al. 1999).
[*NGC 1333 IRAS 4A.*]{} The C$^{18}$O (2–1) emission is associated with the two protostellar sources (4A1 and 4A2). We adopt its emission peak as the center of mass in our model. The observed P–V diagram perpendicular to the outflow axis shows a clear velocity gradient, which can be reproduced with the model. However, the distribution of the C$^{18}$O (2–1) emission is asymmetric with respect to its emission peak (Figure \[c18ofig\]), and hence our simple axisymmetric model shows an emission excess at offsets from $-3\arcsec$ to $-5\arcsec$ in the P–V diagram perpendicular to the outflow axis. The velocity feature in the P–V diagram along the outflow axis is not well explained with the model. This feature could be due to contamination from the outflow. The emission distribution is not symmetric around the systemic velocity. Thus, the emission excess at the blue-shifted velocities is seen in our model P–V diagram along the outflow axis. Overall, the velocity gradient perpendicular to the outflow axis is clearer than the one along the outflow axis. This could suggest that the rotational motion is dominant over the infalling motion. In this case, the C$^{18}$O emission in NGC 1333 4A could trace a circumbinary Keplerian disk, as in the case of L1551 NE (Takakuwa et al. 2012, 2013), and the estimated protostellar mass could represent the total stellar mass of the binary system. A similar velocity gradient perpendicular to the outflow axis is also seen on larger scales of $\sim$20$\arcsec$ ($\sim$5,000 AU) in the PdBI observations in the N$_2$H$^+$ (1–0) line by Di Francesco et al. (2001), which is interpreted as rotational motion. The observed inverse P Cygni profiles in several molecular lines suggest the presence of infalling motion which is estimated to be $\sim$0.68 km s$^{-1}$ at a radius of $\sim$270 AU (e.g., Di Francesco et al. 2001). Assuming that the infalling motion is free-fall, the infalling velocity estimated from the inverse P Cygni profiles corresponds to a protostellar mass of 0.14 $M_\sun$, which is consistent with our fitting results. The VLA observations in the NH$_3$ lines at an angular resolution of 03–04 (Choi et al. 2007, 2010) possibly reveal a circumstellar disk around each component. They further show that the NH$_3$ emission associated with the northern component 4A2 is red-shifted to the southeast and blue-shifted to the northwest, opposite to the direction of the velocity gradient observed with the SMA on the larger scale of 10$\arcsec$. The southern component 4A1 exhibits a velocity gradient and elongation along the northeast–southwest direction (Choi et al. 2011), different from those of 4A2 and the C$^{18}$O (2–1) emission observed with the SMA. If the velocity gradients on sub-arcsecond scales ($<$250 AU) observed with the VLA indeed trace the gas motions of the circumstellar disks around the individual binary components, the direction of the angular momentum axis likely varies from large to small scales. It is also possible that the velocity gradient seen in the P–V diagram perpendicular to the outflow axis does not reflect the gas motions but the systematic velocity offset between the two components in NGC 1333 IRAS 4A. Hence, the interpretation of the velocity gradient of the C$^{18}$O (2–1) emission observed with the SMA is still uncertain. Observations with a wide spatial dynamical range covering scales from 10$\arcsec$ to $0\farcs$5 are required to fully reveal the gas kinematics.
[*NGC 1333 IRAS 4B.*]{} The observed P–V diagrams both along and perpendicular to the outflow axis are well reproduced with the model. There is no clear velocity gradient seen in the P–V diagram perpendicular to the outflow axis, and hence there is no sign of rotational motion. Previous PdBI observations in the N$_2$H$^+$ (1–0) line (Di Francesco et al. 2001) and FCRAO+BIMA observations in the C$^{18}$O (1–0), H$^{13}$CO$^+$ (1–0), and N$_2$H$^+$ (1–0) lines (Volgenau et al. 2006) also show absence of detectable rotational motion, consistent with our results.
[*IRAS 03282$+$3035.*]{} The single-dish observations in the N$_2$H$^+$ (1–0) line at an angular resolution of $\sim$27$\arcsec$ show that there is a large-scale velocity gradient with a magnitude of 1.3 km s$^{-1}$ pc$^{-1}$ and a position angle of 301$\degr$ over a 0.1-pc scale (Tobin et al. 2011). The VLA observations in the NH$_3$ lines at an angular resolution of $\sim$5$\arcsec$ show that on thousands of AU scale the velocity gradient is more significant with 8.7 km s$^{-1}$ pc$^{-1}$ with a similar position angle of 294$\degr$ (Tobin et al. 2011). A velocity gradient perpendicular to the outflow axis is also seen in these observations. The present SMA observations at the highest angular resolution of $\sim$35 reveal an overall velocity gradient with a magnitude of 106.1 km s$^{-1}$ pc$^{-1}$ and a position angle of 291on a 1,000-AU scale. In IRAS 03282$+$3035, the velocity gradients from 0.1-pc to 1,000-AU scales show similar orientations, almost parallel to the outflow, with increasing magnitudes.
[*L1527 IRS.*]{} The velocity features seen in the P–V diagram both along and perpendicular to the outflow axis are well explained by our model. The infalling and rotational velocities at a radius of 2,000 AU are estimated to be 0.3 km s$^{-1}$ and 0.05 km s$^{-1}$, respectively, with the NMA observations in the C$^{18}$O (1–0) line (Ohashi et al. 1997). By extrapolating our fitting results of the gas motions at a radius $<$730 AU to the outer radii, the infalling and rotational velocities at a radius of 2,000 AU are estimated to be 0.23–0.24 km s$^{-1}$ and 0.05–0.06 km s$^{-1}$, respectively, which is approximately consistent with the NMA results. This suggests that the angular momentum of the infalling material is likely conserved from a 2,000-AU radius to an inner 730-AU radius. Indeed, the radial profile of the rotational velocities in L1527 IRS is measured to be $V_{\rm rot} \propto 1.0\cdot(R/100\ {\rm AU})^{-1.02}$ km s$^{-1}$ corresponding to an angular momentum of $j = 4.9 \times 10^{-4}$ km s$^{-1}$ pc derived with an analytical method (Yen et al. 2013). These results are consistent with the present model fitting outcome. Sub-arcsecond-resolution observations with CARMA and ALMA reveal a Keplerian disk with an outer radius of 50–90 AU around a protostar with a mass of 0.2–0.3 $M_\sun$ (Tobin et al. 2012a; Ohashi et al. 2014). Our estimated disk radius and protostar mass with the low-resolution SMA data are comparable to those high-resolution results, if $f = 0.5$ is assumed (see also Section 5.2).
[*HH 212.*]{} The SMA data were analyzed by Lee et al. (2006) with three-dimensional models of an infalling and rotating envelope. Protostellar mass and specific angular momentum are estimated to be 0.15 $M_\sun$ and 6.7 $\times$ 10$^{-4}$ km s$^{-1}$ pc. Our results are approximately consistent with their results if $f = 1$ is adopted. Recent ALMA observations in the HCO$^+$ (4–3) and C$^{17}$O (3–2) lines reveal a Keplerian disk with a radius of $\sim$90–120 AU around a protostar with a mass of $\sim$0.2–0.3 $M_\sun$ (Lee et a. 2014; Codella et al. 2014), comparable to our estimates (see also Section 5.2).
[*B228.*]{} The velocity gradient of the central C$^{18}$O component seen in the P–V diagram perpendicular to the outflow axis can be reproduced with our model, although our model P–V diagram shows two emission peaks in contrast with the observed one. In addition, there is a secondary emission peak at $V_{\rm LSR}$ of $\sim$4.4 km s$^{-1}$ in the P–V diagram along the outflow axis without any corresponding component from our model. Except that, the velocity features of the P–V diagram along the outflow axis can be explained by our model. Previous single-dish observations have found a velocity gradient along the northwest–southeast direction over a 2$\arcmin$ scale in the Lupus I cloud (Vilas-Boas et al. 2000; Tachihara et al. 2001), where the northwest region is more red-shifted and the southeastern region more blue-shifted. The direction of the large-scale velocity gradient is not the same as the one over the 10$\arcsec$ scale observed with the SMA. Tothill et al. (2009) suggest that the large-scale velocity gradient does not reflect the gas motion but is due to a difference in systemic velocities of gas clumps located to the northwest and the southeast.
[*Lupus 3 MMS.*]{} The C$^{18}$O emission is detected at relatively low signal-to-noise ratios ($\lesssim$5$\sigma$). Hence, the velocity structures are not clearly identified in the P–V diagrams. The overall distribution of the C$^{18}$O emission is elongated along the outflow direction. A possible velocity gradient, with blue-shifted emission at the positive offsets and with red-shifted emission at the negative offsets, appears in the P–V diagram perpendicular to the outflow axis. This can be explained with our model. On the other hand, no clear velocity feature is seen in the P–V diagram along the outflow axis.
[*IRAS 16253$-$2429.*]{} Single-dish observations in the N$_2$H$^+$ (1–0) line reveal a velocity gradient with a magnitude of 1.2 km s$^{-1}$ pc$^{-1}$ over a 10,000-AU scale, where the blue-shifted emission is located to the southeast and the red-shifted emission to the northwest (Tobin et al. 2011). The N$_2$H$^+$ (1–0) emission observed with CARMA at an angular resolution of 93 $\times$ 49 shows a velocity gradient of 3.5 km s$^{-1}$ pc$^{-1}$ on thousands of AU scale with a direction identical to the one on the 10,000-AU scale (Tobin et al. 2011). Our SMA observations in the C$^{18}$O emission with the highest angular resolution of 70 $\times$ 28 reveal a velocity gradient with a magnitude of $\sim$33 km s$^{-1}$ pc$^{-1}$ in the central C$^{18}$O component on a 1,000-AU scale, where the blue-shifted emission is located to the southwest and the red-shifted emission to the northeast. The direction of the velocity gradient in IRAS 16253$-$2429 changes from 10,000-AU to 1,000-AU scales, and the magnitude increases. In the P–V diagrams, the main peak positions and the velocity gradients can be explained with our model, except for the additional emission peak at $V_{\rm LSR}$ of $\sim$4.7 km s$^{-1}$, which is without any counterpart in our model, and except for the extension toward the offset of $\sim$ $-15\arcsec$ seen in the P–V diagram along the outflow axis, which is not included in our analysis. The velocity structures of the N$_2$H$^+$ emission observed with CARMA suggest that the gas on thousands of AU scale is falling toward a protostar with a mass $\lesssim$0.1 $M_\sun$ (Tobin et al. 2011), which is consistent with our estimate.
[*B59\#11.*]{} The SMA data were first presented by Hara et al. (2013). They interpreted the entire C$^{18}$O component as a Keplerian disk and estimated the protostellar mass and the disk radius to be 0.73$^{+0.53}_{-0.39}$ $M_\sun$ and $<$350 AU, respectively. Hara et al. (2013) measured the radial dependence of the rotational motion traced by the C$^{18}$O (2–1) emission and found $V_{\rm rot} \propto R^{-0.61}$, which is close to that of Keplerian rotation. On the other hand, that could also suggest that the rotational motion observed with the SMA is a mixture of an inner Keplerian rotation and an outer rotation with a conserved angular momentum. Hence, the radial dependence would be between $-0.5$ and $-1$, too. In our model, we regard the velocity gradient of the C$^{18}$O (2–1) emission as a combination of an outer infalling and rotational motion and an inner Keplerian rotation. Our results show a protostellar mass of 1.0–1.5 $M_\sun$ and a consistent disk radius of 230–340 AU.
[*B335.*]{} The observed P–V diagram both along and perpendicular to the outflow axis can be reproduced with our model. No sign of rotational motion is detected with the SMA, as presented in our previous results (Yen et al. 2010, 2011, 2013). Single-dish observations of B335 in the C$^{18}$O (1–0) and (2–1) lines show a velocity gradient over a 10,000-AU scale perpendicular to the outflow axis with 0.3–0.8 km s$^{-1}$ pc$^{-1}$ (Saito et al. 1999; Yen et al. 2011). Previous NMA observations in the H$^{13}$CO$^+$ (1–0) line revealed both infalling and rotational motions on thousands of AU scale. The infalling velocity at a radius of 2,200 AU and the rotational velocity at a radius of 490 AU are both estimated to be 0.14 km s$^{-1}$ (Saito et al. 1999). By extrapolating our fitting results of the gas motions at a radius $<$750 AU to the outer radii, the infalling velocity at a radius of 2,200 AU is estimated to be 0.2 km s$^{-1}$, which is 40% larger than the NMA results. With the more recent NMA and 45-m telescope observations in the H$^{13}$CO$^+$ (1–0) line, the magnitude of the velocity gradient over a 20,000 AU scale perpendicular to the outflow axis is measured to be 1.0 km s$^{-1}$ pc$^{-1}$. The protostellar mass is estimated to be 0.1 $M_\sun$ (Kurono et al. 2013) which is consistent with our estimate. Their model calculation to reproduce the observed NMA and 45-m images of the H$^{13}$CO$^+$ (1–0) emission suggests that the specific angular momentum within a radius of 1,000 AU is $\sim$7 $\times$ 10$^{-5}$ km s$^{-1}$ pc. This is comparable to our estimated upper limit, and hence, their results also suggest that the disk size is likely small ($<$5 AU).
[*L1157-mm.*]{} No clear velocity gradient is seen in the central C$^{18}$O component in the P–V diagrams neither along nor perpendicular to the outflow axis. To reproduce the observed P–V diagrams, our model fitting results in a small protostellar mass (0.02–0.08 $M_\sun$) and a low specific angular momentum ($j$ $<$5 $\times$ 10$^{-5}$ km s$^{-1}$ pc) because the magnitude of the velocity gradient is small (Table \[c18ovg\]). Single-dish observations of L1157-mm in the N$_2$H$^+$ (1–0) line show that there is a modest velocity gradient with 0.7 km s$^{-1}$ pc$^{-1}$ and a position angle of 303$\degr$ over a 10,000-AU scale (Tobin et al. 2011). This is about a factor of three smaller than the typical value at the same scale ($\sim$2 km s$^{-1}$ pc$^{-1}$; Tobin et al. 2011). At a scale of thousands of AU, the CARMA and PdBI observations in the N$_2$H$^+$ (1–0) line and the VLA observations in the NH$_3$ lines at angular resolutions of $\sim$3$\arcsec$–7$\arcsec$ show velocity gradients around 4–6 km s$^{-1}$ pc$^{-1}$ and position angles of 179$\degr$–260$\degr$ (Tobin et al. 2011). The overall velocity gradient observed with the SMA in the C$^{18}$O (2–1) emission at a similar angular resolution ($\sim$3) has a position angle of $\sim$347. By comparing the velocity structures of the N$_2$H$^+$ (1–0) emission observed with CARMA with models of infalling and rotating spherical envelopes, Chiang et al. (2010) suggest that the velocity gradient perpendicular to the outflow axis on a scale of thousands of AU can be interpreted as rigid-body rotation. On the other hand, Tobin et al. (2012b) suggest that the velocity gradient perpendicular to the outflow axis on this scale can be due to infalling motions along the filamentary structures rather than rotational motions. On smaller scales, previous PdBI observations in the C$^{18}$O (1–0) line at an angualr resolution of $\sim$2$\arcsec$ have found a velocity gradient perpendicular to the outflow axis, shown as a red-shifted peak $\sim$2$\arcsec$ to the northeast and a blue-shifted peak $\sim$1$\arcsec$ to the west, suggesting a possible sign of the rotational motion (Gueth et al. 1997). More recent CARMA observation in the C$^{18}$O (2–1) line at a similar resolution show no clear sign of rotational motion on a 1,000-AU scale.
Aikawa, Y., Wakelam, V., Garrod, R. T., & Herbst, E. 2008, , 674, 984 Allen, A., Li, Z.-Y., & Shu, F. H. 2003, , 599, 363 Andrews, S. M., Wilner, D. J., Hughes, A. M., et al. 2012, , 744, 162 André, P., Ward-Thompson, D., & Barsony, M. 2000, in Protostars and Planets IV, ed. V., Mannings, A. P., Boss, & S. S., Russel (Tucson, AZ: Univ. of Arizona Press), 59 Andrews, S. M., & Williams, J. P. 2007, , 659, 705 Arce, H. G., & Sargent, A. I. 2006, , 646, 1070 Aso, Y., Ohashi, N., Saigo, K., et al. 2014, submitted to Attard, M., Houde, M., Novak, G., et al. 2009, , 702, 1584 Basu, S. 1998, , 509, 229 Bate, M. R. 1998, , 508, L95 Beckwith, S. V. W., Sargent, A. I., Chini, R. S., & Guesten, R. 1990, , 99, 924 Bertrang, G., Wolf, S., & Das, H. S. 2014, , 565, A94 Brinch, C., J[ø]{}rgensen, J. K., & Hogerheijde, M. R. 2009, , 502, 199 Brinch, C., Crapsi, A., J[ø]{}rgensen, J. K., Hogerheijde, M. R., & Hill, T. 2007, , 475, 915 Brinch, C., & J[ø]{}rgensen, J. K. 2013, , 559, A82 Brooke, T. Y., Huard, T. L., Bourke, T. L., et al. 2007, , 655, 364 Cabrit, S., & Bertout, C. 1986, , 307, 313 Caselli, P., Benson, P. J., Myers, P. C., & Tafalla, M. 2002, , 572, 238 Cassen, P., & Moosman, A. 1981, , 48, 353 Chandler, C. J., & Sargent, A. I. 1993, , 414, L29 Chapman, N. L., Davidson, J. A., Goldsmith, P. F., et al. 2013, , 770, 151 Chen, X., Arce, H. G., Zhang, Q., et al. 2013, , 768, 110 Chen, X., Launhardt, R., & Henning, T. 2007, , 669, 1058 Chiang, H.-F., Looney, L. W., & Tobin, J. J. 2012, , 756, 168 Chiang, H.-F., Looney, L. W., Tobin, J. J., & Hartmann, L. 2010, , 709, 470 Chiang, H.-F., Looney, L. W., Tassis, K., Mundy, L. G., & Mouschovias, T. C. 2008, , 680, 474 Choi, M., Kang, M., Tatematsu, K., Lee, J.-E., & Park, G. 2011, , 63, 1281 Choi, M., Tatematsu, K., & Kang, M. 2010, , 723, L34 Choi, M., Tatematsu, K., Park, G., & Kang, M. 2007, , 667, L183 Choi, M., Hodapp, K. W., Hayashi, M., et al. 2006, , 646, 1050 Chou, T.-L., Takakuwa S., Yen, H.-W., Ohashi, N., & Ho, P. T. P. 2014, accepted by , arXiv:1410.3927 Claussen, M. J., Marvel, K. B., Wootten, A., & Wilking, B. A. 1998, , 507, L79 Codella, C., Cabrit, S., Gueth, F., et al. 2014, , 568, L5 Comerón, F. 2008, in Handbook of Star Forming Regions, Vol. II, ed. B. Reipurth, ASP Monograph Publ., 5, 295 Curiel, S., Torrelles, J. M., Rodr[í]{}guez, L. F., G[ó]{}mez, J. F., & Anglada, G. 1999, , 527, 310 Dapp, W. B., Basu, S., & Kunz, M. W. 2012, , 541, A35 Davidson, J. A., Novak, G., Matthews, T. G., et al. 2011, , 732, 97 de Gregorio-Monsalvo, I., M[é]{}nard, F., Dent, W., et al. 2013, , 557, AA133 Di Francesco, J., Myers, P. C., Wilner, D. J., Ohashi, N., & Mardones, D. 2001, , 562, 770 Dotson, J. L., Vaillancourt, J. E., Kirby, L., et al. 2010, , 186, 406 Dunham, M. M., Stutz, A. M., Allen, L. E., et al. 2014a, in Protostars and Planets VI, ed. H., Beuther, R., Klessen, C., Dullemond, & Th., Henning, (Tucson, AZ: Univ. of Arizona Press) Dunham, M. M., Arce, H. G., Mardones, D., et al. 2014b, , 783, 29 Dutrey, A., Guilloteau, S., Prato, L., et al. 1998, , 338, L63 Enoch, M. L., Evans, N. J., II, Sargent, A. I., & Glenn, J. 2009, , 692, 973 Enoch, M. L., Glenn, J., Evans, N. J., II, et al. 2007, , 666, 982 Enoch, M. L., Young, K. E., Glenn, J., et al. 2006, , 638, 293 Evans, N. J., II, Allen, L. E., Blake, G. A., et al. 2003, , 115, 965 Froebrich, D. 2005, , 156, 169 Girart, J. M., & Acord, J. M. P. 2001, , 552, L63 Goodman, A. A., Benson, P. J., Fuller, G. A., & Myers, P. C. 1993, , 406, 528 Gueth, F., & Guilloteau, S. 1999, , 343, 571 Gueth, F., Guilloteau, S., Dutrey, A., & Bachiller, R. 1997, , 323, 943 Guilloteau, S., Dutrey, A., Pi[é]{}tu, V., & Boehler, Y. 2011, , 529, A105 Guilloteau, S., & Dutrey, A. 1994, , 291, L23 Hara, C., Shimajiri, Y., Tsukagoshi, T., et al. 2013, , 771, 128 Harsono, D., J[ø]{}rgensen, J. K., van Dishoeck, E. F., et al. 2014, , 562, A77 Harvey, D. W. A., Wilner, D. J., Myers, P. C., & Tafalla, M. 2003, , 596, 383 Hatchell, J., & Dunham, M. M. 2009, , 502, 139 Hatchell, J., Fuller, G. A., & Richer, J. S. 2007, , 472, 187 Hennebelle, P., & Ciardi, A. 2009, , 506, L29 Heyer, M. H., & Graham, J. A. 1989, , 101, 816 Hirano, N., Kameya, O., Nakayama, M., & Takakubo, K. 1988, , 327, L69 Ho, P. T. P., Moran, J. M., & Lo, K. Y. 2004, , 616, L1 Hogerheijde, M. R., van Dishoeck, E. F., Blake, G. A., & van Langevelde, H. J. 1998, , 502, 315 Hull, C. L. H., Plambeck, R. L., Kwon, W., et al. 2014, , 213, 13 Hull, C. L. H., Plambeck, R. L., Bolatto, A. D., et al. 2013, , 768, 159 Joos, M., Hennebelle, P., Ciardi, A., & Fromang, S. 2013, , 554, A17 Joos, M., Hennebelle, P., & Ciardi, A. 2012, , 543, A128 J[ø]{}rgensen, J. K., van Dishoeck, E. F., Visser, R., et al. 2009, , 507, 861 J[ø]{}rgensen, J. K., Bourke, T. L., Myers, P. C., et al. 2007, , 659, 479 Kirk, H., Johnstone, D., & Tafalla, M. 2007, , 668, 1042 Krasnopolsky, R., & Königl, A. 2002, , 580, 987 Kurono, Y., Saito, M., Kamazaki, T., Morita, K.-I., & Kawabe, R. 2013, , 765, 85 Kwon, W., Looney, L. W., Crutcher, R. M., & Kirk, J. M. 2006, , 653, 1358 Launhardt, R. 2004, Star Formation at High Angular Resolution, 221, 213 Lee, C.-F., Hirano, N., Zhang, Q., et al. 2014, , 786, 114 Lee, C.-F. 2011, , 741, 62 Lee, C.-F. 2010, , 725, 712 Lee, C.-F., Ho, P. T. P., Bourke, T. L., et al. 2008, , 685, 1026 Lee, C.-F., Ho, P. T. P., Beuther, H., Bourke, T. L., Zhang, Q., Hirano, N., & Shang, H. 2006, , 639, 292 Lee, J.-E., Bergin, E. A., & Evans, N. J., II 2004, , 617, 360 Li, Z.-Y., Krasnopolsky, R., & Shang, H. 2013, , 774, 82 Li, Z.-Y., Krasnopolsky, R., & Shang, H. 2011, , 738, 180 Lombardi, M., Alves, J., & Lada, C. J. 2006, , 454, 781 Lommen, D., J[ø]{}rgensen, J. K., van Dishoeck, E. F., & Crapsi, A. 2008, , 481, 141 Looney, L. W., Mundy, L. G., & Welch, W. J. 2003, , 592, 255 Looney, L. W., Mundy, L. G., & Welch, W. J. 2000, , 529, 477 Machida, M. N., Inutsuka, S.-i., & Matsumoto, T. 2014, , 438, 2278 Machida, M. N., Inutsuka, S.-I., & Matsumoto, T. 2011, , 63, 555 Machida, M. N., Matsumoto, T., Hanawa, T., & Tomisaka, K. 2005, Protostars and Planets V Posters, 8280 Machida, M. N., & Matsumoto, T. 2011, , 413, 2767 Maret, S., Belloche, A., Maury, A. J., et al. 2014, , 563, L1 Markwardt, C. B. 2009, Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems XVIII, 411, 251 Marvel, K. B., Wilking, B. A., Claussen, M. J., & Wootten, A. 2008, , 685, 285 Matthews, B. C., McPhee, C. A., Fissel, L. M., & Curran, R. L. 2009, , 182, 143 Mellon, R. R., & Li, Z.-Y. 2009, , 698, 922 Mellon, R. R., & Li, Z.-Y. 2008, , 681, 1356 Momose, M., Ohashi, N., Kawabe, R., Nakano, T., & Hayashi, M. 1998, , 504, 314 Motte, F., & Andr[é]{}, P. 2001, , 365, 440 Murillo, N. M., Lai, S.-P., Bruderer, S., Harsono, D., & van Dishoeck, E. F. 2013, , 560, A103 Myers, P. C., Evans, N. J., II, Ohashi, N. 2000, in Protostars and Planets IV, ed. V., Mannings, A. P., Boss, & S. S., Russel (Tucson, AZ: Univ. of Arizona Press), 217 Nakajima, Y., Nagata, T., Sato, S., et al. 2003, , 125, 1407 Ohashi, N., Saigo, K., Aso, Y., et al. 2014, accepted by , arXiv:1410.0172 Ohashi, N., Hayashi, M., Ho, P. T. P., & Momose, M. 1997, , 475, 211 Padovani, M., Galli, D., Hennebelle, P., Commer[ç]{}on, B., & Joos, M. 2014, accepted by Padovani, M., Hennebelle, P., & Galli, D. 2013, , 560, AA114 P[é]{}rez, L. M., Carpenter, J. M., Chandler, C. J., et al. 2012, , 760, L17 Pi[é]{}tu, V., Dutrey, A., & Guilloteau, S. 2007, , 467, 163 Plunkett, A. L., Arce, H. G., Corder, S. A., et al. 2013, , 774, 22 Qi, C., Ho, P. T. P., Wilner, D. J., et al. 2004, , 616, L11 Qi, C., Kessler, J. E., Koerner, D. W., Sargent, A. I., & Blake, G. A. 2003, , 597, 986 Rosenfeld, K. A., Andrews, S. M., Hughes, A. M., Wilner, D. J., & Qi, C. 2013, , 774, 16 Saito, M., Sunada, K., Kawabe, R., Kitamura, Y., & Hirano, N. 1999, , 518, 334 Sault, R. J., Teuben, P. J., & Wright, M. C. H. 1995, Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems IV, 77, 433 Schnee, S., Sadavoy, S., Di Francesco, J., Johnstone, D., & Wei, L. 2012, , 755, 178 Scoville, N. Z., Carlstrom, J. E., Chandler, C. J., et al. 1993, , 105, 1482 Shu, F. H., Ruden, S. P., Lada, C. J., & Lizano, S. 1991, , 370, L31 Shu, F. H., Adams, F. C., & Lizano, S. 1987, , 25, 23 Shu, F. H. 1977, , 214, 488 Seifried, D., Banerjee, R., Pudritz, R. E., & Klessen, R. S. 2013, , 432, 3320 Seifried, D., Banerjee, R., Pudritz, R. E., & Klessen, R. S. 2012, , 423, L40 Simon, M., Dutrey, A., & Guilloteau, S. 2000, , 545, 1034 Spaans, M., Hogerheijde, M. R., Mundy, L. G., & van Dishoeck, E. F. 1995, , 455, L167 Stephens, I. W., Looney, L. W., Kwon, W., et al. 2013, , 769, LL15 Stutz, A, M., Rubin, M., Werner, M. W., Rieke, G. H., Bieging, J. H., Keene, J., Kang, M., Shirley, Y. L.; Su, K. Y. L., Velusamy, T., Wilner, D. J. 2008, , 687, 389 Tachihara, K., Rengel, M., Nakajima, Y., et al. 2007, , 659, 1382 Tachihara, K., Toyoda, S., Onishi, T., et al. 2001, , 53, 1081 Takakuwa, S., Saito, M., Lim, J., & Saigo, K. 2013, , 776, 51 Takakuwa, S., Saito, M., Lim, J., et al. 2012, , 754, 52 Takakuwa, S., Ohashi, N., Bourke, T. L., et al. 2007, , 662, 431 Terebey, S., Shu, F. H., & Cassen, P. 1984, , 286, 529 Tobin, J. J., Looney, L. W., Wilner, D. J., et al. 2014, Protostars and Planets VI Posters, 1B092 Tobin, J. J., Hartmann, L., Chiang, H.-F., et al. 2012a, , 492, 83 Tobin, J. J., Hartmann, L., Bergin, E., et al. 2012b, , 748, 16 Tobin, J. J., Hartmann, L., Chiang, H.-F., et al. 2011, , 740, 45 Tobin, J. J., Hartmann, L., Looney, L. W., & Chiang, H.-F. 2010, , 712, 1010 Tobin, J. J., Hartmann, L., Calvet, N., & D’Alessio, P. 2008, , 679, 1364 Tobin, J. J., Looney, L. W., Mundy, L. G., Kwon, W., & Hamidouche, M. 2007, , 659, 1404 Tomida, K., Tomisaka, K., Matsumoto, T., et al. 2013, , 763, 6 Tothill, N. F. H., L[ö]{}hr, A., Parshley, S. C., et al. 2009, , 185, 98 Ulrich, R. K. 1976, , 210, 377 van der Marel, N., Kristensen, L. E., Visser, R., et al. 2013, , 556, A76 van Kempen, T. A., van Dishoeck, E. F., Salter, D. M., et al. 2009, , 498, 167 Vilas-Boas, J. W. S., Myers, P. C., & Fuller, G. A. 2000, , 532, 1038 Volgenau, N. H., Mundy, L. G., Looney, L. W., & Welch, W. J. 2006, , 651, 301 Williams, J. P., & Cieza, L. A. 2011, , 49, 67 Wolf-Chase, G. A., Barsony, M., & O’Linger, J. 2000, , 120, 1467 Yen, H.-W., Takakuwa, S., Ohashi, N., et al. 2014, arXiv:1407.2699 Yen, H.-W., Takakuwa, S., Ohashi, N., & Ho, P. T. P. 2013, , 772, 22 Yen, H.-W., Takakuwa, S., & Ohashi, N. 2011, , 742, 57 Yen, H.-W., Takakuwa, S., & Ohashi, N. 2010, , 710, 1786 Young, C. H., Bourke, T. L., Young, K. E., et al. 2006, , 132, 1998 Zhang, Q., Qiu, K., Girart, J. M., et al. 2014, arXiv:1407.3984
Fig. \[config\].— Continued.
Fig. \[c18ofig\].— Continued.
\
Fig. \[fitfig\].— Continued.
\
Fig. \[fitfig\].— Continued.
\
Fig. \[12cofig\].— Continued.
[lrrcccccccccc]{} L1448 IRS 2 & 03$^{h}$25$^{m}$22$\fs$38 & 304513$\farcs$3 & 0/I & 250 & 1.7 & 63 & 4.05 & 57& 138& 1,2,3,4,5\
L1448 IRS 3B & 03$^{h}$25$^{m}$36$\fs$33 & 304514$\farcs$9 & 0/I & 250 & 4.3 & 90 & 4.35 & 63& 105& 1,2,3,4,6\
L1448-mm & 03$^{h}$25$^{m}$38$\fs$87 & 304405$\farcs$4 & 0 & 250 & 4.4 & 69 & 5.0 & 70& 157& 1,2,7,8\
NGC 1333 IRAS 4A & 03$^{h}$29$^{m}$10$\fs$43 & 311332$\farcs$5 & 0 & 250 & 4.2 & 51 & 6.5 & 79& 20& 1,2,9,10,11\
NGC 1333 IRAS 4B & 03$^{h}$29$^{m}$12$\fs$01 & 311308$\farcs$1 & 0 & 250 & 1.6 & 54 & 6.7 & 77& 0 & 1,2,9,12\
Per-emb 9 & 03$^{h}$29$^{m}$51$\fs$82 & 313905$\farcs$6 & 0 & 250 & 0.46 & 41 & 8.1 & 25 & 260 & 2,3\
IRAS 03282$+$3035 & 03$^{h}$31$^{m}$20$\fs$94 & 304530$\farcs$2 & 0 & 250 & 1.2 & 33 & 7.0 & 40 & 300& 1,2,3,13\
IRAS 03292$+$3039 & 03$^{h}$32$^{m}$17$\fs$92 & 304947$\farcs$8 & 0 & 250 & 1.3 & 25 & 6.89 & 40 & 305& 2,3,14\
Per-emb 16 & 03$^{h}$43$^{m}$50$\fs$99 & 320324$\farcs$3 & 0 & 250 & 0.38 & 56 & 8.52 & 20 & 170 & 2,3\
L1527 IRS & 04$^{h}$39$^{m}$53$\fs$91 & 260309$\farcs$8 & 0/I & 140 & 2.8 & 56 & 5.9 & 85& 90& 1,15,16\
HH 212 & 05$^{h}$43$^{m}$51$\fs$41 & $-01$0253$\farcs$1 & 0 & 400 & 7.7 & $<$56 & 1.7 & 86$\degr$ & 23$\degr$ & 1,17,18,19\
B228 & 15$^{h}$43$^{m}$02$\fs$24 & $-34$0907$\farcs$3 & 0/I & 150 & 2.3 & 61 & 5.15 & 15& 65& 1,20,21,22,23\
Lupus 3 MMS & 16$^{h}$09$^{m}$18$\fs$09 & $-39$0453$\farcs$5 & 0 & 200 & 0.16 & 40 & 4.6 & 70 & 80& 20,24,25,13\
IRAS 16253$-$2429 & 16$^{h}$28$^{m}$21$\fs$59 & $-24$3623$\farcs$6 & 0 & 125 & 0.25 & 35 & 4.05 & 75& 210& 1,2,16,26\
B59\#11 & 17$^{h}$11$^{m}$23$\fs$08 & $-27$2433$\farcs$1 & 0/I & 130 & 2.2 & 70 & 3.3 & 75$\degr$ & 235$\degr$ & 27,28,29\
B335 & 19$^{h}$37$^{m}$00$\fs$93 & 073409$\farcs$8 & 0 & 150 & 1.5 & 31 & 8.34 & 80& 270& 1,30,31,32,33\
L1157-mm & 20$^{h}$39$^{m}$06$\fs$17 & 680216$\farcs$6 & 0 & 250 & 2.7 & $<$42 & 2.64 & 80& 330& 1,34,16,35,36\
\[sample\]
[lccc]{} L1448 IRS 2 & 2007 Nov 04 & C & J. Foster\
& 2007 Nov 06 & C & J. Foster\
L1448 IRS 3B & 2007 Nov 21 & C & J. Foster\
L1448-mm & 2004 Nov 07 & C & J. J[ø]{}rgensen\
& 2011 Sep 12 & V & H.-W. Yen/This work\
& 2012 Jan 07 & S & H.-W. Yen/This work\
NGC 1333 IRAS 4A & 2004 Nov 06 & C & J. J[ø]{}rgensen\
& 2004 Nov 22 & C & J. J[ø]{}rgensen\
& 2006 Jan 17 & E & J. J[ø]{}rgensen\
& 2011 Sep 12 & V & H.-W. Yen/This work\
NGC 1333 IRAS 4B & 2004 Nov 06 & C & J. J[ø]{}rgensen\
& 2004 Nov 22 & C & J. J[ø]{}rgensen\
& 2006 Jan 17 & E & J. J[ø]{}rgensen\
& 2011 Sep 12 & V & H.-W. Yen/This work\
& 2012 Jan 07 & S & H.-W. Yen/This work\
Per-emb 9 & 2009 Dec 21 & C & M. Hiramatsu\
IRAS 03282$+$3035 & 2008 Dec 08 & C & X. Chen\
& 2009 Dec 25 & C & X. Chen\
IRAS 03292$+$3039 & 2010 Oct 24 & C & S. Schnee\
Per-emb 16 & 2009 Dec 21 & C & M. Hiramatsu\
L1527 IRS & 2004 Nov 08 & C & J. J[ø]{}rgensen\
& 2011 Sep 09 & V & H.-W. Yen/This work\
& 2012 Jan 07 & S & H.-W. Yen/This work\
HH 212 & 2004 Nov 29 & C & C.-F. Lee\
& 2005 Mar 19 & C & C.-F. Lee\
B228 & 2009 Apr 29 & C & A. Hedden\
& 2013 Apr 30 & S & H.-W. Yen/This work\
Lupus 3 MMS & 2013 Mar 14 & C & H.-W. Yen/This work\
IRAS 16253$-$2429 & 2008 May 02 & C & K. Stapelfeldt\
& 2013 Apr 30 & S & H.-W. Yen/This work\
B59\#11 & 2008 Mar 25 & C & T. Bourke\
B335 & 2005 Jun 24 & C & J. J[ø]{}rgensen\
L1157-mm & 2005 Jul 06 & C & J. J[ø]{}rgensen\
\[oblog\]
[llcclccc]{} L1448 IRS 2 & 37 $\times$ 31 (18) & 2 & & 32 $\times$ 32 (178) & 0.14 & 0.2 & 0.1\
L1448 IRS 3B & 30 $\times$ 29 (59) & 5 & & 35 $\times$ 29 (139) & 0.14 & 0.29 & 0.19\
L1448-mm & 14 $\times$ 11 (78) & 1 & & 51 $\times$ 32 (78) & 0.28 & 0.11 & 0.09\
& 05 $\times$ 04 (53) & 2 &\
NGC 1333 IRAS 4A & 12 $\times$ 10 (72) & 9 & & 17 $\times$ 14 (35) & 0.28 & 0.14 & 0.11\
& 05 $\times$ 04 (59) & 4 &\
NGC 1333 IRAS 4B & 14 $\times$ 12 (73) & 6 & & 26 $\times$ 22 (47) & 0.28 & 0.09 & 0.07\
& 05 $\times$ 04 (56) & 3 &\
Per-emb 9 & 40 $\times$ 30 (8) & 2 & & 40 $\times$ 32 (15) & 0.55 & 0.19 & 0.18\
IRAS 03282$+$3035 & 34 $\times$ 31 (106) & 1 & & 38 $\times$ 32 (8) & 0.55 & 0.11 & 0.15\
IRAS 03292$+$3039 & 36 $\times$ 26 (103) & 6 & & 40 $\times$ 28 (80) & 0.28 & 0.16 & 0.13\
Per-emb 16 & 41 $\times$ 31 (7) & 2 & & 42 $\times$ 33 (11) & 0.55 & 0.17 & 0.17\
L1527 IRS & 16 $\times$ 13 (81) & 1 & & 42 $\times$ 25 (80) & 0.28 & 0.1 & 0.1\
& 05 $\times$ 04 (55) & 2 &\
HH 212 & 30 $\times$ 20 (88) & 4 & & 30 $\times$ 19 (82) & 0.28 & 0.36 & 0.22\
B228 & 42 $\times$ 32 (45) & 2 & & 41 $\times$ 31 (46) & 0.28 & 0.16 & 0.1\
Lupus 3 MMS & 76 $\times$ 27 (6) & 4 & & 76 $\times$ 28 (6) & 0.28 & 0.21 & 0.12\
IRAS 16253$-$2429 & 70 $\times$ 34 (36) & 2 & & 70 $\times$ 28 (37) & 0.28 & 0.22 & 0.15\
B59\#11 & 51 $\times$ 28 (31) & 14 & & 52 $\times$ 29 (31) & 1.11 & 0.21 & 0.5\
B335 & 39 $\times$ 32 (82) & 2 & & 37 $\times$ 32 (87) & 0.28 & 0.28 & 0.14\
L1157-mm & 47 $\times$ 33 (131) & 5 & & 47 $\times$ 33 (131) & 0.28 & 0.26 & 0.18 \[obsum1\]
[llcccc]{} Per-emb 9 & 39 $\times$ 30 (16) & 1.06 & 0.16 & 0.45 & 0.51\
IRAS 03282$+$3035 & 29 $\times$ 26 (111) & 1.06 & 0.06 & 0.25 & 0.27\
IRAS 03292$+$3039 & 36 $\times$ 26 (108) & 0.53 & 0.17 & 0.3 & 0.32\
Per-emb 16 & 37 $\times$ 27 (6) & 1.06 & 0.21 & 0.59 & 0.5\
Lupus 3 MMS & 73 $\times$ 27 (6) & 0.26 & 0.23 & 0.24 & 0.36 \[obsum2\]
[lclc]{} L1448 IRS 2 & 189 & 35 $\times$ 20 (58) & 0.046\
L1448 IRS 3B & 798 & 23 $\times$ 17 (37) & 0.2\
L1448-mm & 190 & 09 $\times$ 08 (33) & 0.11\
& 118 & 03 $\times$ 01 (72) & 0.023\
NGC 1333 IRAS 4A1 & 1625 & 15 $\times$ 10 (57) & 0.56\
& 891 & 07 $\times$ 05 (72) & 0.17\
NGC 1333 IRAS 4A2 & 1446 & 19 $\times$ 17 (97) & 0.35\
& 447 & 08 $\times$ 05 (132) & 0.085\
NGC 1333 IRAS 4B & 893 & 14 $\times$ 08 (106) & 0.22\
& 588 & 07 $\times$ 05 (106) & 0.14\
Per-emb 9 & 41 & 41 $\times$ 36 (52) & 0.008\
IRAS 03282$+$3035 & 290 & 16 $\times$ 12 (70) & 0.16\
IRAS 03292$+$3039 & 546 & 18 $\times$ 07 (32) & 0.1\
Per-emb 16 & 45 & 44 $\times$ 37 (71) & 0.026\
L1527 IRS & 204 & 12 $\times$ 08 (66) & 0.036\
& 135 & 05 $\times$ 02 (4) & 0.008\
HH 212 & 116 & 22 $\times$ 13 (84) & 0.057\
B228 & 252 & 90 $\times$ 55 (51) & 0.022\
Lupus 3 MMS & 200 & & 0.024\
IRAS 16253$-$2429 & 42 & 47 $\times$ 44 (6) & 0.003\
B59\#11 & 611 & 26 $\times$ 11 (159) & 0.057\
B335 & 170 & 43 $\times$ 19 (13) & 0.012\
L1157-mm & 229 & 33 $\times$ 26 (133) &0.13\
\[contable\]
[lccccc]{} L1448 IRS 2 & 65.3$\pm$0.2 & 0.317$\pm$0.001 & 4.07$\pm$0.01 & 925$\pm$02 & 46\
L1448 IRS 3B & 183.0$\pm$0.4 & 0.888$\pm$0.002 & 4.44$\pm$0.01 & 323$\pm$02 & 73\
L1448-mm & 26.1$\pm$0.2 & 0.127$\pm$0.001 & 5.04$\pm$0.01 & 1991$\pm$03 & 42\
NGC 1333 IRAS 4A & 116.1$\pm$0.6 & 0.564$\pm$0.003 & 6.80$\pm$0.01 & 2877$\pm$03 & 88\
NGC 1333 IRAS 4B & 27.3$\pm$0.8 & 0.132$\pm$0.004 & 6.61$\pm$0.01 & 3466$\pm$18 & 13\
Per-emb 9 & 58.3$\pm$0.5 & 0.283$\pm$0.003 & 8.15$\pm$0.01 & 1474$\pm$06 & 67\
IRAS 03282$+$3035 & 106.1$\pm$1.0 & 0.515$\pm$0.005 & 6.96$\pm$0.01 & 2905$\pm$05 & 10\
IRAS 03292$+$3039 & 110.6$\pm$0.3 & 0.537$\pm$0.002 & 6.82$\pm$0.01 & 156$\pm$02 & 71\
Per-emb 16 & 77.7$\pm$0.6 & 0.377$\pm$0.003 & 8.57$\pm$0.1 & 2201$\pm$08 & 50\
L1527 IRS & 71.6$\pm$0.3 & 0.347$\pm$0.002 & 5.81$\pm$0.01 & 221$\pm$04 & 68\
HH 212 & 21.5$\pm$1.0 & 0.104$\pm$0.005 & 1.78$\pm$0.01 & 1208$\pm$24 & 82\
B228 & 90.2$\pm$1.3 & 0.438$\pm$0.006 & 5.05$\pm$0.01 & 639$\pm$07 & 1\
Lupus 3 MMS & 1.2$\pm$0.2 & 0.006$\pm$0.001 & 4.60$\pm$0.01 & 3103$\pm$119 & 50\
IRAS 16253$-$2429 & 32.9$\pm$0.6 & 0.160$\pm$0.003 & 4.08$\pm$0.01 & 2467$\pm$13 & 37\
B59\#11 & 528.5$\pm$1.7 & 2.565$\pm$0.008 & 3.69$\pm$0.01 & 1491$\pm$03 & 86\
B335 & 132.9$\pm$0.5 & 0.645$\pm$0.002 & 8.27$\pm$0.01 & 2579$\pm$02 & 12\
L1157-mm & 9.2$\pm$0.4 & 0.045$\pm$0.002 & 2.61$\pm$0.01 & 3465$\pm$35 & 17\
\[c18ovg\]
[lccc]{} L1448 IRS2 & 47.6$\pm$0.8 & 0.231$\pm$0.002 & 4.08$\pm$0.01\
L1448 IRS 3B & 133.5$\pm$2.3 & 0.648$\pm$0.011 & 4.44$\pm$0.01\
L1448-mm & 30.3$\pm$0.8 & 0.147$\pm$0.003 & 5.05$\pm$0.01\
NGC 1333 IRAS 4A & 131.9$\pm$2.6 & 0.640$\pm$0.013 & 6.63$\pm$0.01\
NGC 1333 IRAS 4B & 15.3$\pm$3.5 & 0.074$\pm$0.017 & 6.61$\pm$0.01\
Per-emb 9 & 56.8$\pm$2.8 & 0.276$\pm$0.013 & 8.19$\pm$0.01\
IRAS 03282$+$3035 & 40.1$\pm$4.2 & 0.195$\pm$0.020 & 6.88$\pm$0.01\
IRAS 03292$+$3039 & 115.3$\pm$1.8 & 0.560$\pm$0.009 & 6.71$\pm$0.01\
Per-emb 16 & 93.7$\pm$6.5 & 0.455$\pm$0.032 & 8.57$\pm$0.01\
L1527 IRS & 64.6$\pm$1.7 & 0.313$\pm$0.008 & 5.81$\pm$0.01\
HH 212 & 17.8$\pm$3.3 & 0.086$\pm$0.016 & 1.75$\pm$0.01\
B228 & 41.9$\pm$5.5 & 0.204$\pm$0.027 & 5.04$\pm$0.01\
Lupus 3 MMS & 14.4$\pm$2.8 & 0.070$\pm$0.013 & 4.60$\pm$0.01\
IRAS 16253$-$2429 & 31.3$\pm$4.9 & 0.152$\pm$0.024 & 4.13$\pm$0.01\
B59\#11 & 551.4$\pm$8.0 & 2.677$\pm$0.039 & 3.89$\pm$0.01\
B335 & 40.0$\pm$2.3 & 0.194$\pm$0.011 & 8.25$\pm$0.01\
L1157-mm & 13.7$\pm$2.8 & 0.067$\pm$0.013 & 2.57$\pm$0.01\
\[c18ovgpa\]
[lrrrrrr]{} L1448 IRS 2 & 0.1–0.26 & 8.3–9.0 $\times$ 10$^{-4}$ & 130–390 & 1 $\times$ 10$^{16}$ & 40–50 & 1080\
L1448 IRS 3B & 1.0–1.9 & 3.6–3.9 $\times$ 10$^{-3}$ & 330–720 & 2 $\times$ 10$^{16}$ & 30–40 & 1170\
L1448-mm & 0.11–0.31 & 5.6–10.2 $\times$ 10$^{-4}$ & 140–160 & 4–10 $\times$ 10$^{20}$ & 20 & 1230\
NGC 1333 IRAS 4A & 0.14–0.15 & 1.4–1.5 $\times$ 10$^{-3}$ & 630–720 & 5–7 $\times$ 10$^{16}$ & 30 & 1250\
NGC 1333 IRAS 4B & 0.03–0.1 & $<$5 $\times$ 10$^{-5}$ & $<$5 & 1–2 $\times$ 10$^{17}$ & 40 & 660\
Per-emb 9 & 0.26 & 1.9 $\times$ 10$^{-3}$ & 690 & 5 $\times$ 10$^{15}$ & 50 & 1040\
IRAS 03282$+$3035 & 0.1–0.24 & 7.0–8.3 $\times$ 10$^{-4}$ & 100–330 & 7 $\times$ 10$^{15}$ & 50 & 740\
IRAS 03292$+$3039 & 0.32–0.33 & 2.2–2.4 $\times$ 10$^{-3}$ & 750–850 & 7 $\times$ 10$^{15}$ & 50 & 1040\
Per-emb 16 & 0.74–1.4 & 2.7–3.2 $\times$ 10$^{-3}$ & 240–640 & 2 $\times$ 10$^{15}$ & 30 & 1380\
L1527 IRS & 0.07–0.24 & 4.6–5.8 $\times$ 10$^{-4}$ & 70–150 & 5–10 $\times$ 10$^{22}$ & 20 & 730\
HH 212 & 0.12–0.48 & 2.7–4.6 $\times$ 10$^{-4}$ & 10–80 & 1 $\times$ 10$^{17}$ & 50 & 1320\
B228 & 0.32–0.94 & 6.1–15.5 $\times$ 10$^{-4}$ & 60–120 & 1 $\times$ 10$^{15}$ & 30–40 & 590\
Lupus 3 MMS & 0.08–0.26 & 5.8–12.6 $\times$ 10$^{-4}$ & 200–290 & 1 $\times$ 10$^{15}$ & 20–30 & 1480\
IRAS 16253$-$2429 & 0.02–0.04 & 2.7–3.2 $\times$ 10$^{-4}$ & 90–240 & 4–5 $\times$ 10$^{15}$ & 40–50 & 670\
B59\#11 & 1.0–1.5 & 2.7 $\times$ 10$^{-3}$ & 230–340 & 4–9 $\times$ 10$^{16}$ & 30 & 640\
B335 & 0.05–0.19 & $<$5 $\times$ 10$^{-5}$ & $<$5 & 3 $\times$ 10$^{16}$ & 50 & 750\
L1157-mm & 0.02–0.08 & $<$5 $\times$ 10$^{-5}$ & $<$5 & 9 $\times$ 10$^{16}$ & 20 & 1060\
\[c18ofit\]
[lccccc]{} L1448 IRS 3B & 330–720 & 1.0–1.9 & & 3.5 & 1\
L1448-mm & 140–160 & 0.11–0.31 & & 1.5 & 1\
NGC 1333 IRAS 4A & 630–720 & 0.14–0.15 & & 4.5 & 1\
NGC 1333 IRAS 4B & $<$5 & 0.03–0.1 & & 1.7 & 1\
IRAS 03282$+$3035 & 100–330 & 0.1–0.24 & 1.3 & 1.4 & 1,2\
L1527 IRS & 70–150 & 0.07–0.24 & 2.2 & 0.8 & 1,2\
IRAS 16253$-$2429 & 90–240 & 0.02–0.04 & 1.2 & & 2\
B335 & $<$5 & 0.05–0.19 & 0.8 & 0.9 & 2,3\
L1157-mm & $<$5 & 0.02–0.08 & 0.9 & 2.0 & 1,2\
\[comtable\]
[lccccc]{} L1448 IRS 2 & 130–390 & 8.3–9.0 $\times$ 10$^{-4}$ & 15$\degr$ & 3$\degr$\
L1448 IRS 3B & 330–720 & 3.6–3.9 $\times$ 10$^{-3}$ & 82& 79\
L1448-mm & 140–160 & 5.6–10.2 $\times$ 10$^{-4}$ & 44$\degr$ & 45$\degr$\
NGC 1333 IRAS 4A & 630–720 & 1.4–1.5 $\times$ 10$^{-3}$ & 37& 36\
NGC 1333 IRAS 4B & $<$5 & $<$5.0 $\times$ 10$^{-5}$ & 55$\degr$ & 84$\degr$\
L1527 IRS & 70–150 & 4.6–5.8 $\times$ 10$^{-4}$ & 32$\degr$ & 87$\degr$\
B335 & $<$5 & $<$5 $\times$ 10$^{-5}$ & 75$\degr$ & 33$\degr$$\tablenotemark{a}$\
L1157 & $<$5 & $<$5 $\times$ 10$^{-5}$ & 14$\degr$ & 3$\degr$\
\[poltab\]
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'With the rapidly growing number of research publications, there is a vast amount of scholarly information that needs to be organized in digital libraries. To deal with this challenge, digital libraries use semantic techniques to build knowledge-base structures for organizing scientific information. Identifying relations between scientific terms can help with the construction of a representative knowledge-based structure. While advanced automated techniques have been developed for relation extraction, many of these techniques were evaluated under different scenarios, which limits their comparability. To this end, this study presents a thorough empirical evaluation of eight <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Bert</span>-based classification models by exploring two factors: 1) <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Bert</span> model variants, and 2) classification strategies. To simulate real-world settings, we conduct our sentence-level assessment using the abstracts of scholarly publications in three corpora, two of which are distinct corpora and the third of which is the union of the first two. Our findings show that <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">SciBert</span> models perform better than <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Bert</span>$_{\text{BASE}}$ models. The strategy of classifying a single relation each time is preferred in the corpus consisting of abundant scientific relations, while the strategy of identifying multiple relations at one time is beneficial to the corpus with sparse relations. Our results offer recommendations to the stakeholders of digital libraries for selecting the appropriate technique to build a structured knowledge-based system for the ease of scholarly information organization.'
author:
- Ming Jiang
- 'Jennifer D’Souza'
- |
\
Sören Auer
- 'J. Stephen Downie'
bibliography:
- 'tpdl.bib'
title: |
Improving Scholarly Knowledge Representation:\
Evaluating BERT-based Models for\
Scientific Relation Classification
---
Introduction
============
Today scientific endeavors are increasingly facing a publication deluge [@stm], which results in the rapid growth of scholarly publications needing to be accessible in digital libraries. While abundant resources have been provided for scholarly communication in digital libraries, it is still challenging for researchers to obtain comprehensive, fine-grained and context-sensitive scholarly knowledge for their research, especially for those who study a research problem that involves multiple disciplines [@Jaradeh2019ORKG]. According to [@Jaradeh2019ORKG; @auer2019orkg], there are three main factors that lead to this issue. First, the set of keywords used for indexing publication documents may not be able to cover all aspects of knowledge involved in each publication. Second, the traditional keyword search on document-based publications fails to consider the semantic associations among the pieces of scholarly information. Finally, the solely manual processing of unstructured scholarly knowledge does not scale to the number of publications, thus rendering a large part of the scholarly canon unused. To improve this problem, some initiatives [@Jaradeh2019ORKG] advocate for combining human and machine intelligence to build an interlinked and semantically rich graph structure to organize the scholarly information in digital libraries.
A key aspect of building a knowledge graph for the scholarly record is identifying relations between scientific terms. In the natural language processing community, within the context of human-annotated datasets comprising abstracts of scholarly articles [@augenstein2017semeval; @gabor2018semeval], seven relation types between scientific terms are being studied. They are <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Hyponym-Of</span>, <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Part-Of</span>, <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Usage</span>, <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Compare</span>, <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Conjunction</span>, <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Feature-Of</span>, and <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Result</span>. The annotations are in the form of the following generalized relation triples: $\langle$experiment$\rangle$ <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Compare</span> $\langle$another experiment$\rangle$; $\langle$method$\rangle$ <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Usage</span> $\langle$data$\rangle$; $\langle$method$\rangle$ <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Usage</span> $\langle$research task$\rangle$. Since human language exhibits the phenomenon of paraphrasing where the same concept can be expressed in various ways, the direct identification of a particular relation between scientific terms is impractical—a problem addressed by a classification task. In the framework of an automated pipeline for generating knowledge graphs over massive volumes of scholarly records, scientific relation classification–the task reviewed in this paper–is therefore indispensable. The resulting task is recognizing which particular relation assertion between a pair of scientific terms in scholarly articles holds given a set of possible predefined relations.
In this age of the “deep learning tsunami”, to build automated scientific relation (SR) classification systems, one can combine various neural architectures to achieve high classification accuracy [@manning2015computational]. And with the recent introduction of BERT [@bert] word embedding models, the opportunity to obtain boosted machine learning systems is further accentuated. While prior studies [@scibert; @mre19] of SR systems have demonstrated high classifier performances by tapping into these recent deep learning developments, the performances have been reported only on single evaluation scenarios, e.g., based on evaluating on a single dataset. Based on such lean evaluations of prior systems, it is, at present, difficult to obtain conclusive insights about the robustness of the classifiers in real-world diverse application settings: such as within scholarly digital library frameworks hosting diverse collections of articles. Moreover, existing evaluations are not identical between each other, since their evaluated datasets differ greatly; hence results are not comparable. Therefore we have no general insights into the best choice among the SR systems to recommend in practical settings—so far they all seem equally good.
In this work, we comprehensively surveyed eight deep learning techniques for scientific relation classification based on two different classification strategies and four <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Bert</span> model variants. Further, we evaluated these systems on all available evaluation resources for the SR task including: a dataset of scholarly articles from the ACL anthology [@gabor2018semeval]; a more diverse dataset of scholarly articles from various Artificial Intelligence conference proceedings [@luan2018multi]; and a third resource that leveraged the two datasets combined, thereby offering a more realistic setting of unbalanced distribution of data domains and, further, offering robust training for classification models on annotations made by two different groups of annotators. Our ultimate goal is to help the stakeholders of digital libraries select the optimal tool to implement knowledge-based scientific information flows. In summary, we address the following research questions in this paper:
1. What is the impact of the eight classifiers on scientific relation classification?
2. Which of the seven relation types studied are easy or challenging for classification?
3. What is the practical relevance of the seven relation types in a scholarly knowledge graph?
Related Work {#sec:related}
============
#### **Relations Mined from Scientific Publications.**
Overall, knowledge is organized in digital libraries based on the following three aspects of the digital collections: 1) metadata, 2) free-form content, and 3) ontologized content [@dlko; @kglib]. In this context, the main categories of relations that have been explored for scholarly publications belong to two groups. One group includes metadata relations such as authorship, co-authorship, and citations [@meta; @coauthorship]. Research in this group mainly focuses on examining the social dimension of scholarly communication such as co-author prediction [@coauthorship] and scholarly community analysis [@meta]. The second group includes semantic relations, either as free-form semantic content classes [@content; @constituency] or as ontologized classes [@ontology; @scholarontology]. In the framework of automatic systems, content relations have been examined for: 1) scientific relation identification that involves determining which scientific term pairs are related [@gabor2018semeval; @constituency], and 2) scientific relation classification that involves determining which relation type exists between related term pairs, where the relation types are typically pre-defined [@mre19; @scibert; @luan2018multi]. With respect to ontologized relation classes, prior work primarily considers the conceptual hierarchy based on formal concept analysis [@ontology; @scholarontology].
We attempt the task of classifying semantic relations that were created from free-form text. Given that the digital libraries are interested in the creation of linked data [@hallo2016current], our attempted task directly facilitates the creation of scholarly knowledge graphs [@auer2018towards], offering structured data for use by librarians to generate linked data.
#### **Techniques Developed for Relation Classification.**
Both rule-based [@snowball] and learning-based [@dependency; @relrnn] methods have been developed for relation classification. Traditionally, learning-based systems relied on hand-crafted semantic and/or syntactic features [@snowball; @dependency]. In recent years, the success of deep learning techniques have nearly obviated the need to manually design features since they can more effectively learn latent feature representations for discriminating between relations. An attention-based bidirectional long short-term memory network (BiLSTM) [@relrnn] was one of the first top-performing systems that leveraged neural attention mechanisms to capture important information per sentence for relation classification. Another advanced system [@luan19] leveraged a dynamic span graph framework based on BiLSTMs to simultaneously extract terms and infer their pairwise relations. Aside from these neural methods considering the word sequence order, transformer-based models [@transformer] that use self-attention mechanisms to quantify the semantic association of each word to its context have become the current state-of-the-art in relation classification. E.g. <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Bert</span> word embeddings [@bert]. It can be trained to model data from any domain—the original <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Bert</span> models were trained on books and Wikipedia. Now with the newly introduced <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">SciBert</span> [@scibert], there are <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Bert</span> models trained on scholarly publications as well.
With respect to the classification strategy, the single-relation-at-a-time classification (SRC) that identifies the relation type for an entity pair each time are regularly adopted by prior work [@relrnn; @luan19; @scibert]. To improve the classification efficiency, [@mre19] designed a <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Bert</span>-based classifier that can recognize multiple pairwise relationships at one time, which can be regarded as a multiple-relations-at-a-time classification (MRC). Differing from prior work that emphasizes classification improvement, we focus on providing a fine-grained analysis of existing resources for selecting the proper tool to extract and organize scientific information in digital libraries.
-------- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------- -------- ------- -------- ------- --------
**Id** **Relation**
Total % Total % Total %
1 <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Usage</span>: a scientific entity that is used for/by/on another scientific entity. E.g. *MT system* is applied to *Japanese* 658 42.13% 2,437 52.43% 3,095 49.84%
2 <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Feature-Of</span>: An entity is a characteristic or abstract model of another entity. E.g. *computational complexity* of *unification* 392 25.10% 264 5.68% 656 10.56%
3 <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Conjunction</span>: Entities that are related in a lexical conjunction i.e., with ‘and’ ‘or’. E.g. videos from *Google Video* and a *NatGeo documentary* 582 12.52% 582 9.37%
4 <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Part-Of</span>: scientific entities that are in a part-whole relationship. E.g. describing the processing of *utterances* in a *discourse* 304 19.46% 269 5.79% 573 9.23%
5 <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Result</span>: An entity affects or yields a result. E.g. With only 12 *training speakers* for SI recognition , we achieved a 7.5% *word error rate* 92 5.89% 454 9.77% 546 8.79%
6 <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Hyponym-Of</span>: An entity whose semantic field is included within that of another entity. E.g. *Image matching* is a problem in *Computer Vision* 409 8.80% 409 6.59%
7 <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Compare</span>: An entity is compared to another entity. E.g. *conversation transcripts* have features that differ significantly from *neat texts* 116 7.43% 233 5.01% 349 5.62%
1,562 100% 4,648 100% 6,210 100%
-------- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------- -------- ------- -------- ------- --------
\[table:1\]
Corpus
======
For our comprehensive evaluations, we select both the publicly available NLP datasets [@gabor2018semeval; @luan2018multi] annotated for the scientific relation classification task. These datasets contain a set of manually annotated scholarly abstracts for their scientific terms and the scientific relations between pairs of terms. Additionally, we combine the two datasets into a third new dataset, which offers a more realistic evaluation setting since it provides a larger, more diverse task representation. In the sequel, we describe our evaluation corpora.
#### **C1: The SemEval18 Corpus.**
This corpus was created for the SemEval-2018 Task 7 [@gabor2018semeval] as a community-wide research initiative. It provided 500 manually annotated abstracts from scholarly articles in computational linguistics from the ACL Anthology. In the abstracts, originally, six discrete semantic relations were defined that were studied to capture the predominant information content. For our evaluation, we omit one of the six, viz. <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Topic</span>, since it is not well-represented in the corpus, and simply consider the following five relations: <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Usage</span>, <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Result</span>, <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Model</span>, <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Part\_Whole</span>, and <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Comparison</span>. In all, the dataset comprised 500 annotated abstracts partitioned into a training dataset for machine learning containing 350 abstracts and a test dataset of 150 abstracts for evaluating the trained machine learning model.
#### **C2: The SciERC Corpus.**
Our second evaluation corpus [@luan2018multi], also contains a set of 500 manually annotated abstracts of scholarly articles with their scientific terms and their pairwise relations. Unlike the SemEval18 corpus, the SciERC corpus represents diverse underlying data domains where the abstracts were taken from 12 AI conference/workshop proceedings in five research areas: artificial intelligence, natural language processing, speech, machine learning, and computer vision. These abstracts were annotated for the following seven relations: <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Compare</span>, <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Part-of</span>, <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Conjunction</span>, <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Evaluate-for</span>, <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Feature-of</span>, <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Used-for</span>, and <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Hyponym-Of</span>. And, for machine learning, the corpus was prepartitioned into a 350/50/100 train/dev/test split. Between the two corpora, except the <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Conjunction</span> and <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Hyponym-Of</span> relations, five of the defined relations are semantically identical.
#### **C3: The Combined Corpus.**
To create this corpus, we merged *C1* and *C2*. This involved renaming relations. Specifically, <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Used-For</span> in *C2* which is semantically similar to <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Usage</span> in *C1*, was renamed as <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Usage</span>. Further, based on our observations of the two corpora, for <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Result</span> in *C1* and <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Evaluate-For</span> in *C2*, we found that the arguments of these relations were in reverse order. E.g. “\[accuracy\] for \[semantic classification\]” is labeled as “accuracy" $\to$ <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Evaluate-For</span> $\to$ “semantic classification" in *C2*, which can be regarded as “semantic classification" $\to$ <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Result</span> $\to$ “accuracy". In this way, we renamed all instances annotated with relation <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Evaluate-For</span> in corpus *C2* into <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Result</span> by flipping their argument order. The two additional relations in *C2*, i.e., <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Hyponym-Of</span> and <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Conjunction</span>, that were not in *C1* were preserved as is. Thus, we created a third evaluation corpus of 1000 abstracts presenting a more realistic evaluation scenario of large and heterogenous data.
In Table \[table:1\], we present corpus statistics for each of the evaluation corpora. Across all three, <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Usage</span> is the most predominant. Particularly pertinent in the context of the digital libraries are the columns ‘SemEval18’ and ‘SciERC’ in Table \[table:1\] that were generated from the Open Research Knowledge Graph [@auer2018towards]. The contributions in each scholarly article about the respective SemEval18 and SciERC datasets [@gabor2018semeval; @luan2018multi] are encoded via subject-predicate-object triples and were customized for comparability and merged in a single view. This customized comparison view of the scholarly knowledge graph of the two articles is persistently accessible[^1] for all researchers to access or edit. While this customized graph with machine-actionable data from the scholarly article is not based upon the triples that are addressed in this work, the relations we study can be harnessed similarly.
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Bert</span>-based Scientific Relation Classifiers
========================================================================================
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Bert</span> [@bert], Bidirectional Encoder Representations from Transformers, as a pretrained language representation built on cutting-edge neural technology, provides NLP practitioners with high-quality language features from text data simply out-of-the-box that improves performance on many NLP tasks. These models return *contextualized* embeddings for tokens which can be directly employed as features for various NLP tasks. Further, with minimal task-specific extensions over the core <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Bert</span> architecture, the embeddings can be relatively inexpensively fine-tuned to the task at hand, in turn facilitating even greater boosts in task performance.
In this work, for scientific relation classification, we employ <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Bert</span> embeddings and we also fine-tune them within two different neural extensions: 1) for single-relation-at-a-time classification (SRC); and 2) for multiple-relation-at-a-time classification (MRC). In the remainder of the section, we first describe the <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Bert</span> models we employ followed by the SRC and MRC classifiers that implement different classification objectives.
Pre-trained <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Bert</span> Variants
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Bert</span> models as pretrained language representations are available in several variants depending on the model configuration parameters and on the underlying training data. While there are over 16 types, in this work we select the following four core variants.
#### **<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Bert</span>$_{\text{BASE}}$**
[^2] The first two models we use are in the category of the pretrained <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Bert</span>$_{\text{BASE}}$. They were pretrained on billions of words from text data comprising the BooksCorpus (800M words) [@zhu2015aligning] and English Wikipedia (2,500M words). The two models we select are: a cased model (where the case of the underlying words were preserved when training <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Bert</span>$_{\text{BASE}}$) and an uncased model (where the underlying words were all lowercased when training <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Bert</span>$_{\text{BASE}}$).
#### **<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">SciBert</span>**
[^3] The next two models employed in this study are in the category of the pretrained scientific <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Bert</span> called <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">SciBert</span>. They are language models based on <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Bert</span> but trained on a large corpus of scientific text. Specifically, they are trained on a random sample of 1.14M papers from Semantic Scholar [@ammar2018construction] consisting of full text of 18% papers from the computer science domain and 82% from the broad biomedical domain. Like <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Bert</span>$_{\text{BASE}}$, for <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">SciBert</span>, we use its cased and uncased variants.
Fine-tuned <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Bert</span>-based Classifiers
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We implement the aforementioned <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Bert</span> models within two neural system extensions that respectively adopt different classification strategies.
#### **Single-relation-at-a-time Classification (SRC)**
Classification models built for SRC generally extend the core <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Bert</span> architecture with one additional linear classification layer that has $K \times H$ dimensions, where $K$ is the number of labels and $H$ denotes the size of hidden states. The label probabilities are further normalized by using a softmax function and the classifier assigns the label with the maximum probability to the target.
#### **Multiple-relations-at-a-time Classification (MRC)**
This strategy is a more recent innovation on the classification problem in which the classifier can be trained with all the relation instances in a sentence at a time or predicts all the instances in one pass, as opposed to separately for each instance. In this case, however, the core <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Bert</span> architecture’s self-attention mechanism is modified to efficiently consider representations of the relative positions of tokens that represent scientific terms [@shaw2018self; @mre19]. While this modification enables encoding the novel multiple-relations-at-a-time problem, for obtaining the classification probabilities, the MRC is also extended with a linear classification layer, though not identical to the SRC since it has to model the modified architecture.
Evaluation
==========
Experimental Setup
------------------
#### Experimental datasets, <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Bert</span> word embeddings, and Classification strategies.
Our comprehensive evaluation setup involved three different corpora, four <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Bert</span> embedding variants, and two classification strategies. Given this, we trained a total of *eight* different classifiers, which for each of the three corpora resulted in 24 trained models. Each corpus was already prepartitioned three ways as training/dev/test by the original creators, which we adopt. To train optimal classifiers on the respective corpus, we tuned the learning rate parameter $\eta$ for values {2e-5, 3e-5, 5e-5}.
#### Evaluation Metrics.
We employ the standard machine learning classification evaluation indicators, i.e., Precision ($P$), Recall ($R$), F1-score ($F1$), and Accuracy ($Acc$).
Results and Analysis
--------------------
In this section, we present results from our comprehensive evaluations with respect to the three main research questions that undergird this study.
### RQ1: What is the impact of the eight classifiers on scientific relation classification?
The eight classifiers are obtained from two classification strategies built over four <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Bert</span> model variants. We examine their classification results (depicted in Table \[tab:overalleval\]) in terms of the following three key characteristics of the classifiers.
#### The classification strategy, i.e., SRC vs. MRC.
From the $Acc$ and $F1$ shown in Table \[tab:overalleval\], we see that SRC outperforms MRC on two corpora except the SemEval18 corpus. One characteristic of the SemEval18 corpus is that it has significantly lower number of annotations than the other two copora. Thus we infer that the novel MRC strategy is more robust than SRC because its performance level is unaffected by a drop in the number of the annotations.
#### Word embedding features, i.e., <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Bert</span> vs. <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">SciBert</span>.
Regarding the <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Bert</span> word embedding models, <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">SciBert</span> outperformed <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Bert</span> on all three corpora with higher accuracy and F1 scores. Since our experimental corpora are all scholarly data, as an expected result, word embeddings trained on the similar data domains are better suited.
#### Vocabulary case in <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Bert</span> models, i.e., cased vs. uncased.
We observe that the uncased <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Bert</span> models (<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">SciBert</span>: 82.91, <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Bert</span>: 81.24) show higher classification accuracy than their cased counterpart (<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">SciBert</span>: 81.71, <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Bert</span>: 80.05) on average. Further, the uncased models have a lower standard deviation in accuracy overall (<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">SciBert</span>: 2.04, <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Bert</span>: 2.84) than the cased models (<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">SciBert</span>: 4.60, <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Bert</span>: 4.14); comparisons on $F1$ are along similar lines. Hence, our results suggest that uncased <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Bert</span> models can achieve more stable performances than cased variants.
In conclusion, with respect to the classification strategy, we find SRC outperforms MRC (see averaged scores in the last row in Table \[tab:overalleval\]). Nevertheless, the advanced MRC strategy demonstrates consistently robust performance that remains relatively unaffected by smaller dataset sizes compared to the SRC (e.g. SRC vs. MRC results on the SemEval18 corpus). On the other hand, with respect to <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Bert</span> word embedding variants, from the averaged scores in the last column in Table \[tab:overalleval\], the <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">SciBert</span> uncased model posits as the optimal word embedding features model on scholarly articles.
------------------------------------------------------------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ------------ ----------- -----------
(lr)[2-4]{} (lr)[5-7]{} P R F1 P R F1
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Usage</span> **87.22** 89.71 **88.45** 90.53 **87.43** **88.95**
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Result</span> 78.26 **90.00** 83.72 **100.00** 75.00 85.71
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Compare</span> 85.71 85.71 85.71 75.00 85.71 80.00
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Model-Feature</span> 75.76 70.92 77.27 73.91
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Part-Whole</span> 79.25
------------------------------------------------------------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ------------ ----------- -----------
: Per-relation classification scores of SRC and MRC best systems on SemEval18.[]{data-label="tab:relsemeval"}
### RQ2: Which of the seven relation types studied are easy/challenging to classify?
Examining the fine-grained per-relation classification results in Tables \[tab:relsemeval\] to \[tab:relcomb\] across all our evaluation corpora for both SRC and MRC, we note the classification ranked order. Of all relations, <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Usage</span> (<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Used-For</span>) is the easiest classification target, since in all three tables, it is in the two topmost. <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Usage</span> is the most predominant type in all corpora. This accounts, in part, for its high-scored classification, since the classifiers are trained on a significant number of training instances for <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Usage</span> compared to the rest.
------------------------------------------------------------ ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------
(lr)[2-4]{} (lr)[5-7]{} P R F1 P R F1
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Used-For</span> **93.30** 91.37 **92.32** **88.75** 90.24 **89.49**
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Conjunction</span> 87.97 **95.12** 91.41 80.69 **95.12** 87.31
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Hyponym-Of</span> 92.31 89.55 90.91 80.00 82.93 81.44
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Evaluate-For</span> 82.29 86.81 84.49 84.44 83.52 83.98
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Compare</span> 72.73 84.21 78.05 83.87 68.42 75.36
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Part-Of</span> 66.04 60.34 60.32 62.81
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Feature-Of</span> 61.02 73.68
------------------------------------------------------------ ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------
: Per-relation classification results of SRC and MRC best systems on SciERC.[]{data-label="tab:relscierc"}
----------------------------------------------------------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------
(lr)[2-4]{} (lr)[5-7]{} P R F1 P R F1
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Conjunction</span> **92.56** **91.06** **91.80** 85.07 **92.68** **88.72**
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Usage</span> 91.30 88.98 90.13 **87.96** 87.71 87.84
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Hyponym-Of</span> 89.39 88.06 88.72 83.12 78.05 80.50
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Compare</span> 86.89 89.83 88.33 73.85 81.36 77.41
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Result</span> 76.36 75.68 76.02 84.69 74.77 79.43
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Part-Of</span> 75.86 70.68 68.33 64.82
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Feature-Of</span> 75.20 68.00
----------------------------------------------------------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------
: Per-relation classification results of the best SRC and MRC systems on the Combined corpus.[]{data-label="tab:relcomb"}
For the challenging relations, we examine the results per corpus. Starting with the Table \[tab:relsemeval\] results for the SemEval18 corpus, we observe that both SRC and MRC find <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Part-Whole</span> most challenging to classify. We surmise that this relation displays high diversity in the underlying natural language text from which it is induced; hence the classifier is unable to generalize a consistent set of patterns for it. Observing classification performance ranks, for three of the five relations (i.e., <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Usage</span>, <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Model-Feature</span> and <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Part-Whole</span>), SRC and MRC obtain the same classification rank order. For <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Result</span> and <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Compare</span>, they are opposites, where SRC classifies <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Result</span> better than MRC.
In Table \[tab:relscierc\] results for SciERC, both classifiers perform significantly low on two relations, viz. <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Feature-Of</span> and <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Part-Of</span>. Since these two relations are not the most underrepresented in the corpus, we theorize that their low classification performance is owed to the natural language text diversity from which they are deduced. In this case, obtaining more annotated instances is one way to boost classifier performance. In terms of the ranked order of performances on the relations, SRC and MRC perform identically on SciERC data. And lastly in Table \[tab:relcomb\] results on the Combined corpus, for the challenging relations, both SRC and MRC have the same result as they did on SciERC—i.e., <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Feature-Of</span> followed by <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Part-Of</span> are the most challenging. And we theorize the same reason for the low scores on these relations, since Combined contains SciERC data. Given the two corpora in the Combined dataset, SciERC additionally introduced <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Conjunction</span> which SemEval18 did not have. <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Conjunction</span> is among the top two easiest relations to classify, with <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Usage</span> as the other, for the classifiers trained on SciERC and on the Combined corpus. Further, its classification is better in the Combined corpus than in SciERC. This lends an understanding to the realistic evaluation settings that the Combined corpus presents. To elaborate, for <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Usage</span>, instances from SemEval18 and SciERC (i.e. <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Used-For</span>) are combined, resulting in an insignificant dip in performance (on the Combined corpus, <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Usage</span> ranks second easiest compared with SemEval18 and SciERC) since they are now non-uniform annotation signals. As opposed to the case of <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Conjunction</span>, the Combined corpus obtains a uniform annotation signal from just the SciERC corpus and ranks a minor degree higher at classifying it.
Finally, a list summarizing the top-scoring per-relation performances for scientific relation classification across all three tables, includes the following: <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Usage</span> (SRC in SciERC), <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Conjunction</span> (SRC in Combined), <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Hyponym-Of</span> (SRC in SciERC), <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Result</span> (MRC in SemEval18), <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Part-Of</span> (MRC in SemEval18 for <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Part-Whole</span>), and <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Feature-Of</span> (MRC in SemEval18 for <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Model-Feature</span>). Since the SemEval18 corpus appears the most times in the top-ranked results, we conclude that its annotations obtain a relatively better trained classifier. However, the SemEval18 corpus only includes scholarly abstracts from one AI domain i.e. NLP (in the ACL Anthology), whereas SciERC is more comprehensively inclusive across various AI domains. Thus, an additional factor that classifiers trained on SciERC handle is domain diversity.
### Error Analysis
A closer look at the misclassifications is portrayed in the confusion matrices in Figure \[fig:conmat\] for the SRC and MRC strategies on the Combined corpus. Four of the seven relations, i.e. <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Hyponym-Of</span>, <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Result</span>, <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Part-Of</span>, and <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Feature-Of</span>, are highly likely to be misclassified as <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Usage</span>. This shows that our classifiers are biased by the predominant <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Usage</span> relation. In general, unbalanced distribution of training samples (see the details in the corpus section) is, more often than not, one of the main factors for confusion learned in machine learning systems. For the most challenging relations <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Feature-Of</span> and <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Part-Of</span>, after <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Usage</span>, are highly likely to be confused with each other (<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Feature-Of</span> as <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Part-Of</span> ($\sim$10% confusion), and vice-versa ($\sim$9.4% confusion)). For the relations <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Hyponym-Of</span> and <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Feature-Of</span> that loosely demonstrate a relation heirarchy such that <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Hyponym-Of</span> subsumes <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Feature-Of</span>, but not the other way around, we find the classification confusion demonstrates a consistent pattern to this data. From the matrices, we see that <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Hyponym-Of</span> has $\sim$6% likelihood to be predicted as <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Feature-Of</span>, but none of the <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Feature-Of</span> (0%) instances were confused with <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Hyponym-Of</span>.
To offer another pertinant angle on the classifier error analysis, we compute the word distance distributions between related scientific term pairs in the Combined corpus. This data is depicted in Figure \[fig:worddist\]. In general, most box plots shown in the figure are skewed with a long upper whisker and a short lower whisker, which indicates that the majority of paired scientific terms are close in the text. Specifically, the scientific term pairs in the <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Conjunction</span> relation, which in linguistic terms should necessarily be close. This consistent pattern could be another reason why <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Conjunction</span> is among the easiest relations to classify. Further, the average word distance of <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Feature-Of</span>, <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Part-Of</span>, <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Hyponym-Of</span>, and <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Compare</span> is closer to the lower quartile than the other relations. Such varied distribution may bring challenges for a classifier to identify these relations. Notably, the similar median value and spread range between <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Feature-Of</span> and <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Part-Of</span> could account for why they are challenging to classify.
Finally, we examine the third research question that undergirded this study.
### RQ3: What is the practical relevance of the seven relations studied in this paper in a scholarly knowledge graph?
As a practical illustration of the relation triples studied in this work, we build a knowledge graph from their annotations in the 1000 scholarly abstracts in the Combined dataset. This is depicted in Figure \[fig:kg\]. Looking at the corpus-level graph (the right graph), we observe that generic scientific terms such as “method,” “approach,” and “system” are the most densely connected nodes, as expected since generic terms are found across research areas. In the zoomed-in ego-network of the term “machine\_translation” (the left graph), <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Hyponym-Of</span> is meaningfully highlighted by its role linking “machine\_translation” and its sibling nodes as the research tasks “speech\_recognition,” and “natural\_language\_generation” to the parent node “NLP\_problems.” The term “lexicon” is related by <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Usage</span> to “machine\_translation” and “operational\_foreign\_language.” The <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Conjunction</span> link joins “machine\_translation” and “speech\_recognization” both aim at translating information from one source to the other one. This knowledge graph now enables various property comparisons across 1000 scholarly abstracts (consider the corpus statistics Table 1 generated from the Open Research Knowledge Graph presented in the corpus section).
Conclusions and Recommendations
===============================
We have investigated the scientific relation classification task for improving scholarly knowledge representations in digital libraries. Our surveyed systems offer a comprehensive view of results that are attainable given advanced neural technology when put together in varying combinations, including the ones that produce the state-of-the-art results. We have categorized neural technology in terms of four <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Bert</span>-based embedding models and two classification strategies. Our results indicate that, of the various word embedding models, <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">SciBert</span> is the optimal choice for a corpus of scholarly data. In terms of classification strategies, the single-relation-at-a-time system outperforms the multiple-relations-at-a-time classification system. Nevertheless, the latter is robust over all datasets, even in settings with lean annotated data, in which case it outperforms the former. Our findings are obtained over a broad scenario of model performances for scientific relation classification now available to the stakeholders of the digital libraries.
Future Work
===========
To further facilitate the choice of the proper technique for classifying scientific relations toward the creation of structured, semantic representations over scholarly articles, there are two main avenues that are worthwhile for future exploration. As we have seen in the course of examining our **RQ2**, there exist label biases in the annotated corpora such that some relations are better represented than others (E.g. <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Usage</span>). Toward this end, such data needs to be further curated by experts to enable a well-represented domain. Further, digital libraries deal with various domains in Science in general. While our evaluations have been performed on corpus that covers the Artificial Intelligence research area, there still remains a plenty of potentials to explore other research domains that are unrelated to Computer Science specifically. Finally, we have examined scientific relation classification in terms of seven relations, ontologized models of the scientific world [@fathalla2017towards; @scholarontology] posit a larger set of relations or properties. For this, techniques such as open information extraction or ontology-based extraction are viable alternatives for future developments.
[^1]: <https://www.orkg.org/orkg/c/SldTAX>
[^2]: https://github.com/google-research/bert
[^3]: https://github.com/allenai/scibert
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'Rain streaks will inevitably be captured by some outdoor vision systems, which lowers the image visual quality and also interferes various computer vision applications. We present a novel rain removal method in this paper, which consists of two steps, i.e., detection of rain streaks and reconstruction of the rain-removed image. An accurate detection of rain streaks determines the quality of the overall performance. To this end, we first detect rain streaks according to pixel intensities, motivated by the observation that rain streaks often possess higher intensities compared to other neighboring image structures. Some mis-detected locations are then refined through a morphological processing and the principal component analysis (PCA) such that only locations corresponding to real rain streaks are retained. In the second step, we separate image gradients into a background layer and a rain streak layer, thanks to the image quasi-sparsity prior, so that a rain image can be decomposed into a background layer and a rain layer. We validate the effectiveness of our method through quantitative and qualitative evaluations. We show that our method can remove rain (even for some relatively bright rain) from images robustly and outperforms some state-of-the-art rain removal algorithms.'
author:
- 'Yinglong Wang, , Shuaicheng Liu, , Chen Chen, , Dehua Xie, , and Bing Zeng, [^1] [^2][^3][^4]'
title: 'Rain Removal By Image Quasi-Sparsity Priors'
---
[Shell : Rain Removal By Image Quasi-sparsity Priors]{}
Rain removing, sparsity prior, rain detection, image decomposition, feature description, morphology.
Introduction
============
the development of computer vision techniques, many learning, detection, matching, and tracking algorithms that are based on small features of images have appeared recently. However, many of these algorithms are quite sensitive to weather conditions under which the image is taken. In this work, we consider the image recovering with good visual quality from a single color image that is spotted by rain during the capturing.
Weather conditions can be classified into steady and dynamic according to the constituent particles [@Garg_2004_CVPR]. The former one contains small particles (e.g., fog) and the later one includes large particles (e.g., rain and snow). In the steady condition, small particles cannot be captured by cameras; while in the dynamic condition, droplets of rain and snow can be clearly filmed. He *et al.* proposed a de-haze approach that is based on dark channel priors and has achieved excellent results on various challenging examples [@He_2011_PAMI]. Another fast image dehazing work which based on linear transformation are proposed by Wang *et al.* [@Wang_2017_TMM]. However, in the case of dynamic weather, the existing rain removal methods still need to be improved. The difficulty lies in two aspects: rain droplets appear in an image randomly and large droplets interfere original image contents.
The earliest work on rain dates back to the study of statistical characteristics of rain in the atmospheric science in 1948 [@Marshall_1948_JM]. According to these characteristics, rain appears in a picture looks quite random and is of different shapes, which makes it difficult to detect and remove rain streaks from a single image. Therefore, most works pay attentions to rain removal in videos [@Garg_2004_CVPR; @Zhang_2006_ICME; @Brewer_2008_CS; @Bossu_2011_CV; @Barnum_2007_PACV; @Barnum_2010_CV], where the rain detection is relatively easier. For example, Barnum *et al.* detected and removed rain streaks for videos in the frequency domain [@Barnum_2007_PACV; @Barnum_2010_CV]. To the best of our knowledge, dealing with rain removing in a single image started in 2009 when Roser *et al.* detected rain streaks in single image [@Roser_2009_CV]. Later on, several other rain removal works based on a single image were proposed, e.g., [@Fu_2011_ASSP; @Kang_2012_TIP; @Chen_2014_CSVT; @Xu_2012_CIS; @Kim_2013_ICIP; @Ding_2015_MTA; @Huang_2014_TMM].
This paper aims at removing rain from a single image. Although the detection and removal of rain in a single image is more challenging as compared with videos, there are still some observations that can be utilized for the rain identification. On one hand, rain streaks are more reflective than other parts of images, leading to higher pixel intensities compared with non-rain pixels. On the other hand, rain streaks usually do not occlude objects completely due to their semi-transparency property. The former one can be utilized for the rain detection while the latter one facilitates the reconstruction in the gradient domain after computing image gradients on all non-rain locations.
There are two main challenges: accurate rain streaks identification and high quality rain-removed image recovery. The detection of rain streaks will not be accurate if only pixel intensities are involved, because other objects with similar or even higher pixel intensities would be mis-classified as rain pixels. After the rain pixels are identified, the final result needs to be reconstructed without introducing noticeable artifacts (e.g., blurring of image contents). Methods such as the weighted mean of neighbouring non-rain pixels and image inpanting [@Bertalmio_2000_CGIT] are all possible candidates that have been considered previously.
In this paper, in order to deal with the first challenge, we over-detect rain pixels in single rain image by the method in [@Wang_2016_ICIP] firstly. To improve the accuracy, we further employ a morphological processing technique[@Gonzalez_2002_PUSR] to refine all detected rain pixels. For the second challenge, we decompose the input image into a rain-layer and a non-rain layer in the gradient domain after the rain pixels are identified. We reconstruct the final result by using the non-rain layer under the image quasi-sparsity priors.
The contributions of our work are the following aspects. (1) We propose a quite unique detection method of rain streaks. (2) We simplify the sparsity [@Levin_2007_PAMI] to quasi-sparsity and combine it with the detection of rain to complete rain-removal tasks. After simplifying the sparsity to quasi-sparsity, the loss function is derived into a $L_{1}$-norm minimization problem. (3) An additional constraint is added to solve the color shift problem that often appears in [@Levin_2007_PAMI] successfully. An example of our rain-removed results is shown in Fig. \[fig:rain\_derain\].
The rest of the paper is organized as follows. We briefly review some related works in Section \[sec:RelatedWorks\]. We propose the rain streaks detection algorithm in Section \[sec:RainStreaksDetection\]. The reconstruction of rain-removed images is presented in Section \[sec:ImageReconstruction\]. The results and comparisons are presented and discussed in Section \[sec:ExperimentalResults\]. Finally, some conclusions are drawn in Section \[sec:Conclusion\].
Related Works {#sec:RelatedWorks}
=============
Rain removal can be performed in the spatial domain or the frequency domain, and some are focused on the single-image scenario. A brief review of the existing algorithms is presented in the following.
**Rain removal from videos in the spatial domain:** Garg and Nayar analyzed the visual effect of rain streaks comprehensively [@Garg_2004_CVPR] by developing a correlation model to describe rain’s dynamics and a motion blur model to explain the photometry of rain. Through these two models, rain streaks can be detected efficiently and then removed in videos. To make the study more complete, Garg and Nayar further built a rain appearance model based on a rain oscillation model that was developed in the atmospheric science in [@Garg_2006_TG]. They also developed an image-based rain-rendering algorithm by creating a database to describe different kinds of rain appearances under various lighting and viewing directions. In [@Garg_2007_CV], Garg and Nayar analyzed various factors that influence the visual effect of rain. Based on these analyses, an efficient algorithm was developed to control rain. Besides, by modeling the distortion of raindrop, they accomplished photorealistic rain-rendering.
Another rain removal algorithm that is based on both temporal and chromatic characteristics of rain streaks in video was proposed by Zhang *et al.* [@Zhang_2006_ICME]. This work shows that a certain area is not always infected by rain streaks. On the other hand, when indeed affected by rain, the intensity changes of chromatic components (namely, R, G, B) of a pixel approximately equal to each other. These two properties have been utilized to detect and then remove rain streaks in videos. However, constrained by temporal properties, this method can only deal with the videos that are obtained by using a stationary camera.
In [@Brewer_2008_CS], Brewer and Liu suggested that (1) a region with instantaneous intensity spike be probably affected by rain streaks and (2) streak-like objects in a region with a nearly consistent range of aspect ratios be considered as rain streaks. Once detected, rain streaks can be removed by calculating the mean value of two neighbouring frames. A rain streaks detection method that uses a histogram of orientation of streaks (HOS) was introduced by Bossu *et al.* in [@Bossu_2011_CV]. This method proposes to decompose an image sequence into foreground and background, while potential rain streaks are detected in foreground. Then, HOS is calculated, which follows a model of Gaussian-uniform mixture. Finally, the Gaussian distribution whose amplitude stands for rain presence and the uniform distribution standing for noise are separated by an algorithm of expectation maximization.
**Rain removal from videos in the frequency domain:** In [@Barnum_2007_PACV], Barnum *et al.* combined a physical model of rain streaks (for determining the general shape and brightness of rain) and some statistical properties of rain streaks to show the influence of rain on image sequences in the frequency domain. Once detected, the spectrum of rain streaks can be suppressed to obtain rain-removed image sequences. Later on, they combined a shape model with statistical properties of rain streaks to detect and remove rain streaks, also in the frequency domain, and demonstrated a better accuracy [@Barnum_2010_CV].
(a)
(b)
**Single image rain removal:** Roser *et al.* detected rain streaks in a single image monocularly, based on a photometric raindrop model [@Roser_2009_CV]. Meanwhile, Halimeh *et al.* detected raindrops on car windshield by utilizing a model that describes the shape of raindrop and a relationship between raindrops and the environment [@Halimeh_2009_VS].
For the first time, Fu *et al.* accomplished the rain-removal task for a single image by utilizing morphological component analysis (MCA) [@Fu_2011_ASSP]. Some improved or extended versions have been proposed by Kang *et al.* [@Kang_2012_TIP] ,Chen *et al.* [@Chen_2014_CSVT], Wang *et al.* [@Wang_2016_ICIP] and Wang *et al.* [@Wang_2017_TIP]. In particular, Kang *et al.* used the histogram of oriented gradients (HOG) [@Dalal_2005_CVPR] to separate rain and non-rain dictionary atoms, while Chen *et al.* extended rain removal task to a single color image. The denosing paper [@Huang_2014_TMM] on TMM which treats rain as a kind of noise removes rain streak by a self-learning based image decomposition method. In [@Wang_2016_ICIP; @Wang_2017_TIP], Wang *et al.* developed a rough detection method of rain to remove bright rain streaks.
More recently, Luo *et al.* proposed that a rain image be decomposed into the rain layer and non-rain layer by a highly discriminative code on a learned dictionary that is based on a screen blend model [@Luo_2015_ICCV]. On the other hand, a novel rain removal method based on the guided filter was proposed by Xu *et al.* [@Xu_2012_CIS], in which a rain-free guidance image is constructed and a guided filter [@He_2013_PAMI] is used to remove rain in a single image. In [@Kim_2013_ICIP], Kim *et al.* assumed that rain streaks have an elliptical shape. Then, a kernel regression method [@Takeda_2007_TIP] is used to extract elliptical components in the image to detect rain streaks. Once detected, rain streaks are removed by non-local mean filter [@Buades_2005_CVPR]. In the meantime, Chen *et al.* proposed a low-rank model of rain streaks to capture the spatio-temporally correlated rain streaks [@Chen_2013_ICCV].
Lately, a rain removal method based on the $L_0$ gradient minimization was proposed by Ding *et al.* [@Ding_2015_MTA]. By this method, majority of rain streaks can be restrained, but a lot of image details also vanish with the rain streaks removal. Another novel rain removal method was developed by Li *et al.* [@Li_2016_CVPR], in which some patch-based priors for both the background layer and rain layer are used to accomplish the rain removal task. Because these priors are based on Gaussian mixture models and can accommodate the rain streaks with multiple orientations and scales, this method obtains the state-of-the-art effectiveness.
**Deep learning based methods:** In recent years, deep learning is utilized in many computer vision tasks, including rain removal. In [@Fu_2017_TIP], Fu *et al.* designed a DerainNet to learn the mapping relationship between rain and clean images. They also proposed a deep detail network which can directly reduces the mapping range to simplify the learning process, then remove rain streaks in single color images [@Fu_2017_CVPR]. Yang *et al.* built a new model for rain images and designed a multi-task deep learning architecture to remove rain streaks in single images [@Yang_2017_CVPR]. A DID-MDN net tried to estimate the density of rain first, then remove rain streaks [@Zhang_2018_CVPR].
Rain Streaks Detection {#sec:RainStreaksDetection}
======================
Fig. \[fig:pipeline\] shows the pipeline of our method. Given an input rain image (Fig. \[fig:pipeline\](a)), we first detect the rain locations according to pixel intensities. Since the initial locations (Fig. \[fig:pipeline\](b)) are usually inaccurate, they will be refined using the proposed morphology approach, generating a refined rain location map (Fig. \[fig:pipeline\](d)) as well as a non-rain location map (Fig. \[fig:pipeline\](c)). The final result (Fig. \[fig:pipeline\](e)) is reconstructed from the image gradients on all non-rain locations. Optionally, we can also reconstruct an image that contains rain only (Fig. \[fig:pipeline\](f)).
In this section, we utilize the rain image in Fig. \[fig:pipeline\](a) as an example to present the details of rain streaks detection. Firstly, an initial rain location is obtained by the method in [@Wang_2016_ICIP]. Then, the mis-detections are refined by a morphological processing and the principal component analysis (PCA).
Initial detection of rain streaks
---------------------------------
Rain pixels often possess higher values than their neighbouring non-rain pixels. Therefore, Wang *et al.* [@Wang_2016_ICIP] over-detected rain location by this characteristic.
For each pixel $I(i,j)$ in a given rain image $I$, Wang *et al.* calculate 5 mean values $\bar{I}^{(k)}$ $(k=1,2,3,4,5)$ in the windows $w^{(k)}$ with pixel $I(i,j)$ located in the center, top-left, top-right, bottom-left, and bottom-right of the window, respectively. If the following inequalities $$\label{eq:detect_condition}
I(i, j)>\bar{I}^{(k)}=\frac{\sum_{\{m,n\}\in w^{(k)}}I(m,n)}{|w^{(k)}|}, k\!=\!\{1,2,3,4,5\},$$ where $|w^{(k)}|$ stands for the window size, are satisfied for all color channels, $I(i,j)$ is recognized as a rain pixel and the corresponding term $S_R(i,j)$ in the so-called binary location map $S_R$ is set to be 1; otherwise $S_R(i,j)$ is assigned as 0. Detection result $S_{R}$ is a binary image as shown in Fig. \[fig:initial\_location\].
(a)
An analysis of mis-detections
-----------------------------
It can be seen from Fig. \[fig:initial\_location\] that not only rain streaks but also some non-rain components appear in rain detection result. How to recognize those non-rain components and eliminate their influence is thus very critical - a lot of image details and useful information would otherwise get lost after the removal of rain streaks.
In order to separate rain from non-rain objects, some characteristics of rain can be useful. We describe them as follows:
- rain streaks usually do not have too large size in width,
- the directions of all rain streaks in a scene are nearly consistent,
- the color of a rain streak is usually shallow white, and
- the length of a rain streak is usually larger than its width.
These characteristics are very robust to describe rain, and some of them have been utilized in some existing rain-removal works, such as [@Chen_2014_CSVT], [@Kim_2013_ICIP] and so on. Later on, we will see that when these characteristics are combined with our proposed morphological processing, the error detection will be reduced largely.
Refining of initial locations of rain streaks
---------------------------------------------
**First**, all connected components shown in Fig. \[fig:initial\_location\] are extracted by the morphology method and the details can be referred to [@Gonzalez_2002_PUSR].
(a)
(b)
**Second**, PCA is used to describe the shape of every connected component. In order to describe this step more visually, we select one connected component from Fig. \[fig:initial\_location\] as an example to show the refining process, the selected component is in Fig. \[fig:single\_streak\](a). Because some colors can not be seen clearly on a black background, we have changed the selected streak to black and the background to white in Fig. \[fig:single\_streak\](a).
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
For $p^{th}( p=1, 2, ..., P)$ connected component, we calculate the covariance matrix of location vectors of all pixels in it. Suppose that there are $N$ pixels in $p^{th}$ connected component. Hence, there are $N$ sample vectors of pixel locations so that the mean location vector $\bm{m}_{\bm{z}}$ and covariance matrix $\bm{C}_{\bm{z}}$ can be calculated as $$\label{eq:mean_approximation}
\bm{m}_{\bm{z}} = \frac {1}{N} \sum^{N}_{n=1} \bm{z}_{n}$$ $$\label{eq:covariance_matrix2}
\bm{C}_{\bm{z}} = \frac {1}{N} \sum^{N}_{n=1} \bm{z}_{n}\bm{z}_{n}^{T} - \bm{m}_{\bm{z}}\bm{m}_{\bm{z}}^{T}$$ where $\bm{z}_{n}= [x_{n}, y_{n}]^{T}$, and $x_n$ and $y_n$ are respectively the corresponding coordinates of the $n^{th}$ pixel ($n=1, 2, \cdots, N$).
After the covariance matrix $\bm{C}_{\bm{z}}$ of $p^{th}$ connected component is obtained, we perform the eigenvalue decomposition of $\bm{C}_{\bm{z}}$ and obtain the eigenvalues $\lambda_{1}$, $\lambda_{2}$ and their corresponding eigenvector $\bm{e}_{1}$, $\bm{e}_{2}$ ($\lambda_{1}$ is the larger eigenvalue). The description of PCA to the shape of connected components are shown in Fig. \[fig:single\_streak\](a). The red arrows stand for two eigenvectors, while two yellow arrows denote the coordinate axes. Here, $\theta$ is the angle between $x$-axis and eigenvector $\bm{e}_{1}$ and it can be calculated as $\theta=\arctan(\frac {\bm{e}_{1}(2)}{\bm{e}_{1}(1)})$. Notice that in order to avoid the red direction arrow from occluding the connected component, the origin of the coordinate system is not placed on the connected component.
From Fig. \[fig:single\_streak\](a), we learn that $\bm{e}_{1}$ (corresponding to the larger eigenvalue $\lambda_{1}$) points to the direction where the location variance has the maximum value; whereas $\bm{e}_{2}$ (corresponding to the smaller eigenvalue $\lambda_{2}$) is perpendicular to the maximum variance direction.
Accordingly, we define the length of a connected component as $$\label{eq:length}
L=c\lambda_{1}$$ and its width as $$\label{eq:width}
W=c\lambda_{2}$$ where $c$ is a proportional parameter. We assume that $c$ is a constant in an image. The specific value of $c$ is not important, because it does not affect the ratio of the length and width of a connected component. The more important quantity is the direction angle of a connected components, which is denoted as $\theta$ in Fig. \[fig:single\_streak\](a), but is now re-defined as $$\label{eq:angle}
D=\theta$$ and name $D$ as the direction of a connected component.
In our experiment, the values $\lambda_{1}$, $\lambda_{2}$, $\bm{e}_{1}$, $\bm{e}_{2}$ and $D$ of all $p^{th}(p=1, 2, ..., P)$ connected components are calculated, $P$ is the number of connected components. As an example, these values of the given connected components in Fig. \[fig:single\_streak\](a) are $\lambda_{1}=172.8949$, $\lambda_{2}=0.5852$, $\bm{e}_{1}=(0.9309, 0.3653)^{T}$, $\bm{e}_{2}=(-0.3653, 0.9309)^{T}$ and $D=21.4286^{\circ}$ respectively.
**Third**, after obtaining the quantified characteristics of all connected components, we recognise non-rain connected components as follows.
- As we said above, rain streaks usually do not have large width as compared to some non-rain objects. Hence, the $K$-means is used here to classify the connected components by their width $W$. The connected components with larger width are mis-detected non-rain components and we set their corresponding values in location map $S_{R}$ as $0$. The refined result in this way is shown in Fig. \[fig:single\_streak\](b).
There are not so many wide non-rain objects in this given image, hence the refinement by width is not too apparent. We can see that some non-rain components at right bottom corner disappear in Fig. \[fig:single\_streak\](b). This is because when textures of an image are complex, some non-rain streaks combine together and form a larger connected component so that the width becomes large.
- An apparent characteristic of rain streaks is that they follow nearly the same falling direction and the angle will not be too large generally. If we use the direction angle $D$ of connected component defined in Equation (\[eq:angle\]) to describe this characteristic, $\vert D \vert$ of rain components must be less than a threshold $T1$ ($\vert D \vert$ is the absolute value of $D$). Hence, by the threshold $T1$, we can recognize the mis-detected non-rain connected components in Fig. \[fig:single\_streak\] (b). Then the non-rain connected components are set to be 0, and the refined result is shown in Fig. \[fig:revision\](a).
- After refining by the width and direction constraints, majority of non-rain components are recognized. However, some non-rain components that are similar in shape to the rain streaks still remain. Rain streaks usually possess neutral color. According to this feature, Chen *et al.* [@Chen_2014_CSVT] proposed to identify rain dictionary atoms by the eigen color feature [@Tsai_2008_IET_CV]. In our work, we utilize the color characteristics of rain to revise the mis-detected non-rain connected components.
For $p^{th}$ connected component in Fig. \[fig:revision\](a), we calculate the mean color vector of all pixels in it, and denote as $[\bar{R}, \bar{G}, \bar{B}]$. Then we transform this 3-D RGB color vector into a 2-D vector as follows:
$$\label{eq:color_transform}
\begin{split}
u & =\frac{2\Phi-\bar{G}-\bar{B}} {\Phi} \\
v & =max \left \{
\frac{\Phi-\bar{G}}{\Phi}, \frac{\Phi-\bar{B}}{\Phi}
\right \}
\end{split}$$
where $\Phi=\frac{1}{3}(\bar{R}+\bar{G}+\bar{B})$. It is clear from (\[eq:color\_transform\]) that, after the transform any connected components having neutral color will be clustered around $(0, 0)$ in the $u$-$v$ space. Hence, we calculate the magnitude of this 2-D vector $(u, v)$ (i.e.,the Euclidean distance to the origin of the $u$-$v$ space), if the magnitude is larger than a pre-set value $T2$, the $p^{th}$ connected component is recognized as a mis-detected non-rain connected component. For all remaining connected components in Fig. \[fig:revision\](a), we repeat this process and revise the mis-detected non-rain connected components. The refined result is shown in Fig. \[fig:revision\](b).
- According to [@Kim_2013_ICIP], a rain streak has a larger size in length than in width. Hence, we classify the connected components whose aspect ratio are less than $\mu$ as non-rain components. By excluding the connected components that have small aspect ratios, the refined result is shown in Fig. \[fig:revision\](c).
- Finally, in order to avoid some slim rain edges from remaining in our final rain-removed result, we dilate the connected components in Fig. \[fig:revision\](c) by a $3\times 3$ ’disk’ mask, to obtain the final result for rain streaks detection, as shown in Fig. \[fig:revision\](d).
Our rain detection is a stepwise revision method. By utilizing morphology and PCA, we quantify the rain’s characteristics and detect rain streaks relatively accurately.
Image Reconstruction {#sec:ImageReconstruction}
====================
In this section, we try to verify the sparsity of natural rain images and utilize one Laplacian distribution to approximate the sparsity prior of natural rain image, we name the approximate prior as *quasi-sparsity prior*. Then, based on the quasi-sparsity and several constraints, the rain-removed result is obtained by separating a rain image into rain layer and background layer.
Quasi-sparsity of rain images
-----------------------------
In [@Levin_2007_PAMI], Levin and Weiss tried to separate the background and reflection from an image by sparsity prior of natural images. We also utilize image sparsity in our rain removal task. The sparsity of an image mentioned in [@Levin_2007_PAMI] can be depicted as: when a derivative filter is applied on an image, the logarithm of the histogram of the obtained gradient image reaches peak value at zero and falls off much faster than a Gaussian. Levin *et al.* demonstrated that sparse distributions will lead to a better image decomposition [@Levin_2002_NIPS]. Hence, the sparsity of a natural image is crucial to its decomposition into several layers.
(a)
(b)
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
Fig. \[fig:sparsity\](a) illustrates the logarithm probabilities of several distributions. Laplacian distribution exactly results in a straight line and connects the maximum and minimum values. We can see that Gaussian distribution falls off the slowest and is above the straight line so that it is viewed as non-sparse. The other two distributions below the straight line are classified as sparse according to [@Levin_2007_PAMI]. Laplacian distribution is on the border of sparsity and non-sparsity.
In order to verify the sparsity of rain images, we conduct an experiment on nearly 200 rain images and part of these images are also used in the experiment section. Here, we use the image in Fig. \[fig:results\](a) as an example to illustrate the sparsity of rain images. Fig. \[fig:sparsity\](b) shows the logarithm curve (the blue curve) of histogram after applying an horizontal derivative filter on it. Obviously, the result reveals that the rain image satisfies the sparsity requirement.
However, decomposing a rain image $I$ into the rain layer $I_{R}$ and background layer $I_{NR}$ as $$\label{eq:image_decomposition}
I=I_{R}+I_{NR}$$ is a massively ill-posed problem. To simplify this kind of problem, Levin *et al.* proposed that users can label some edges or areas that belong to $I_{R}$ and some other edge or areas that belong to $I_{NR}$ to increase the constraint for this kind of problem [@Levin_2007_PAMI].
Sparsity ensures that an edge of unit contrast will not be split, and will appear in one layer [@Levin_2007_PAMI]. In our task, we have detected nearly all rain locations and the remaining region is labelled as the non-rain area. Our detection offers better constraints to this ill-posed problem than the manually-labeled operation in [@Levin_2007_PAMI], and also realize the role of sparsity in certain degree. Unlike in [@Levin_2007_PAMI], we relax the probability constraint and utilize single Laplacian function to approximate the sparsity of rain images and named as *quasi-sparse distribution*: $$\label{eq:histogram_approximation}
P(x)=e^{- \vert x \vert}$$ Hence, the quasi-sparsity prior over the whole image $I$ is as follows: $$\label{eq:laplacian_approximation}
P(I)=\prod_{i, k}e^{- \vert \omega_{i, k} \cdot I \vert}$$ where $\omega_{i,k}$ is the $k^{th}$ filter which centered at $i^{th}$ pixel. The filters with two orientations (horizontal and vertical) and two degrees (the first derivative and the second derivative) are used here.
Optimization
------------
For an given rain image $I$, $S_{R}$ is the detected rain location, and the non-rain location can be obtained by $S_{NR}=1-S_{R}$. The following constraints are satisfied to separate an rain image into rain layer $I_{R}$ and background (non-rain) layer $I_{NR}$:
1. $I=I_{R}+I_{NR}$;
2. the gradients of $I_{R}$ and $I_{NR}$ at their corresponding locations in $S_{R}$ and $S_{NR}$ respectively agree with the gradient of image $I$;
3. the values of $I_{NR}$ at location $S_{NR}$ are close to the value of $I$.
The first two constraints are also utilized in [@Levin_2007_PAMI]. As shown later, this will lead some non-normal separation for some specific images. To improve the separation, we add the third constraint and it plays a role as boundary condition.
As the work in [@Weiss_2001_ICCV], we assume that derivative filters are independent over space and orientation; rain layer $I_{R}$ and background layer $I_{NR}$ are independent. Then the quasi-sparsity prior can be written as follows according to the first constraint: $$\label{eq:prior_define}
P(I)=P(I_{R})P(I_{NR})=\prod_{i, k}e^{- ( \vert \omega_{i, k} \cdot I_{R} \vert + \vert \omega_{i, k} \cdot I_{NR} \vert)}$$ We would like to obtain $I_{R}$ and $I_{NR}$ which maximize the above likelihood function. It is equal to minimize the following loss function: $$\label{eq:loss_function}
J(I_{R}, I_{NR})=\sum_{i, k} \vert \omega_{i, k} \cdot I_{R} \vert + \vert \omega_{i, k} \cdot I_{NR} \vert$$ Combined with the second and third constraints, we rewrite Equation (\[eq:loss\_function\]) as $$\label{eq:loss_function1}
\begin{split}
&J_{1}(I_{R})=\sum_{i, k} \vert \omega_{i, k} \cdot I_{R} \vert + \vert \omega_{i, k} \cdot (I-I_{R}) \vert \\
& \qquad \quad + \lambda \sum_{i \in S_{R}, k} \vert \omega_{i,k} \cdot I_{R} - \omega_{i, k} \cdot I \vert \\
& \qquad \quad +\lambda \sum_{i \in S_{NR}, k} \vert \omega_{i, k} \cdot I_{R} \vert \\
& \qquad \quad +\eta \sum_{i \in S_{NR}} \vert I_{R} \vert
\end{split}$$ where $\lambda$ and $\eta$ are regularization parameters.
If $v$ is defined as the vectorized version of image $I_{R}$, Equation (\[eq:loss\_function1\]) becomes $$\label{eq:loss_function2}
J_{2}(v)= \Vert Av-b \Vert_{1}$$ where $\Vert \cdot \Vert_{1}$ is the $L_{1}$ norm, $A$ is relative to the derivative filters, $\lambda$ and $\eta$, and $b$ is relative to the image derivative, the values of $I$ at location $S_{NR}$, zero and $\lambda$, $\eta$.
This is a $L_{1}$-norm optimization problem, and it can be solved by iterative reweighted least squares (IRLS) [@Burrus_2009_CPAM]. We summarize the process in Algorithm \[alg:whole\_algorithm\]. Once $v$ is obtained, we resize it back to the rain-layer image $I_{R}$. Then, the rain-removed image $I_{NR}$ can be obtained as $$\label{eq:rain_remove}
I_{NR}=I-I_{R}$$ One example of the rain layer and rain-removed image is shown in Fig. \[fig:results\](a) and (b), respectively. In Fig. \[fig:results\](c)(d), we show the constructed rain layer and the non-rain location $S_{NR}$.
As mentioned above, the third constraint plays an important role in the correct separation of rain images. Here, we show an example in Fig. \[fig:correct\_separate\] to suggest the role of this constraint. In Fig. \[fig:correct\_separate\](b)(c), we can see that serious color shift (means that the colors of non-rain details in (b) are abnormal) will appear without the third constraint. The reason is that some colors go to the rain layer (c) in under-determined conditions. By adding the third constraint, the separation quality can be improved and we can obtain a natural rain-removed image.
$A$, $b$, $Iter$
$v=[ A^{T}A ]^{-1}Ab$ $e=abs(Av-b)$ $z(i) = e(i)^{-0.5}, i=1, 2, ...$ $\Omega = diag(z)$ $v =[ A^{T}\Omega^{T}\Omega A ]^{-1}A^{T}\Omega^{T}\Omega b$
$v$
Experimental Results {#sec:ExperimentalResults}
====================
\[t\]
--------- ------------------ ------------------- ------------------ ----------------- ----------------- -------------------- --------
Method [@Ding_2015_MTA] [@Chen_2014_CSVT] [@Luo_2015_ICCV] [@Li_2016_CVPR] [@Fu_2017_CVPR] [@Zhang_2018_CVPR] Ours
Time(s) 1.25s 97.15s 69.69s 1260.40s 5.30s 0.20s 28.01s
--------- ------------------ ------------------- ------------------ ----------------- ----------------- -------------------- --------
\[tab:time\]
\[t\]
[l|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c]{} & Image 1 & Image 2 & Image 3 & Image 4 & Image 5 & Image 6 & Image 7 & Image 8 & Image 9 & Image 10 & Image 11\
[@Ding_2015_MTA] &
-------
34.65
0.867
-------
&
-------
33.70
0.889
-------
&
-------
33.89
0.802
-------
&
-------
34.17
0.805
-------
&
-------
35.16
0.861
-------
&
-------
35.93
0.835
-------
&
-------
41.29
0.796
-------
&
-------
31.77
0.811
-------
&
-------
32.50
0.874
-------
&
-------
34.58
0.907
-------
&
-------
33.22
0.832
-------
\
[@Chen_2014_CSVT] &
-------
34.31
0.803
-------
&
-------
32.36
0.759
-------
&
-------
34.92
0.750
-------
&
-------
34.68
0.738
-------
&
-------
34.95
0.774
-------
&
-------
32.55
0.824
-------
&
-------
38.58
0.775
-------
&
-------
31.84
0.602
-------
&
-------
32.11
0.704
-------
&
-------
34.59
0.854
-------
&
-------
34.15
0.784
-------
\
[@Luo_2015_ICCV] &
-------
32.69
0.767
-------
&
-------
30.23
0.703
-------
&
-------
31.53
0.748
-------
&
-------
32.43
0.820
-------
&
-------
33.73
0.888
-------
&
-------
29.45
0.841
-------
&
-------
35.95
0.784
-------
&
-------
29.45
0.790
-------
&
-------
30.43
0.879
-------
&
-------
31.63
0.864
-------
&
-------
32.99
0.843
-------
\
[@Li_2016_CVPR] &
-------
31.55
0.701
-------
&
-------
30.45
0.686
-------
&
-------
31.23
0.789
-------
&
-------
32.27
0.691
-------
&
-------
33.34
0.748
-------
&
-------
31.13
0.754
-------
&
-------
36.39
0.681
-------
&
-------
29.54
0.570
-------
&
-------
30.32
0.686
-------
&
-------
32.35
0.786
-------
&
-------
32.42
0.749
-------
\
Ours &
-----------
**35.46**
**0.886**
-----------
&
-----------
**35.30**
**0.901**
-----------
&
-----------
**35.04**
**0.827**
-----------
&
-----------
**34.86**
**0.832**
-----------
&
-----------
**35.38**
**0.897**
-----------
&
-----------
**36.03**
**0.842**
-----------
&
-----------
**41.31**
**0.846**
-----------
&
-----------
**31.94**
**0.854**
-----------
&
-----------
**33.42**
**0.883**
-----------
&
-----------
**34.91**
**0.916**
-----------
&
-----------
**34.53**
**0.866**
-----------
\
\[tab:psnrssim\]
\
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)
(g)
(h)
(i)
(a)
(b)
In order to verify the effectiveness of our method, several state-of-the-art traditional and deep learning based rain removal works are selected for comparisons. The method by Ding *et al.* [@Ding_2015_MTA] removes rain streaks in a single image by developing an $L_0$ smoothing filter that is derived from the guided filter by He *et al.* [@He_2013_PAMI]. This work produces excellent rain removal results for some kinds of images and keeps good visual quality. Meanwhile, several rain removal works that are based on dictionary learning have appeared in recent years [@Fu_2011_ASSP; @Kang_2012_TIP; @Chen_2014_CSVT]. Among them, the work by Chen *et al.* [@Chen_2014_CSVT] produces the best rain removal effect. In addition, two most recent works, by Luo *et al.* [@Luo_2015_ICCV] and Li *et al.* [@Li_2016_CVPR], respectively, are also selected in our comparisons. For deep learning based rain-removed methods, we select the most recent two works [@Fu_2017_CVPR] and [@Zhang_2018_CVPR]. Compared with other deep learning based works, these two works are more robust and can obtain better rain-removed visual quality.
We implement our rain removal algorithm using MATLAB on an Intel (R) Xeon (R) CPU E5-2643 v2 @ 3.5 GHz 3.5 GHz (2 processors) with 64G RAM. Some parameters used in our work are: the size of the window in Equation (\[eq:detect\_condition\]) is $7 \times 7$; the iteration time of $K$-means in Section \[sec:RainStreaksDetection\] is 100; the thresholds $T1$, $T2$ and $\mu$ are 10, 0.08, 2 respectively; regularization parameter $\lambda$ and $\eta$ in loss function (\[eq:loss\_function1\]) is $0.25$ and $0.1$, and the iteration time in IRLS is $3$. The parameters here are robust in our experiments. While for the parameter $T1$, it can be slightly changed for different images. Because, rain’s direction is downward and its value $D$ is close to $0$ in most image, we set the threshold $T1$ as $10$ in our paper. Rain’s direction $D$ can be approximately evaluated by user easily. For some rain which has large falling direction (e.g. the sixth row in Fig. \[fig:result\_compare\]), the threshold $T1$ can be changed to a larger value.
We first test the run-time consumed by the selected methods on images with size $256 \times 256$. Our method takes $28.01$ seconds. Specifically, the initial detection of rain streaks takes $5.30$ seconds; the rain streaks refining by morphology needs $2.19$ seconds; and the majority of time is spent on rain and non-rain layer separation by using quasi-sparsity prior, which is $20.02$ seconds. Upon the same image, the time consumed by other selected methods are listed in Table \[tab:time\]. By comparison, our algorithm is the fourth fastest one in selected methods.
Because the task in this work is to remove rain streaks in single images, we need to evaluate the effectiveness of our algorithm subjectively and objectively. For the purpose of objective evaluations, we synthesize rain images from clean images. Two such ground-truth images and synthesized rain images are shown in Fig. \[fig:result\_render\_compare\](a) and (b), respectively, and the other columns are the corresponding rain-removed results by different state-of-the-art algorithms and our method.
We also collect many real rain images and present the corresponding rain removal results as shown in Figs. \[fig:result\_compare\] and \[fig:result\_compare1\] for subjective assessments.
\[t\]
------------ ------------------ ------------------- ------------------ ----------------- ----------------- -------------------- --------
Method [@Ding_2015_MTA] [@Chen_2014_CSVT] [@Luo_2015_ICCV] [@Li_2016_CVPR] [@Fu_2017_CVPR] [@Zhang_2018_CVPR] Ours
Percentage 5.50% 1.25% 2.50% 3.75% 21.00% 9.50% 56.50%
------------ ------------------ ------------------- ------------------ ----------------- ----------------- -------------------- --------
\[tab:statistics\]
Objective assessment
--------------------
In order to evaluate the performances of different methods more completely and accurately, we synthesize rain images by the method in [@Luo_2015_ICCV] and implement different rain removal algorithms on these synthesized images. Then, we calculate the PSNR and SSIM [@Wang_2004_TIP] values between the rain-removed images and the ground-truth images.
Fig. \[fig:result\_render\_compare\] shows two examples where each row presents a ground-truth image, the rain image (obtained by synthesis), and the rain-removed results by different methods. Note that we show the corresponding PSNR/SSIM values at the top-left corner of each rain-removed image. The PSNR/SSIM values of more examples by selected traditional methods are shown in Table \[tab:psnrssim\]. The comparisons of PSNR/SSIM with deep learning methods are shown in Fig. \[fig:PSNR\_SSIM\].
According to the PSNR/SSIM values, the method by Ding *et al.* [@Ding_2015_MTA] produces very good results compared with the other traditional methods. Because of the use of an $L_0$ threshold, objects with large structures in the image will usually be preserved well, thus leading to higher SSIM values. In the meantime, rain streaks below the $L_0$ threshold will be removed, leading to higher PSNR values.
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)
(g)
(h)
The method by Chen *et al.* [@Chen_2014_CSVT] can remove the rain steaks that possess lower pixel intensities but the rain streaks with higher intensities will remain (the reason will be described latter). Furthermore, because the HOG descriptor used in this method can not identify rain streaks from tenuous details well, it would lose many details (the second image in Fig. \[fig:result\_render\_compare\]). For the above two reasons, the PSNR/SSIM values are relatively lower than the method by Ding *et al.*
The work by Luo *et al.* [@Luo_2015_ICCV] can not remove rain streaks well. It makes rain streaks more tenuous in size and weaker in intensity. We show the results of Li *et al.* [@Li_2016_CVPR] in the sixth column of Fig. \[fig:result\_render\_compare\]. This method removes rain streaks quite well. However, a lot of image details have also been removed at the same time. It can be seen from Table \[tab:psnrssim\] that these two methods produce lower PSNR and SSIM values.
Finally, it is seen from Table \[tab:psnrssim\] that our proposed method produces the best PSNR/SSIM results consistently for all 11 test images compared with the selected traditional methods. For some test images (5 out of 11), the PSNR value of our method is about 1 dB higher than the second best method (i.e., Ding’s method).
We can see from Fig. \[fig:PSNR\_SSIM\] that our method produces comparable PSNR/SSIM values compared with the state-of-the-art deep learning methods. Only for the two rendering rain images shown in Fig. \[fig:result\_render\_compare\], the work by Fu *et al.* [@Fu_2017_CVPR] removes nearly all rain streaks and keeps image details relatively well. But its PSNR/SSIM values are slightly low compared with ours. The reason is that our method only remove rain streaks on the detected rain pixels and the non-rain pixels nearly unchanged. Though a few of light rain streaks remain in our results in these selected two images, our method keeps good image details in majority part of images. The work by Zhang *et al.* removes rain streaks well, but the image details loss seriously. That is why this method has high PSNR values, while the SSIM values are low. Besides, these two methods also can not remove all rain streaks in some rendering rain images, but our method can achieve good results, especially, for practical images which will be shown later. As we know, deep learning methods are very good at dealing with rendering rain images, because they are trained from them. Real-world images are real challenging for them.
User study
----------
To conduct a visual (subjective) evaluation on the performances of selected methods, we invited 20 viewers (14 males and 6 females, they all are undergraduate, master or Ph.D students in computer vision field) to evaluate the visual quality of different methods in terms of the following three aspects:
- less rain residual,
- the maintenance of the image details, and
- overall perception.
In the evaluation, $20$ groups of results are selected and every group involves the results by Ding *et al.*, Chen *et al.*, Luo *et al.*, Li *et al.*, Fu *et al.*, Zhang *et al.* and our method. To ensure fairness, the results in each group are arranged randomly. For each group, the viewers are asked to select only one result which they like most by considering the three criterions together.
The evaluation result is shown in Table \[tab:statistics\]. It is clear that our rain removal results are favored by a majority of viewers (56.50%).
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)
(g)
(h)
Results analysis
----------------
In this subsection, we try to analyze the rain removal effectiveness of different methods. The advantages or disadvantages of different methods are discussed according to the rain-removed results that is obtained by applying the selected methods on practical rain images. Notice that some images employed in these experiments have a large size so that the rain streaks look tenuous.
**Method by Ding *et al.*:** The first row of Fig. \[fig:result\_compare\] shows a rain image with slight rain streaks. The result by Ding *et al.*, as shown in the second column, seems to have removed the rain streaks quite well at the first glance. However, when the picture is zoomed in, it is found that a lot of non-rain details are lost. To verify this point more clearly, a small part of the rain picture and its corresponding rain-removed results by the selected methods are shown in the second row of Fig. \[fig:result\_compare\]. Now, it becomes obvious that some details of tree leaves have been removed together with the rain streaks. This is due to the threshold of the $L_0$ filters used in [@Ding_2015_MTA]: some non-rain objects whose size is relatively small would be mistreated as rain streaks and get removed.
The third row is still a slight rain image, but the rain streaks are denser. When zoomed in, the details-losing becomes more apparent. For heavy rain streaks in images shown in the sixth, seventh, eighth rows of Fig. \[fig:result\_compare\], they can not be removed by the method of Ding *et al.*. This is because the size of rain streaks in these images is beyond the preset threshold of $L_0$ filters. If we set the threshold larger, the rain streaks with wide size will be removed. However more details in the images will also be removed at the same time. For the light rain images which have less tenuous details (the third, forth and sixth rows in Fig. \[fig:result\_compare1\]), this method has satisfactory rain removal effectiveness.
**Method by Chen *et al.*:** The results by Chen *et al.* are shown in the third column. For the light rain images that have less subtle details (such as the image in the fifth row of Fig. \[fig:result\_compare\], the third, forth and sixth rows in Fig. \[fig:result\_compare1\]), this method can obtain good rain removal results. However, if the rain images possess subtle details (such as the first, third and forth rows of Fig. \[fig:result\_compare\]), the detail-losing and image-blurring are inevitable. The reason is that the HOG descriptor used here cannot separate rain streaks and subtle details well. The lost details can be seen clearly in third image of the second row of Fig. \[fig:result\_compare\], which is obtained by zooming in a part of the image in the first row. Moreover, low-pass filter cannot filter bright rain streaks completely. Consequently, the method by Chen *et al.* can not deal with heavy rain images (such as the images in the sixth and seventh rows of Fig. \[fig:result\_compare\]).
**Method by Luo *et al.*:** The results by Luo *et al.* are in the forth column of Fig. \[fig:result\_compare\] and \[fig:result\_compare1\]. Obviously, this method can not remove rain streaks well. This is due to the discrimination of the sparse code used in this work, which is not good to separate a rain image into the rain layer and non-rain layer. However, this method can make the intensity of rain streaks a little weaker. Hence, for tenuous rain streaks considered in their work, their method seems to have removed rain well. When rain steaks become brighter or wider, they can not be removed well.
**Method by Li *et al.*:** Li *et al.* used priors for both background and rain layer (which are based on Gaussian mixture models) to remove rain streaks. We show the results by this method in the fifth column. For the images that have little subtle details (the fifth, seventh, ninth, and tenth image in Fig. \[fig:result\_compare\], as well as the third, forth, and sixth images in Fig. \[fig:result\_compare1\]), this method can obtain good rain-removal effectiveness. However, for rain images that have subtle details (e.g., the first, third and forth of Fig. \[fig:result\_compare\]), many subtle details are lost. This point can be seen clearly in the fifth image of the second row of Fig. \[fig:result\_compare\]. As mentioned above, this image is part of the image in the first row that is zoomed in to see the details more clearly.
**Method by Fu *et al.*:** For the majority of selected practical images, this work can achieve good results. But there are still some defects. The first apparent one is that this method can cause slight blur for some rainy images, such as the second and eighth images in Fig. \[fig:result\_compare\]. That is also the reason that this method has lower PNSR/SSIM values than ours for the images in Fig. \[fig:result\_render\_compare\]. The second is the generalization. This method can not handle some rain images. For example, the seventh and eighth images in Fig. \[fig:result\_compare\], the rain streaks are left in the results.
**Method by Zhang *et al.*:** The work by Zhang *et al.* is the most recent work published on CVPR. We can see that this method faces the similar problems as the work by Fu *et al.* [@Fu_2017_CVPR]. The details lose seriously for some practical images, especially, the images with slim details (the last one in Fig. \[fig:result\_compare\] and \[fig:result\_compare1\] separately, you can enlarge the images in this paper to see clear). This method also can not deal with some rainy images, and some apparent rain streaks are left in some rain-removed results.
**Our work:** The results by our proposed method are shown in the eighth column. Compared with other traditional rain removal works, our proposed approach achieves better rain removal results. When compared with deep learning based works, our method produces comparable results for majority of rain images. But for some other rain images, the selected deep learning based methods can not handle well and better rain-removed result are obtained by our method. Because our method acquires relatively more accurate locations, the remaining image details can be preserved well. Besides, the image quasi-sparsity prior offers a robust tool to the image recovery. Hence, better PSNR/SSIM values and good visual quality have been achieved in our proposed method.
Limitations
-----------
By experiments, our method can deal with majority of rain images. However, every algorithm has its drawbacks, so does our method. For some images with non-rain objects that are very similar to the shape and color of rain streaks, some mis-detections are inevitable. This will result in the loss of some useful information. Besides, when the rain is very heavy, the rain streak will be combined to produce fog. A shallow thought for this situation is that we can remove the rain streaks by our method first, and a dehaze method can be used to remove haze which is caused by heavy rain. We note that this situation has been discussed in a very recent work in [@Li_2016_CVPR]. We will continue to work on this situation in our future work. Another future work is to further improve the rain detection.
Conclusions {#sec:Conclusion}
===========
In this paper, we have proposed a new rain streaks detection and removal method from a single color image. Our results suggest that using a morphological image processing to extract connected components and quantifying the characteristics of extracted connected components by the principal component analysis (PCA) are effective in detecting rain streaks. Once rain streaks are detected, we employ an image sparsity prior to accurately decompose a rain image into the rain layer and non-rain layer, which has also been proven to be effective. In addition, quantitative (objective) evaluations and an user study (subjective) validate the overall rain removal effectiveness of our method, which outperforms four selected traditional methods and is comparable to the most recent deep learning based works that are all proposed very recently and widely regarded as the state-of-the-art.
[100]{}
K. Garg and S. K. Nayar, “Detection and removal of rain from videos,” *IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition* (CVPR 2004), pp. 528-535, Washington DC, USA, Jun. 27-Jul. 2, 2004.
K. He, J. Sun and X. Tang, “Single image haze removal using dark channel prior,” *IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence*, vol. 33, no. 12, pp. 2341-2353, Dec. 2011.
W. Wang, Y. Yuan, X. Wu and Y. Liu, “Fast image dehazing method based on linear transformation,” *IEEE Transactions on Multimedia*, vol. 19, no. 6, pp. 1142-1155, 2017.
J. S. Marshall and W. Mc K.Palmer, “The distribution of raindrops with size,” *Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences*, vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 165-166, 1948.
X. Zhang, H. Li, Y. Qi, W. K. Leow, and T. K. Ng, “Rain removal in video by combining temporal and chromatic properties,” *IEEE International Conference on Multimedia and Expo* (ICME 2006), pp. 461-464, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, July 9-12, 2006.
N. Brewer and N. Liu, “Using the shape characteristics of rain to identify and remove rain from video,” *Joint IAPR International Workshop on Structural, Syntactic, and Statistical Pattern Recognition*, vol. 5342, pp. 451-458, Olando, USA, Dec. 2008.
J. Bossu, N. Hautiere, and J. P. Tarel, “Rain or snow detection in image sequences through use of a histogram of orientation of streaks,” *International Journal of Computer Vision*, vol. 93, no. 3, pp. 348-367, July 2011.
P. Barnum, T. Kanade, and S. Narasimhan, “Spatio-temporal frequency analysis for removing rain and snow from videos,” *International Workshop on Photometric Analysis For Computer Vision* (PACV 2007), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, Oct. 2007.
P. C. Barnum, S. Narasimhan, and T. Kanade, “Analysis of rain and snow in frequency space,” *International Journal of Computer Vision*, vol. 86, no. 2, pp. 256-274, 2010.
M. Roser and A. Geiger, “Video-based raindrop detection for improved image registration,” *IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision Workshops* (ICCV Workshops 2009), pp. 570-577, Kyoto, Japan, Sep. 29-Oct. 2, 2009.
Y. H. Fu, L. W. Kang, C. W. Lin, and C. T. Hsu, “Single-frame-based rain removal via image decomposition,” *IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing* (ICASSP 2011), pp. 1453-1456, Prague, Czech Republic, May 22-27, 2011.
L. W. Kang, C. W. Lin, and Y. H. Fu, “Automatic single-image-based rain streaks removal via image decomposition,” *IEEE Transactions on Image Processing*, vol. 21, no. 4, pp. 1742-1755, April 2012.
D. Y. Chen, C. C. Chen, and L. W. Kang, “Visual depth guided color image rain streaks removal using sparse coding,” *IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Video Technology*, vol. 24, no. 8, pp. 1430-1455, Aug. 2014.
J. Xu, W. Zhao, P. Liu, and X. Tang, “An improved guidance image based method to remove rain and snow in a single image,” *Computer and Information Science*, vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 49-55, May 2012.
J. H. Kim, C. Lee, J. Y. Sim, and C. S. Kim, “Single-image deraining using an adaptive nonlocal means filter,” *IEEE International Conference on Image Processing* (ICIP 2013), Melbourne, Australia, Sep. 15-18, 2013.
X. H. Ding, L. Q. Chen, X. H. Zheng, Y. Huang, and D. L. Zeng, “Single image rain and snow removal via guided l0 smoothing filter,” *Multimedia Tools and Applications*, vol. 24, no. 8, pp. 1-16, 2015.
D. Huang, L. Kang, Y. Wang and C. Lin, “Self-learning based image decomposition with applications to single image denoising,” *IEEE Transactions on Multimedia*, vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 83-93, 2014.
Y. L. Chen and C. T. Hsu, “A generalized low-rank appearance model for spatio-temporally correlated rain streaks,” *IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision* (ICCV 2013), pp. 1968-1975, Sydney, Australia, Dec. 1-8, 2013.
Y. L. Wang, C. Chen, S. Y. Zhu, and B. Zeng, “A framework of single-image deraining method based on analysis of rain characteristics,” *IEEE International Conference on Image Processing* (ICIP 2016), pp. 4087 – 4091, Phoenix, USA, Sep. 2016.
Y. L. Wang, S. C. Liu, C. Chen, and B. Zeng, “A hierarchical approach for rain or snow removing in a single color image,” *IEEE Transactions on Image Processing*, vol. 26, no. 8, pp. 3936-3950, May 2017.
X. Fu, J. Huang, X. Ding, Y. Liao and J. Paisley, “Clearing the skies: a deep network architecture for single-image rain removal ,” *IEEE Transactions on Image Processing*, vol. 26, no. 6, pp. 2944-2956, June 2017.
X. Fu, J Huang, D. Zeng, Y. Huang, X. Ding and J. Paisley, “Removing rain from single images via a deep detail network,” *IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition* (CVPR-2017), pp. 1715-1723, Honolulu, HI, USA, July 21-26, 2017.
W. Yang, R Tan, J. Feng, J. Liu, Z. Guo and S. Yan, “Deep joint rain detection and removal from a single image,” *IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition* (CVPR-2017), pp. 1685-1694, Honolulu, HI, USA, July 21-26, 2017.
H. Zhang and V. Patel,, “Density-aware Single Image De-raining using a Multi-stream Dense Network,” *IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition* (CVPR-2018), 2018.
M. Bertalmio, G. Sapiro, V. Caselles, and C. Ballester “Image inpainting,” *The 27th ACM Internationl Conference on Computer Graphics and Interactive Techniques*, pp. 417-424, New Orleans, USA, Jul. 23-28, 2000.
R. C. Gonzalez and R. E. Woods, *Digital Image Processing*, Third Edition, Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey, 2008.
A. Levin and Y. Weiss, “User assisted separation of reflections from a single image using a sparsity prior,” *IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence*, vol. 29, no. 9, pp. 1647-1654, Sep. 2007.
K. Garg and S. K. Nayar, “Photorealistic rendering of rain streaks,” *ACM Transactions on Graphics*, vol. 25, no. 3, pp. 996-1002, July 2006.
K. Garg and S. K. Nayar, “Vision and rain,” *International Journal of Computer Vision*, vol. 75, no. 1, pp. 3-27, Oct. 2007.
J. C. Halimeh and M. Roser, “Raindrop detection on car windshields using geometric-photometric environment construction and intensity-based correlation,” *Intelligent Vehicles Symposium, 2009*, Xi’an, China, June 3-5, 2009.
N. Dalal and B. Triggs, “Histograms of oriented gradients for human detection,” *IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition* (CVPR 2005), vol. 1, pp. 886-893, San Diego, CA, USA, June 20-25, 2005.
Y. Luo, X. Yong, and J. Hui, “Removing Rain From a Single Image via Discriminative Sparse Coding,” *IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision* (ICCV 2015), pp. 3397-3405, Boston, MA, USA, Dec. 7-13, 2015.
L. Tsai and J. W. Hsieh and C. H. Chuang and Y. J. Tseng and K. Fan and C. C. Lee, “Road sign detection using eigen colour,” *IET Computer Vision*, vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 164-177, Sep., 2008.
K. He, J. Sun, and X. Tang, “Guided image filtering,” *IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence*, vol. 35, no. 6, pp. 1397-1409, June 2013.
H. Takeda, S. Farsiu, and P. Milanfar, “Kernel regression for image processing and reconstruction,” *IEEE Transactions on Image Processing*, vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 349-366, Feb. 2007.
A. Buades, B. Coll, and J. M. Morel, “A non-local algorithm for image denoising,” *IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition* (CVPR 2005), vol. 2, pp. 60-65, San Diego, CA, USA, June 20-25, 2005.
Y. Li, R. T. Tan, X. Guo, J. Lu, and M. S. Brown, “Rain Streak Removal Using Layer Priors,” *IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition* (CVPR 2016), pp. 2736-2744, Las Vegas, Nevada, USA, June 26-July 1, 2016.
A. Levin, A. Zomet, and Y. Weiss, “Learning to perceive transparency from the statistics of natural scenes,” *Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems*, pp. 1247-1254, Dec. 9-14, 2002.
Y. Weiss, “Deriving intrinsic images from image sequences,” *IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision* (ICCV 2001), vol. 2, pp. 68-75, Vancouver, BC, Canada, July 7-14, 2001.
C. S. Burrus, “Iterative Reweighted Least Squares,” *Communications on Pure and Applied Mathematics*, vol. 44, no. 6, pp. 1-9, 2009.
Z. Wang, A. C. Bovik, H. R. Sheikh, and E. P. Simoncelli, “Image quality assessment: from error visibility to structural similarity,” *IEEE Transactions on Image Processing*, vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 600-612, April 2004.
[^1]: Manuscript received xxx 2017.
[^2]: Y. L. Wang, S. C. Liu, D. H. Xie and B. Zeng are with Institute of Image Processing, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, Sichuan 611731, China.
[^3]: C. Chen is with Department of Electronic and Computer Engineering, The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, Kowloon, Hong Kong, China.
[^4]: All correspondences to Y. L. Wang and B. Zeng ([email protected], [email protected]).
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'We show that there is a positive constant $c$ such that any graph on vertex set $[n]$ with at most $c n^2/k^2 \log k$ edges contains an independent set of order $k$ whose vertices form an arithmetic progression. We also present applications of this result to several questions in Ramsey theory.'
author:
- 'David Conlon[^1]'
- 'Jacob Fox[^2]'
- 'Benny Sudakov[^3]'
title: Independent arithmetic progressions
---
A classical theorem of Turán [@Tu] shows that any graph on $n$ vertices with less than $\frac{n(n-k+1)}{2(k-1)}$ edges contains an independent set of order $k$. The celebrated Szemerédi’s theorem [@Sz] states that for $\delta>0$, $k \in \mathbb{N}$, and $n$ sufficiently large in terms of $k$ and $\delta$, any subset of $[n]=\{1,\ldots,n\}$ of order at least $\delta n$ contains a $k$-term arithmetic progression. Here we marry the themes of these results and deduce as consequences bounds on three other well-studied problems on rainbow arithmetic progressions and set mappings.
Given a graph with vertex set $[n]$, a $k$-term arithmetic progression is said to be [*independent*]{} if it is an independent set in the graph. Our main result is a Turán-type theorem, showing that any sparse graph on vertex set $[n]$ contains an independent arithmetic progression. Before proving this result, we need a standard estimate from number theory. Note that all logs will be taken to base $e$.
\[lem:sieve\] There is a positive constant $\eta$ such that, for all $n \geq \eta^{-1} k \log k$, the number of integers from $[n]$ which are relatively prime to $1, 2, \dots, k$ is at least $\eta n/\log k$.
Writing $\Phi(x, y)$ for the number of integers less than or equal to $x$ all of whose prime factors are greater than $y$, a result of Buchstab (see Section 7.2 of [@MV06]) says that $$\Phi(x,y) = \frac{w(u) x}{\log y} - \frac{y}{\log y} + O\left(\frac{x}{\log^2 x}\right),$$ where $u$ is defined by $y = x^{1/u}$ and $w(u)$ is the Buchstab function, equal to $1/u$ for $1 < u \leq 2$ and asymptotic to $e^{-\gamma}$, with $\gamma$ the Euler–Mascheroni constant, as $u$ tends to infinity. For $k$ sufficiently large, say $k \geq k_0$, and $n \geq k \log k$, the required estimate with $\eta = 1/10$ easily follows by applying this result with $x = n$ and $y = k$. For $k < k_0$, the estimate follows by choosing $\eta$ such that $\eta^{-1} \geq \max(20 \log k_0, k_0 \log k_0)$. Then $n \geq k_0 \log k_0$, so that $\Phi(n, k) \geq \Phi(n, k_0) \geq n/10 \log k_0 \geq \eta n/\log k$.
Our main result, which is tight up to the logarithmic factor, is now as follows.
\[thm:APmain\] There is a positive constant $\varepsilon$ such that any graph $G$ on $[n]$ with less than $\varepsilon \frac{n^2}{k^2 \log k}$ edges contains a $k$-term independent arithmetic progression.
We split into two cases, depending on the size of $n$. For $n \geq 2 \eta^{-1} k^2 \log k$, where $\eta$ is as in Lemma \[lem:sieve\], we consider the set of integers $X$ which are relatively prime to $1,2,\ldots,k$ and let $\mathcal{A}$ be the set of $k$-term arithmetic progressions in $[n]$ whose difference is in $X$. We can form an arithmetic progression in $\mathcal{A}$ by choosing the first term from $[n/2]$ and the common difference from $X \cap [n/2k]$. Therefore, since $n/2k \geq \eta^{-1} k \log k$, Lemma \[lem:sieve\] applies to show that $|\mathcal{A}| \geq \eta n^2/4k \log k$. Each pair of integers are in arithmetic progressions with at most one common difference in $X$ and, hence, are in at most $k-1$ arithmetic progressions in $\mathcal{A}$. Thus, the number of arithmetic progressions in $\mathcal{A}$ which contain an edge of $G$ is at most $e(G)k$. Taking $\varepsilon < \eta/8$, we have that $e(G)k < \varepsilon \frac{n^2}{k \log k} < |\mathcal{A}|$, so there is an arithmetic progression in $\mathcal{A}$ which forms an independent set.
For the second case, when $n < 2 \eta^{-1} k^2 \log k$, we let $\mathcal{B}$ be the set of $k$-term arithmetic progressions in $[n]$ whose difference is a prime. By the same argument as in the previous case, the number of arithmetic progressions in $\mathcal{B}$ which contain an edge of $G$ is at most $e(G)k < \varepsilon \frac{n^2}{k \log k}$. On the other hand, the number of progressions in $\mathcal{B}$ is at least $\pi(n/2k) n/2$, where $\pi(x)$ is the prime counting function. Since there exist positive constants $a$ and $C$ such that $\pi(x) > a \frac{x}{\log x}$ and $2 \eta^{-1} k^2 \log k < k^C$, we have that $\pi(n/2k) n/2 > \frac{a}{2C} \frac{n^2}{k \log k}$. Therefore, for $\varepsilon < a/2C$, there is an independent arithmetic progression.
In a coloring of $[n]$, an arithmetic progression is [*rainbow*]{} if its elements are all different colors. The [*sub-Ramsey number $sr(m,k)$*]{} is the minimum $n$ such that every coloring of $[n]$ in which no color is used more than $m$ times has a rainbow $k$-term arithmetic progression. Alon, Caro, and Tuza [@ACT] proved that there are constants $c,c'>0$ such that $$c'\frac{mk^2}{\log mk} \leq sr(m,k) \leq c mk^2 \log (mk).$$ They also showed that there is an upper bound on $sr(m,k)$ which is linear in $m$ but with a worse dependence on $k$, namely, $sr(m,k) \leq cmk^3$. The lower bound was later improved by Fox, Jungić, and Radoiči' c [@FJR] to $sr(m,k) \geq c'mk^2$. Here we improve on the upper bounds of Alon, Caro, and Tuza [@ACT].
\[subRamsey\] There is a constant $c$ such that the sub-Ramsey number satisfies $$sr(m,k) \leq cmk^2 \log k.$$
Consider a coloring of $[n]$ with $n= \varepsilon^{-1} mk^2 \log k$, with $\varepsilon$ as in Theorem \[thm:APmain\], where no color appears more than $m$ times. Define a graph on $[n]$ where two integers are adjacent if they receive the same color. The graph consists of a disjoint union of cliques of order at most $m$. Since the maximum of $\sum_i \binom{x_i}{2}$ under the constraint $\sum_i x_i$ occurs when each term is as large as possible, the number of edges in this graph is at most $\frac{n}{m}{m \choose 2}<\frac{nm}{2}$. Therefore, by our choice of $n$, the number of edges is such that Theorem \[thm:APmain\] applies to give an independent $k$-term arithmetic progression, which is a rainbow arithmetic progression in our coloring of $[n]$.
Let $T_k$ denote the smallest positive integer $t$ such that for every positive integer $m$, every equinumerous $t$-coloring of $[tm]$ contains a rainbow $k$-term arithmetic progression. Jungić et al. [@JLMNR] proved that there are positive constants $c,c'$ such that $$c' k^2 \leq T_k \leq c k^3.$$ They conjectured that the lower bound is correct, that is, $T_k=\Theta(k^2)$, a problem which was reiterated in the survey [@JNR]. Here we make progress on this conjecture, improving the upper bound to $c k^2 \log k$. Note that an equinumerous $t$-coloring of $[tm]$ uses each color exactly $m$ times, so $T_k$ is at most the maximum of $sr(m,k)/m$ over all positive integers $m$. Hence, by Corollary \[subRamsey\], we obtain the following corollary.
There is a constant $c$ such that $$T_k \leq c k^2 \log k.$$
Motivated by the set mapping problem of Erdős and Hajnal, Caro [@C87] proved that for every positive integer $k$, there is a minimum integer $n_0 = n_0(k)$ such that, for all $n \geq n_0$ and every permutation $\pi:[n] \to [n]$, there is a $k$-term arithmetic progression $A$ such that $\pi(i) \not \in A$ for all $i \in A$. Moreover, he showed that there are constants $c, c' > 0$ such that $c' k^2/\log k \leq n_0(k) \leq k^2 2^{c \log k / \log \log k}$. Alon et al. [@ACT] used the same methods they had used to bound $sr(m,k)$ to improve the earlier upper bound to $n_0(k) \leq c k^2 \log k$. Our result gives a simple alternative proof of this.
There is a constant $c$ such that $$n(k) \leq c k^2 \log k.$$
Consider the graph on $[n]$ with edges $(i,\pi(i))$ for $i \in [n]$. This graph has at most $n$ edges. By choosing $c$ large enough, we can make the number of edges such that Theorem \[thm:APmain\] applies to give an independent arithmetic progression in this graph. This arithmetic progression has the required property.
[**Acknowledgements.**]{} This note was first written in May 2015, predating a recent paper of Geneson [@G18] showing that $T_k \leq k^{5/2 + o(1)}$, and will form part of the forthcoming paper [*Short proofs of some extremal results III*]{}. We would like to thank Kevin Ford for some helpful discussions. We would also like to mention that recently József Balogh, Will Linz and Mina Nahvi independently investigated the question of estimating $T_k$ and showed that $T_k = k^{2 + o(1)}$.
N. Alon, Y. Caro, and Z. Tuza, Sub-Ramsey numbers for arithmetic progressions, [*Graphs Combin.*]{} [**5**]{} (1989), 307–314.
Y. Caro, Extremal problems concerning transformations of the edges of the complete hypergraphs, [*J. Graph Theory*]{} [**11**]{} (1987), 25–37.
J. Fox, V. Jungić, and R. Radoiči' c, Sub-Ramsey numbers for arithmetic progressions and the Sidon equation, [*Integers*]{} [**7**]{} (2007), A12.
J. Geneson, A note on long rainbow arithmetic progressions, arXiv:1811.07989 \[math.CO\].
V. Jungić, J. Licht (Fox), M. Mahdian, J. Nešetřil, and R. Radoiči' c, Rainbow Arithmetic Progressions and Anti-Ramsey Results, [*Combin. Prob. Comput.*]{} [**12**]{} (2003), 599–620.
V. Jungić, J. Nešetřil, and R. Radoiči' c, Rainbow Ramsey theory, [*Integers*]{} [**5**]{} (2005), A9, 13 pp.
H. L. Montgomery and R. C. Vaughan, [**Multiplicative number theory. I. Classical theory**]{}, Cambridge Studies in Advanced Mathematics, 97, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2007.
E. Szemerédi, On sets of integers containing no $k$ elements in arithmetic progression, [*Acta Arith.*]{} [**27**]{} (1975), 199–245.
P. Turán, Eine Extremalaufgabe aus der Graphentheorie, [*Mat. Fiz. Lapok*]{} [**48**]{} (1941), 436–452.
[^1]: Mathematical Institute, Oxford OX2 6GG, United Kingdom. Email: [[email protected]]{}. Research supported by ERC Starting Grant 676632.
[^2]: Department of Mathematics, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305. Email: [[email protected]]{}. Research supported by a Packard Fellowship and by NSF Career Award DMS-1352121.
[^3]: Department of Mathematics, ETH, 8092 Zürich, Switzerland. Email: [[email protected]]{}. Research supported in part by SNSF grant 200021-175573.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'End-to-end (E2E) models have made rapid progress in automatic speech recognition (ASR) and perform competitively relative to conventional models. To further improve the quality, a two-pass model has been proposed to rescore streamed hypotheses using the non-streaming Listen, Attend and Spell (LAS) model while maintaining a reasonable latency. The model attends to acoustics to rescore hypotheses, as opposed to a class of neural correction models that use only first-pass text hypotheses. In this work, we propose to attend to both acoustics and first-pass hypotheses using a deliberation network. A bidirectional encoder is used to extract context information from first-pass hypotheses. The proposed deliberation model achieves 12% relative WER reduction compared to LAS rescoring in Google Voice Search (VS) tasks, and 23% reduction on a proper noun test set. Compared to a large conventional model, our best model performs 21% relatively better for VS. In terms of computational complexity, the deliberation decoder has a larger size than the LAS decoder, and hence requires more computations in second-pass decoding.'
address: |
Google, Inc., USA\
{huk,tsainath,rpang,prabhavalkar}@google.com
title: 'Deliberation Model Based Two-Pass End-to-End Speech Recognition'
---
Introduction {#sec:intro}
============
E2E ASR has gained a lot of popularity due to its simplicity in training and decoding. An all-neural E2E model eliminates the need to individually train components of a conventional model (i.e., acoustic, pronunciation, and language models), and directly outputs subword (or word) symbols [@graves2012sequence; @rao2017exploring; @chan2016listen; @bahdanau2016end; @kim2017joint]. In large scale training, E2E models perform competitively compared to more sophisticated conventional systems on Google traffic [@he19streaming; @chiu18]. Given its all-neural nature, an E2E model can be reasonably downsized to fit on mobile devices [@he19streaming].
Despite the rapid progress made by E2E models, they still face challenges compared to state-of-the-art conventional models [@pundak2016lower; @luscher2019rwth]. To bridge the quality gap between a streaming recurrent neural network transducer (RNN-T) [@he19streaming] and a large conventional model [@pundak2016lower], a two-pass framework has been proposed in [@sainath2019twopass], which uses a non-streaming LAS decoder to *rescore* the RNN-T hypotheses. The rescorer attends to audio encoding from the encoder, and computes sequence-level log-likelihoods of first-pass hypotheses. The two-pass model achieves 17%-22% relative WER reduction (WERR) compared to RNN-T [@he19streaming] and has a similar WER to a large conventional model [@pundak2016lower].
A class of neural correction models post-process hypotheses using only the text information, and can be considered as second-pass models [@zhang2019neural; @zhang2019investigation; @guo2019spelling]. The models typically use beam search to generate new hypotheses, compared to rescoring where one leverages external language models trained with large text corpora [@kannan2018analysis]. For example, a neural correction model in [@zhang2019neural] takes first-pass text hypotheses and generates new sequences to improve numeric utterance recognition [@peyser2019improving]. A transformer-based spelling correction model is proposed in [@zhang2019investigation] to correct the outputs of a connectionist temporal classification model in Mandarin ASR. In addition, [@guo2019spelling] leverages text-to-speech (TTS) audio to train an attention-based neural spelling corrector to improve LAS decoding. These neural correction models typically use only text as inputs, while the aforementioned two-pass model attends to acoustics alone for second-pass processing.
In this work, we propose to combine acoustics and first-pass text hypotheses for second-pass decoding based on the deliberation network [@xia2017deliberation]. The deliberation model has been used in state-of-the-art machine translation [@hassan2018achieving], or generating intermediate representation in speech-to-text translation [@sung2019towards]. Our deliberation model has a similar structure as [@xia2017deliberation]: An RNN-T model generates the first-pass hypotheses, and deliberation attends to both acoustics and first-pass hypotheses for a second-pass *decoding*. We encode first-pass hypotheses bidirectionally to leverage context information for decoding. Note that the first-pass hypotheses are sequences of wordpieces [@schuster2012japanese] and are usually short in VS, and thus the encoding should have limited impact on latency.
Our experiments are conducted using the same training data as in [@narayanan2018toward; @narayanan2019recognizing], which is from multiple domains such as Voice Search, YouTube, Farfield and Telephony. We first analyze the behavior of the deliberation model, including performance when attending to multiple RNN-T hypotheses, contribution of different attention, and rescoring vs. beam search. We apply additional encoder (AE) layers and minimum WER (MWER) training [@prabhavalkar2018minimum] to further improve quality. The results show that our MWER trained 8-hypothesis deliberation model performs 11% relatively better than LAS rescoring [@sainath2019twopass] in VS WER, and up to 15% for proper noun recognition. Joint training further improves VS slightly (2%) but significantly for a proper noun test set: 9%. As a result, our best deliberation model achieves a WER of 5.0% on VS, which is 21% relatively better than the large conventional model [@pundak2016lower] (6.3% VS WER). Lastly, we analyze the computational complexity of the deliberation model, and show some decoding examples to understand its strength.
Deliberation Based Two-Pass E2E ASR {#sec:model}
===================================
Model Architecture {#sec:architecture}
------------------
![Diagram of the deliberation model with an optional additional encoder (dashed box).[]{data-label="fig:delib"}](deliberation2.pdf)
As shown in Fig. \[fig:delib\], our deliberation network consists of three major components: A shared encoder, an RNN-T decoder [@graves2012sequence], and a deliberation decoder, similar to [@sainath2019twopass; @xia2017deliberation]. The shared encoder takes log-mel filterbank energies, $\mathbf{x} = ( \mathbf{x}_1,...,\mathbf{x}_T )$, where $T$ denotes the number of frames, and generates an encoding $\mathbf{e}$. The encoder output $\mathbf{e}$ is then fed to an RNN-T decoder to produce first-pass decoding results $\mathbf{y}_r$ in a streaming fashion. Then the deliberation decoder attends to both $\mathbf{e}$ and $\mathbf{y}_r$ to predict a new sequence $\mathbf{y}_d$. We use a bidirectional encoder to further encode $\mathbf{y_r}$ for useful context information, and the output is denoted as $\mathbf{h}_b$. Note that we could use multiple hypotheses $\{\mathbf{y}_r^i\}$, where $i=1,...,H$ and $H$ is the number of hypotheses, and in this scenario we encode each hypothesis $\mathbf{y}_r^i$ separately using the same bidirectional encoder, and then concatenate their outputs in time to form $\mathbf{h}_b$. We keep the audio encoder unidirectional due to latency considerations. Then, two attention layers are followed to attend to acoustic encoding and first-pass hypothesis encoding separately. The two context vectors, $\mathbf{c}_b$ and $\mathbf{c}_e$, are concatenated as inputs to a LAS decoder.
There are two major differences between our model and the LAS rescoring [@sainath2019twopass]. First, the deliberation model attends to both $\mathbf{e}$ and $\mathbf{y}_r$, while [@sainath2019twopass] only attends to the acoustic embedding, $\mathbf{e}$. Second, our deliberation model encodes $\mathbf{y}_r$ bidirectionally, while [@sainath2019twopass] only relies on unidirectional encoding $\mathbf{e}$ for decoding.
### Additional Encoder Layers
[@sainath2019twopass] shows that the incompatibility between an RNN-T encoder and a LAS decoder leads to a gap between the rescoring model and LAS-only model. To help adaptation, we introduce a 2-layer LSTM as an additional encoder (dashed box in Fig. \[fig:delib\] to indicate optional) to further encode $\mathbf{e}$. We show in Sect. \[sec:results\] that additional encoder layers improve both deliberation and LAS rescoring models.
Training {#sec:training}
--------
A deliberation model is typically trained from scratch by jointly optimizing all components [@xia2017deliberation]. However, we find training a two-pass model from scratch tends to be unstable in practice [@sainath2019twopass], and thus use a two-step training process: Train the RNN-T as in [@he19streaming], and then fix the RNN-T parameters and only train the deliberation decoder and additional encoder layers as in [@chiu18; @sainath2019twopass].
### MWER Loss {#sec:mwer_loss}
We apply the MWER loss [@prabhavalkar2018minimum] in training which optimizes the expected word error rate by using n-best hypotheses: $$L_{\text{MWER}}(\mathbf{x}, \mathbf{y}^*) = \sum_{i=1}^{B} \hat{P}(\mathbf{y}_d^i|\mathbf{x})[W(\mathbf{y}_d^i, \mathbf{y}^*) - {\hstretch{2}{\hat{\hstretch{.5}{W}}}}]
\label{eq:mwer}$$ where $\mathbf{y}_d^i$ is the $i$th hypothesis from the deliberation decoder, and $W(\mathbf{y}_d^i, \mathbf{y}^*)$ the number of word errors for $\mathbf{y}_d^i$ w.r.t the ground truth target $\mathbf{y}^*$. $\hat{P}(\mathbf{y}_d^i|\mathbf{x})$ is the probability of the $i$th hypothesis normalized over all other hypotheses to sum to 1. $B$ is the beam size. In practice, we combine the MWER loss with cross-entropy (CE) loss to stabilize training: $L'_{\text{MWER}}(\mathbf{x}, \mathbf{y}^*)=L_{\text{MWER}}(\mathbf{x}, \mathbf{y}^*) + \alpha L_{\text{CE}}(\mathbf{x}, \mathbf{y}^*)$, where $\alpha=0.01$ as in [@prabhavalkar2018minimum].
### Joint Training {#sec:joint_training}
Training the deliberation decoder while fixing RNN-T parameters is not optimal since the model components are not jointly updated. We propose to use a combined loss to train all modules jointly:
$$L_{\text{joint}}(\theta_e, \theta_1, \theta_2) = L_{\text{RNNT}}(\theta_e, \theta_1) + \lambda L_{\text{CE}}(\theta_e, \theta_2)
\label{eq:joint_loss}$$
where $L_{\text{RNNT}}(\cdot)$ is the RNN-T loss, and $L_{\text{CE}}(\cdot)$ the CE loss for the deliberation decoder. $\theta_e$, $\theta_1$, and $\theta_2$ denote the parameters of shared encoder, RNN-T decoder, and deliberation decoder, respectively. Note that a jointly trained model can be further trained with MWER loss. The joint training is similar to “deep finetuning" in [@sainath2019twopass] but without a pre-trained decoder.
Decoding
--------
Our decoding consists of two passes: 1) Decode using the RNN-T model to obtain the first-pass sequence $\mathbf{y}_r$, and 2) Attend to both $\mathbf{y}_r$ and $\mathbf{e}$, and perform the second beam search to generate $\mathbf{y}_d$. We are also curious how rescoring performs given bidirectional encoding from $\mathbf{y}_r$. In rescoring, we run the deliberation decoder on $\mathbf{y}_r$ in a teacher-forcing mode [@sainath2019twopass]. Note the difference from [@sainath2019twopass] when rescoring a hypothesis is that the deliberation network sees all candidate hypotheses. We compare rescoring and beam search in Sect. \[sec:results\].
Experimental Setup
==================
Datasets
--------
For training, we use the same multidomain datasets as in [@narayanan2018toward; @narayanan2019recognizing] which include anonymized and hand-transcribed English utterances from general Google traffic, far-field environments, telephony conversations, and YouTube. We augment the clean training utterances by artificially corrupting them by using a room simulator, varying degrees of noise, and reverberation such that the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) is between 0dB and 30dB [@kim2017generation]. We also use mixed-bandwidth utterances at 8kHz or 16 kHz for training [@yu2013feature].
Our main test set includes 14K anonymized hand-transcribed VS utterances sampled from Google traffic. To evaluate the performance of proper noun recognition, we report performance on a side-by-side (SxS) test set, and 4 voice command test sets [@he19streaming]. The SxS set contains utterances where the LAS rescoring model [@sainath2019twopass] performs inferior to a state-of-the-art conventional model [@pundak2016lower], and one reason is due to proper nouns. The voice command test sets include 3 TTS test sets created using parallel-wavenet [@oord17]: Songs, Contacts-TTS, and Apps, where the commands include song, contact, and app names, respectively. The Contacts-Real set contains anonymized and hand-transcribed utterances from Google traffic to communicate with a contact, for example, “Call Jon Snow".
Architecture Details and Training
---------------------------------
Our first-pass RNN-T model has the same architecture as [@he19streaming]. The encoder of the RNN-T consists of an 8-layer Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM) [@hochreiter1997] and the prediction network contains 2 layers. Each LSTM layer has 2,048 hidden units followed by 640-dimensional projection. A time-reduction layer is added after the second layer to improve the inference speed without accuracy loss. Outputs of the encoder and prediction network are fed to a joint-network with 640 hidden units, which is followed by a softmax layer predicting 4,096 mixed-case wordpieces.
The deliberation decoder can attend to multiple hypotheses, and RNN-T hypotheses with different lengths are thus padded with end-of-sentence label $\langle\backslash\texttt{s}\rangle$ to a length of 120. Each subword unit in a hypothesis is then mapped to a vector by a 96-dimensional embedding layer, and then encoded by a 2-layer bidirectional LSTM encoder, where each layer has 2,048 hidden units followed by 320-dimensional projection. Each of the two attention models is a multi-headed attention [@vaswani2017attention] with four attention heads. The two output context vectors are concatenated and fed to a 2-layer LAS decoder (2,048 hidden units followed by 640-dimensional projection per layer). The LAS decoder has a 4,096-dimensional softmax layer to predict the same mixed-case wordpieces [@schuster2012japanese] as the RNN-T.
For feature extraction, we use 128-dimensional log-Mel features from 32-ms windows at a rate of 10 ms. Each feature is stacked with three previous frames to form a 512-dimensional vector, and then downsampled to a 30-ms frame rate. Our models are trained in Tensorflow [@abadi2016tensorflow] using the Lingvo framework [@shen2019lingvo] on 8$\times$8 Tensor Processing Units (TPU) slices with a global batch size of 4,096.
Computational Complexity
------------------------
We estimate the computational complexity of the deliberation decoder using the number of floating-point operations (FLOPS) required: $$\texttt{FLOPS} = M_{B} \cdot N \cdot H + M_{D} \cdot N \cdot B + \texttt{FLOPS}_{\texttt{atten}}
\label{eq:ops}$$
where $M_B$ is the size of the bidirectional encoder, $N$ the number of decoded tokens, and $H$ the number of first-pass hypotheses. $M_D$ denotes the size of the LAS decoder, and $B$ the second beam search size. $\texttt{FLOPS}_{\texttt{atten}}$ is the FLOPS required for two attention layers, and we compute it as the sum of multiplying the sizes of source and query matrices with the number of time frames and $N$, respectively. Our deliberation decoder contains roughly 66M parameters, where the size of the bidirectional encoder is $M_B=22$M, LAS decoder is $M_D=42$M, and attention layers have 2M parameters.
Results {#sec:results}
=======
In this section we analyze the importance of certain components of the deliberation model by ablation studies, improve the model by MWER and AE layers, and select one of our best deliberation models for comparison.
Number of RNN-T Hypotheses
--------------------------
The deliberation decoder may attend to multiple first-pass hypotheses. We encode the hypotheses separately, and then concatenate them as the input to the attention layer. We use a beam size of $8$ for RNN-T decoding. Unless stated otherwise, the WER we report is for VS test set. The third row in Table \[tab:wer\_num\_hyp\] shows that the WER improves slightly when increasing the number of RNN-T hypotheses from 1 to 8. However, after applying MWER training, the WER improves continuously: 5.4% to 5.1%. We suspect that MWER training specifically helps deliberation attend to relevant parts of first-pass hypotheses. Since 8-hypothesis model gives the best performance, we use that for subsequent experiments. MWER training is not used for simplicity.
ID E1 E2 E3 E4
-------------- ------- ------- ------- -------
Model 1 hyp 2 hyp 4 hyp 8 hyp
Deliberation 5.5 5.4 5.4 5.4
+ MWER 5.4 5.3 5.2 5.1
: WERs (%) of deliberation with different number of RNN-T hypotheses.[]{data-label="tab:wer_num_hyp"}
Acoustics vs. Text
------------------
We are curious about how different attention ($\mathbf{c}_b$ vs $\mathbf{c}_e$) contribute to deliberation, and thus train separate models where we attend to either acoustics (`E5`) or text (`E6`) alone in training and inference. Table \[tab:acoustics\_text\] shows that either `E5` or `E6` perform significantly better than the baseline RNN-T model (`B0`) with a 9% WERR. By using both attentions (`E4`), the model gains another 11% relative improvement. It seems surprising that `E6` performs equally to `E5`. We note this could be because `E6` has a bidirectional encoder while `E5` does not.
ID Model WER (%)
---- ----------------- ---------
B0 RNN-T 6.7
E5 Acoustics alone 6.1
E6 Text alone 6.1
E4 Both 5.4
: WERs (%) of baseline RNN-T model and deliberation models with different attention setup.[]{data-label="tab:acoustics_text"}
Additional Encoder Layers {#sec:ae}
-------------------------
To help the deliberation decoder better adapt to the shared encoder, we add AE layers for dedicated encoding for the deliberation decoder. The AE consists of a 2-layer LSTM with 2,048 hidden units followed by 640-dimensional projection per layer. Beam search is used for decoding. In Table \[tab:ae\], we show that with AE layers (`E7`) the model performs around 4% better than without (`E4`). Similarly, we apply AE to the LAS beam search (`B1`$\rightarrow$`B2`), and obtain similar improvements.
ID Model WER
---- ---------- ----- --
E7 E4 + AE 5.2
B1 LAS 6.1
B2 LAS + AE 5.8
: WERs (%) with or without AE layers.[]{data-label="tab:ae"}
----- --------------------------- ------------- --------- ---------- ---------- --------------- -------------- --------- ---------
VS SxS Songs Contacts-Real Contacts-TTS Apps
B0 RNN-T Beam search 6.7 35.2 11.9 15.9 24.3 7.8 3.5
B4 LAS [@sainath2019twopass] Rescoring 5.7 31.4 10.9 14.7 22.6 7.5 4.8
B5 LAS [@sainath2019twopass] Beam search **5.5** **29.0** **11.7** **14.7** **22.9** **8.3** **4.8**
E9 Deliberation Beam search 5.1 26.6 9.9 13.7 22.3 7.1 8.8
E10 + Joint training Beam search **5.0** **24.3** **9.6** **13.4** **22.0** **6.4** **8.8**
----- --------------------------- ------------- --------- ---------- ---------- --------------- -------------- --------- ---------
Rescoring
---------
We propose to use the deliberation decoder to rescore first-pass RNN-T results, and expect bidirectional encoding to help compared to LAS rescoring [@sainath2019twopass]. Table \[tab:rescoring\] shows that the deliberation rescoring (`E8`) performs 5% relatively better than LAS rescoring (`B3`). AE layers are added to both models.
ID Rescoring WER (%)
---- -------------- ---------
E8 Deliberation 5.7
B3 LAS + AE 6.0
: Comparison of rescoring models.[]{data-label="tab:rescoring"}
Comparisons {#sec:comp}
-----------
From the above analysis, an MWER trained 8-hypothesis deliberation model with AE layers performs the best, and thus we use that for comparison below.
In Table \[tab:wer\], we compare deliberation models with an RNN-T [@he19streaming] and LAS rescoring model [@sainath2019twopass] in different recognition tasks including VS and proper noun recognition. We include two deliberation models: An MWER trained 8-hypothesis deliberation model with AE layers (`E9`), and a jointly trained version (`E10`). For LAS two-pass model, we add AE layers to the model in [@sainath2019twopass] and evaluate both rescoring (`B4`) and beam search (`B5`). We note that all models are MWER trained except the RNN-T model, which we find little improvement. First, we note that two-pass models perform substantially better than RNN-T (`B0`) in both VS task (15%–25% WERR) and rare word test sets (e.g. up to 30% in `E10` for the SxS set). This confirms that second-pass decoding brings additional benefits. Second, the MWER trained 8-hypothesis deliberation model with AE layers (`E9`) performs significantly better than LAS rescoring (`B4`) or beam search (`B5`). When beam search is used for both of the deliberation and LAS models, the WERR is 7% for VS, and 8% for the SxS set. We observe significant improvements for voice command test sets too. Third, joint training (`E10`) brings an additional 2% relative improvement for VS, 9% for the SxS set, and uniform improvements for voice command test sets.
To understand where the improvement comes from, in Fig. \[fig:atten\] we show an example of deliberation attention distribution on the RNN-T hypotheses (x-axis) at every step of the second-pass decoding (y-axis). We can see the attention selects mainly one wordpiece when the first-pass result is correct (e.g. “\_`weather`", “\_`in`", etc). However, when the first-pass output is wrong (e.g. “`ond`" and “`on`"), the attention looks ahead at “\_`Nevada`" for context information for correction. We speculate that the attention functions similarly as a context-aware language model on the first-pass sequence.
![Example attention probabilities on a first-pass RNN-T hypothesis: “`Weather in London Nevada`", for generating the second-pass result “`Weather in Lund Nevada`". Brighter colors correspond to higher probabilities. A beginning wordpiece starts with a space marker (i.e., “"). $\langle$`s`$\rangle$ denotes start of sentence, and $\langle$$\backslash$`s`$\rangle$ the end of sentence.[]{data-label="fig:atten"}](attention_tts.png)
In Table \[tab:wer\], we also report gigaFLOPS (GFLOPS) estimated using Eq. (\[eq:ops\]) on the 90%-tile VS set, where an utterance has roughly 109 audio frames and a decoded sequence of 14 tokens. Since the deliberation decoder has a larger size than LAS decoder (67MB vs. 33MB), it requires around 1.8 times GFLOPS as LAS rescoring. The increase mainly comes from the bidirectional encoder for 8 first-pass hypotheses. However, we note that the computation can be parallelized across hypotheses [@sainath2019twopass] and should have less impact on latency. Latency estimation is complicated, and we will quantify that in future works.
Decoding Examples
-----------------
Lastly, we compare some decoding examples between deliberation and LAS rescoring in Table \[tab:decoding\_example\]. One type of wins for deliberation is URL, where the deliberation model corrects and concatenates string pieces to a single one since it sees the whole first-pass hypothesis. Second type is proper noun. Leveraging the context, deliberation realizes the previous word should be a proper noun (i.e. `Walmart`). Third, the deliberation decoder corrects semantic errors (`china` $\rightarrow$ `train`). On the other hand, we also see some losses of deliberation due to over-correction of proper nouns or spelling difference. The former is probably from knowledge in training, and the latter is benign and does not affect semantics.
LAS rescoring Deliberation
-------------------------------- ------------------------------
[ Quality times.com]{} [ quadcitytimes.com]{}
[ Where my]{} job application [ Walmart]{} job application
[ china]{} near me [ train]{} near me
bio of [ Chesty]{} [ Fuller]{} bio of [ Chester Fuller]{}
2016 Kia [ Forte5]{} 2016 Kia [ Forte 5]{}
: Decoding examples of deliberation and LAS rescoring. Deliberation wins are in green and losses in red.[]{data-label="tab:decoding_example"}
Conclusion
==========
We presented a new two-pass E2E ASR based on the deliberation network, and our best model obtained significant improvements over LAS rescoring in both VS tasks and proper noun recognition: 12% and 23% WERR, respectively. The model also performs 21% relatively better than a large conventional model for VS. Although the model requires more computation than LAS rescoring, batching across hypotheses can improve latency.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'A detailed and systematic density-functional theory (DFT) study of a series of early transition-metal carbides (TMC’s) in the NaCl structure is presented. The focus is on the trends in the electronic structure and nature of bonding, which are essential for the understanding of the reactivity of TMC’s. The employed approach is based on a thorough complementary analysis of the electron density differences, the density of states (DOS), the band structure, and the real-space wave functions to gain insight into the bonding of this class of materials and get a more detailed picture of it than previously achieved, as the trend study allows for a systematic identification of the bond character along the different bands. Our approach confirms the presence of both the well-known TM–C and TM–TM bonds and, more importantly, it shows the existence and significance of direct C–C bonds in all investigated TMC’s, which are frequently neglected but have been recently identified in some cases \[Solid State Commun. **121**, 411 (2002); Phys. Rev. B **75**, 235438 (2007)\]. New information on the spatial extent of the bonds, their *k*-space location within the band structure, and their importance for the bulk cohesion is provided. Trends in covalency and ionicity are presented. The resulting electron-structural trends are analyzed and discussed within a two-level model.'
author:
- Aleksandra Vojvodic
- Carlo Ruberto
title: 'Trends in bulk electron-structural features of early transition-metal carbides'
---
Introduction
============
An extensive study of the reactivity of the transition-metal carbide and nitride (TMX) surfaces is being performed with the density-functional theory (DFT).[@RuVoLu06; @VoRuLu06; @RuVoLu07; @RuLu07; @VoHeRuLu; @VoRuLu] It is aimed at an understanding of reactivity from fundamental principles, similar to the one available today for pure metal surfaces.[@BlNobook08] Due to the intimate relation between bulk and surface electronic structures, a careful mapping of trends in the bulk electronic structure is essential for the overall purpose to understand the trends in reactivity of the transition-metal carbides (TMC’s). Therefore, a bulk background focusing on the trends in electronic structure and nature of bonding in the early transition-metal carbides (TMC) is here provided.
The relevance of the results is, however, broader, as the bulk TMX’s are also interesting by themselves, having such properties as extremely high melting point, ultrahardness, and metallic conductivity.[@Oy96; @Pi96] As a consequence, the importance of the electronic-structure trends for atomic structure and stability is also analyzed.
The bulk TMX’s have been studied experimentally and theoretically with a large number of techniques.[@NeRaEiWeSch76; @GeWiMo83; @Sch87; @ZhGuJeChAn88; @PrCo89; @GuGr89; @HaGrJaGu91; @GuHaGr92; @GuHaGr93; @HaGuGrKo93; @Jo95; @GrMiCoCoLo99; @ZhLiZhXi02; @DaDeMo05; @ViSoLiRoIl05; @RuLu07] Already the early studies agree on the fact that the bonding in these compounds involves simultaneous contributions from metallic, covalent, and ionic bonding.[@Sch87] The main electronic-structure properties are related to (i) the direction and amount of charge transfer between the TM and X atoms, responsible for the ionicity of the material, and (ii) the modifying effect on the metal *d* band upon the carbide/nitride formation, responsible for the formation of hybridized bonding and antibonding $pd$ states. The decreasing stability of the TMC’s in NaCl structure from left to right along a period in the periodic table has been explained as arising from the successive filling of the antibonding TM$d$–C$p$ states in a rigid-band model.[@HaGuGrKo93; @GeWiMo83; @PrCo89]
Recently, the contributions to the cohesive energy from the TM–C, TM–TM, and C–C bonds, respectively, have been approximately determined quantitatively by a two-sublattice model of the NaCl structure based on DFT calculations.[@ZhLiZhXi02] These results confirm the dominance of the TM–C bond (strongest for TiC) and the importance of the TM–TM bond (strongest for VC). In addition, they show that direct C–C interactions cannot be neglected in some of the considered TMC’s (from CrC to NiC along period 4 in the periodic table). The used model, however, falls short of explaining such results from the calculated electronic structures.
Our systematic DFT investigation is performed on a number of non-magnetic early TMC’s. Complementary electronic-structure analysis tools are employed in a joined way to obtain detailed information of the bond character: valence-electron density differences, Bader charge analyses, band structures, projected densities of states (DOS), and real-space wave functions. Key bulk properties are calculated, compared with earlier studies, and analyzed on the basis of the obtained knowledge of the electronic structure. The studied subgroup of TMC’s (Fig. \[fig:TMCs\]) is chosen to allow a monitoring of trends with respect to the constituent transition metals (TM) along both period and group within the periodic table. Also, some of these TMC’s are widely used in applications. We argue that the subgroup is large enough to pick up the important trends.
Many TMC’s crystallize in the sodium chloride structure, either as stable, including ScC (at normal pressures), TiC, VC, ZrC, NbC, and TaC, or metastable compounds, such as $\delta$-MoC and WC. The choice of the TMC’s in the NaCl structure is natural for our calculations since the number of varying parameters should be kept small when performing a trend study to allow for an identification of the important electronic factors.
The Paper is organized as follows. First, the computational details are summarized in Sec. \[sec:comp\_det\]. Then, in Sec. \[sec:res\], the results from our calculations are presented and the obtained trends analyzed, including: atomic geometry and stability (Sec. \[sec:bulk\_geometry\]), electron density and charge transfer (Sec. \[sec:dens\_diff\_Bader\]) and detailed electronic structure (Sec. \[sec:DOS\_bulk\]). In Sec. \[sec:disc\], these trends and the nature of bonding in the TMC’s are summarized, discussed, and related. The main conclusions of our study are summarized in Sec. \[sec:conc\].
![\[fig:TMCs\] The early transition-metal carbides under investigation, organized according to their parent-metal position in the periodic table.](fig1.eps){width=".25\textwidth"}
Computational details {#sec:comp_det}
=====================
The calculations presented in this paper are performed within the well-established DFT formalism using the plane-wave pseudopotential code Dacapo. [@dacapo] The ion-electron interaction is treated with Vanderbilt ultrasoft pseudopotentials. [@Va90] The exchange-correlation energy is included by the generalized gradient approximation (GGA), using the PW91 functional. [@BuPeWa98] All the bulk calculations are performed with a Monkhorst-Pack sampling [@MoPa76] of $8\times8\times8$ special *k*-points and a cutoff energy for the plane-wave expansion of 400 eV. The similarities and differences in the nature of bonding in the considered TMC’s are studied with the following electron-structure analysis tools: electronic density differences, Bader charge analyses,[@Ba91; @HeArJo06] band structure diagrams, atom-projected local DOS’s, and Kohn-Sham wave functions. The Bader analysis is a charge-localization analysis that is able to give quantitative information of the electron localization around different ions. The scheme used here is based on the approach described in Refs. and .
Results and Analysis {#sec:res}
====================
Geometry and Stability {#sec:bulk_geometry}
----------------------
In Table \[tab:TMC\_a0\] and Fig. \[fig:bulk\] we present the calculated lattice parameters, bulk moduli, and cohesive energies, together with the available experimental data. The lattice parameters and the bulk moduli are obtained with a Murnaghan equation of state [@Mu44] and the cohesive energies are calculated as $$\label{eq:E_cohesive}
E_{\text{coh}}=E_{\text{solid}}-\sum_\text{atoms}
E_{\text{atom}}^{\text{isolated}}.$$
-------------- --------------- ------------------ --------------- --------------
TMC $a_0$ $E_{\text{coh}}$ $B_0$ Bader
(Å) (eV/unit cell) (GPa) ($|e|$/atom)
ScC 4.684 (4.637) 12.39 (12.74) 148 (–) 1.54
TiC 4.332 (4.325) 14.90 (14.32) 242 (232-390) 1.49
VC 4.164 (4.163) 13.88 (13.88) 290 (308-390) 1.41
ZrC 4.702 (4.691) 15.93 (15.86) 258 (159-224) 1.70
NbC 4.492 (4.454) 15.83 (16.52) 293 (296-330) 1.64
$\delta$-MoC 4.450 (4.270) 13.11 (14.45) 319 (–) 1.97
TaC 4.479 (4.453) 17.34 (17.12) 321 (214-414) 1.94
WC 4.382 (–) 15.67 (16.49) 357 (–) 1.60
-------------- --------------- ------------------ --------------- --------------
: \[tab:TMC\_a0\] Calculated lattice parameters ($a_0$), cohesive energies ($E_{\text{coh}}$), bulk moduli ($B_0$), and Bader charge transfers from TM to C atoms (Bader). The corresponding experimental values are given in parentheses. The calculated $E_{\text{coh}}$ values are defined by Eq. (\[eq:E\_cohesive\]).
{width="\textwidth"}
There is good agreement between calculated and experimental values. For the lattice parameters the deviations are smaller than $1\%$. Our calculated lattice constants are also in quantitative agreement with other published theoretical results, obtained with both the PW91 and the RPBE GGA functionals.[@ViSoLiRoIl05]
For both the cohesive energies and the bulk moduli the deviations from experiments are larger. Still, our results agree well with other theoretical values.[@GrMiCoCoLo99; @ViSoLiRoIl05; @DaDeMo05] The deviations from experiments can be understood from the fact that in reality the TMC’s often occur as substoichiometric phases, with strongly varying amounts of carbon vacancies. It is known that several bulk properties depend strongly on such defects.[@Jo95; @DrBoRuAo95]
The trends in lattice parameters can be understood qualitatively by plotting them against empirical covalent [@CoGoPlReEscCrBaAl05] and ionic [@Shannon76] radii (Fig. \[fig:a0\_vs\_rion\_rcov\]). The overall linear correlations indicate that the bonding in the TMC’s contains both covalent and ionic effects. This iono-covalent mixture agrees with earlier studies [@Sch87] and is examined in more detail in our analysis of the electronic structure below.
The cohesive energies increase monotonically down a group in the periodic table. Along each period, they exhibit a maximum for group IV. These trends agree with the experimental values (see Table \[tab:TMC\_a0\]). As will be argued below, these trends can be understood from the trends of the bulk electronic structure.
![\[fig:a0\_vs\_rion\_rcov\] The linear correlations of the TMC lattice parameters with the covalent radii [@CoGoPlReEscCrBaAl05] (squares) and with the ionic radii [@Shannon76] (circles) of the parent transition metals.](fig3.eps){width=".50\textwidth"}
Valence Electron Density and Charge Transfer {#sec:dens_diff_Bader}
--------------------------------------------
{width="0.43\textheight"}
Three-dimensional contour plots of the differences between the valence electron densities in the bulk TMC’s and the electron densities of free TM and C atoms are shown in Fig. \[fig:dens\_diff\] for the considered TMC’s. The changes in the distribution of the valence electrons upon bond creation in the bulk TMC’s reveal (i) a partially ionic character of the bond, seen as quite localized electron clouds (orange-red regions) around the C atoms, indicating a charge transfer from TM to C, and (ii) covalent TM–C $\sigma$ bonds, seen as a localization of charge (orange) in the region in between the TM and C atoms.
Our Bader analysis results presented in Table \[tab:TMC\_a0\] confirm that the TMC’s are partly ionic compounds. Charge is transferred from TM to C for all considered compounds, as expected from the higher electronegativity of C. This direction of the charge transfer is confirmed experimentally by the near-edge X-ray absorption fine structure (NEXAFS) technique.[@Chen97]
The covalent nature of the bonding is most evident in TiC and VC, as shown by the charge-difference contours (Fig. \[fig:dens\_diff\]) and by the lower Bader charge transfer for these compounds. In general, the Bader charge trends indicate (i) an increase in covalency and a decrease in ionicity (an exception is the metastable $\delta$-MoC), when moving from left to right along a period, and (ii) a decrease in covalency and an increase in ionicity down a group.
All of the considered carbides except MoC and WC are stable in the NaCl structure. The electron-density difference alone cannot explain why this is the case. To gain an understanding of the structure change of WC other methods must be employed, including the ones in the next Section.
Electronic Structure and Nature of Bonding {#sec:DOS_bulk}
------------------------------------------
{width="\textwidth"}
{width="85.00000%"}
{width="\textwidth"}
### General Features
Calculated total and atom-projected DOS’s and band structures for the considered bulk TMC’s are shown in Figs. \[fig:DOS\_bulk\] and \[fig:band\_structure\], respectively. Furthermore, complementary information about the bond character for different bands and $k$ points is obtained by investigating the real-space Kohn-Sham wave functions in detail. Such an analysis is performed for all the TMC’s. The results are presented in Fig. \[fig:band\_structure\] and a representative selection of the different bond types is illustrated in Fig. \[fig:band\_structure\_psi\].
The overall electronic structure is similar for all considered TMC’s and is characterized by (i) a deeply bound lower valence band (LVB) with C $2s$ states and a very small amount of TM $d$ states (not shown in the DOS figures for all the TMC’s in the given energy interval); (ii) a filled (or, for ScC, partly filled) bonding upper valence band (UVB) below $E_F$, with overlapping C $2p$ and TM $d$ states; (iii) an empty or partly filled antibonding conduction band (CB) above or around $E_F$, dominated by TM $d$ states with a clear contribution from C $2p$ states; and (iv) a non-vanishing DOS in the pseudogap between the UVB and the CB.
The contribution to the bonding from the LVB is presumably small due to the small hybridization of the TM and C states. Points (ii) and (iii) illustrate the presence of a covalent bond. The mainly C $2p$ and TM $d$ characters of the UVB and CB, respectively, indicate a partially ionic bonding nature. Orbital-projected DOS’s show that the TM states are of predominantly $e_g$ and $t_{2g}$ symmetry in the UVB and in the CB, respectively. Property (iv) explains the metallic character of the TMC’s.
An analysis of the Kohn-Sham wave functions along the $k$ symmetry lines of Fig. \[fig:band\_structure\] shows that the band structure is dominated by TM–C states \[see Figs. \[fig:band\_structure\_psi\](a)-(b) for representative TM–C bonds in the case of VC\]. These states are found throughout the whole energy region of the $k$ space, that is, they are present in both the LVB and the UVB, as well as in the CB.
The wave function analysis reveals also that large parts of the states in the LVB and in the lower energy range of the UVB have a bonding C–C character of both $\sigma$ and $\pi$ symmetry \[see Figs. \[fig:band\_structure\_psi\](d)–(e) for representative C–C bonds in the case of bulk VC\].
Finally, TM–TM states are evident in significant parts of both the UVB and the CB \[see Fig. \[fig:band\_structure\_psi\](c) for a representative TM–TM bond in the VC system\]. In all the TMC’s, at least one band of TM–TM character crosses $E_F$.
The wave function analysis confirms also the picture that the UVB states have a bonding symmetry, while the CB states show a more antibonding character (*i.e.*, nodes in between the atoms).
Experiments on the band structures for single bulk crystals of group IV-VI TMC’s have been carried out by using, for example, angle-resolved photo-emission spectroscopy (ARPES), in particular X-ray photoemission spectroscopy (XPS) for the mapping of occupied bands and inverse photo-emission spectroscopy (IPES) for the mapping of unoccupied bands (see Ref. and references therein). These results agree with the rough features of our calculated results but do not provide any information on the different bond characters of the different bands, which our method is able to give.
### Trends along a period
The DOS figures, together with the band structure and wave function analyses, show that, as the TM group number increases, (i) both the UVB and the CB (as well as the LVB) are shifted down in energy relative to $E_F$, due to the filling of bands; (ii) as a consequence the metallicity (*i.e.*, the number of states at $E_F$) increases; (iii) the bands crossing $E_F$ show more TM–TM character; (iv) the energy separation between the UVB and the CB decreases; (v) the UVB becomes less C localized; and (vi) the overall amount of C–C states decreases.
### Trends along a group
As the TM period number increases the following general features are observed in the DOS, band structure, and wave function plots: (i) the position of $E_F$ relative to the center of mass of the UVB and the CB is unchanged; (ii) the bond character of the different states is largely unchanged; (iii) the energy separation between the UVB and the CB increases; and (iv) the UVB becomes more C localized. The differences between periods 5 and 6 are smaller than the differences between periods 4 and 5.
Also, a detailed investigation of the band structure reveals that the energetical order of the bands changes: (i) at the $\Gamma$ point the higher TM–TM band moves up in energy, while TM–C bands move down; and (ii) the two lowest UVB bands at the $X$ point (the C–C and the TM–TM bands) approach each other and change places.
Understanding the trends
------------------------
![An illustration of a two-level system consisting of the valence TM and C states. The bonding $E_{\text{b}}$ and antibonding $E_{\text{a}}$ states correspond to the UVB and CB of the TMC, respectively.[]{data-label="fig:twolevel"}](fig8.eps){width=".4\textwidth"}
The above trends can be explained on the basis of a two-level system, comprised of the valence $d$ and $p$ states of the free TM and C atoms, respectively (see Fig. \[fig:twolevel\]). This discussion resembles the one for a heteronuclear diatomic molecule (see for example Ref. ). Due to the lower electronegativity of the TM atom, the energy of the TM $d$ state is higher than that of the C $p$ state. Their interaction results in bonding $E_{\text{b}}$ and antibonding $E_{\text{a}}$ states, the UVB and the CB, respectively, separated by an energy $W$ (see Fig. \[fig:twolevel\]). Assuming a one-electron picture, the solutions to the Schrödinger equation are $$\begin{aligned}
&E_{\text{b}}=\varepsilon-\sqrt{\Delta^2+\beta^2}\\
&E_{\text{a}}=\varepsilon+\sqrt{\Delta^2+\beta^2}, \end{aligned}$$ with $\varepsilon=(E_{\text{TM}}+E_{\text{C}})/2$ and $\Delta=(E_{\text{TM}}-E_{\text{C}})/2$, where $E_{\text{TM}}$ is the energy of the TM $d$ level and $E_{\text{C}}$ is the energy of the C $p$ level, and $\beta=\langle C|H_{12}|TM\rangle$. If $\Delta\neq0$, which is the case here, there is a charge transfer from TM to C and the bond is partially ionic.
As the TM group number increases, the TM level is shifted down in energy, due to the increase of $d$ electrons, giving a better energy overlap between the TM and C states. This results in a stronger $pd$ hybridization, a smaller $\Delta$, and a bond of more covalent character, that is, a more similar amount of TM and C localization of the UVB. At the same time, the increase of $d$ electrons causes a shift of $E_F$ towards higher energies. The separation between UVB and CB is given by $W=2(\Delta^2+\beta^2)^{1/2}$. Along a period, each extra $d$ electron is added in the same valence shell. To a first approximation one can therefore assume that $\beta$ is constant along a period. Hence, $W$ becomes smaller, which is confirmed by our DFT calculations (see Fig. \[fig:DOS\_bulk\]).
Moving down a group, the number of $d$ electrons is constant, leaving $E_F$ at the same energy. However, the TM level is shifted up in energy, resulting in a smaller $pd$ hybridization and a larger separation between the TM and the C levels, giving a more ionic bond. As the separation increases, the closer the resulting levels come to the original ones, giving them more character of the original levels, that is, the UVB (CB) becomes more C (TM)-localized.
This picture is supported by our calculated Bader charge-transfer trends (Table \[tab:TMC\_a0\]). To the right along a period, the ionicity decreases, which results in decreasing Bader values (except for $\delta$-MoC, as mentioned in Sec. \[sec:dens\_diff\_Bader\]). Down a group, the increase in ionicity is reflected by increasing Bader values.
Discussion {#sec:disc}
==========
In this paper we present a systematic and detailed trend study of the electronic structure of a collection of early transition-metal carbides based on DFT calculations.
The results confirm the mixed iono-covalent TM–C and the metallic TM–TM nature of the bond. This is shown both by local DOS analyses and by a thorough analysis of the band structures and Kohn-Sham wave functions along several symmetry lines in the Brillouin zone (Fig. \[fig:band\_structure\]). TM–C bands are present throughout the whole energy range of the *k* space, including the pseudogap between the UVB and the CB. Also, both a bonding and an antibonding TM–TM band are identified.
In addition, our analysis shows that in all the considered TMC’s there exist direct C–C bonds, localized mainly in the lower part of the UVB. This presence is most pronounced in ScC (where C–C bands cross $E_F$) and decreases as the TM group and period numbers increase. The C–C bonds are also found in the pseudogap.
Hence, the C atoms play two roles for the bonding in the TMC’s, by their interaction with the TM atoms and with other C atoms, respectively.
The valence-electron density difference analysis shows that the dominating bond character is the iono-covalent TM–C bond, which is supported by the mapping of bands in the band structure (see Fig. \[fig:band\_structure\]). The trends in the covalent and ionic contributions can be extracted even though these two bonding types are closely intertwined. We find that the covalent contribution increases from left to right along a period and decreases down a group, while the ionic one decreases from left to right and increases down a group. In addition, our results show that there is a correlation between the covalency and the separation between the UVB and CB. A larger covalency corresponds to a larger separation.
Although the TM–TM and C–C bonds are not observed in the density difference plots, their existence is revealed by the real-space wave function analysis. A contribution from C–C bonds to the TMC cohesion has been suggested in Ref. based on a two-sublattice model. However, such a model does not take into account the modifying effect of the TM $d$ states on the C orbitals in the C sublattice, and vice versa. Our approach identifies the different bonding types directly from the calculated electronic structure and therefore includes this modifying effect. We find that a significant amount of C–C states are present in all the studied TMC’s, that is, not only the metastable ones, as was suggested in Ref. .
All the studied TMC’s have a metallic bond character, that is, a non-vanishing DOS at $E_F$. These states (Fig. \[fig:band\_structure\]) are of both TM–TM and TM–C character (for ScC also C–C states). Indeed, measurements show that group IV and V TMC’s are almost as good electrical conductors as the parent metals.[@Pi96] With an increasing DOS at $E_F$ (Fig. \[fig:DOS\_bulk\]), and assuming everything else weakly varying, the conductivity should increase from group IV to group VI, which agrees with measurements.[@Pi96] On the same arguments, the conductivity of ScC should be comparable to that of VC.
As discussed in Sec. \[sec:bulk\_geometry\], along a period the calculated cohesive energies exhibit a maximum for group IV. The calculated electronic structure shows that for group IV, $E_F$ is positioned in the pseudogap between the UVB and the CB, meaning that all the bonding UVB states are filled and all the antibonding CB states are empty. The same arguments as in the case of the bonding energy in a diatomic molecule can be applied, that is, a filling of bonding states increases the bond strength, while filling of antibonding states reduces the bond strength.[@NeRaEiWeSch76; @GeWiMo83; @Sch87; @ZhGuJeChAn88; @HaGuGrKo93] For ScC, not all bonding UVB states are filled and therefore the cohesive energy is lower for this compound. For groups V and VI, the antibonding CB states are partly filled, which again results in a weaker bond.
Down a group, the cohesive energies of the TMC’s increase. This is because the UVB is shifted down in energy, making the bond stronger, while the CB is shifted up in energy, resulting in an energy gain due to the emptying of antibonding states.
The band structure and Kohn-Sham wave function analyses show the origin of the instabillity of MoC and WC in NaCl structure. The instability arises from the filling of antibonding states, as shown in Fig. \[fig:band\_structure\]. In MoC, the TM–TM antibonding band around $\Gamma$ is partly filled. In WC, two additional antibonding bands, of W–C character, cross $E_F$ around the $\Gamma$ point and become partly occupied. This picture agrees with previous studies [@PrCo89] but also provides additional details.
The detailed analysis of the electronic structure provided in this study lays the essential foundation for the understanding of the TMC’s surface properties, such as their surface reactivity. The surface characteristics of a material are tightly bound to its underlying bulk properties, and will of course depend strongly on the type of bonds that are broken upon creation of the surface. It is, for example, known that the surface electronic structure of the TMC (100) surfaces is similar to that of the bulk. However, the TMC (111) surface shows both TM-localized as well as C-localized surface resonances.[@RuLu07; @VoHeRuLu; @VoRuLu] The importance of these resonances on the surface reactivity is investigated in Refs. and .
Conclusions {#sec:conc}
===========
This trend study deals with the bonding nature of early TMC’s. Our approach is based on a complementary use of different types of electronic-structure analysis tools. In particular, a thorough mapping of the band structure provides detailed insight into the bonding of the bulk TMC’s. The results (i) confirm that the dominant contribution to the bond is the iono-covalent TM–C bond, (ii) show the existence of TM–TM bonds, and, importantly, (iii) reveal the existence of direct C–C bonds (most pronounced for ScC). We provide new information on the spatial extent of the different bonds, on their *k*-space location within the band structure, and on their importance for the bulk cohesion. Also, trends in covalency *vs.* ionicity are obtained. The resulting electron-structural trends are analyzed and discussed within a two-level model.
These results are of importance for the understanding of the TMC surface reactivities, due to the intimate relation between bulk and surface electronic structures. When creating a surface by cutting a crystal, the breaking of TM–C, TM–TM, and C–C bonds can manifest themselves as surface resonances and/or surface states at the surface. As we show in another study, not only TM but also C resonances play a crucial role in the bonding mechanism on TMC surfaces.[@VoHeRuLu; @VoRuLu]
The authors thank B. I. Lundqvist and A. Hellman for reading the manuscript and for providing valuable suggestions. Allocation of computer time via SNIC (Swedish National Infrastructure for Computing) is gratefully acknowledged.
[999]{}
C. Ruberto, and B. I. Lundqvist, Phys. Rev. B **75**, 235438 (2007).
A. Vojvodic, C. Ruberto and B. I. Lundqvist, Surf. Sci. **600**, 3619 (2006).
C. Ruberto, A. Vojvodic and B. I. Lundqvist, Surf. Sci. **600**, 1612 (2006)
C. Ruberto, A. Vojvodic and B. I. Lundqvist, Solid State Commun. **141**, 48 (2007).
A. Vojvodic, A. Hellman, C. Ruberto and B. I. Lundqvist, submitted.
A. Vojvodic, C. Ruberto and B. I. Lundqvist, in preparation.
T. Bligaard and J. K. N[ø]{}rskov, in *Chemical Bonding at Surfaces and Interfaces*, edited by A. Nilsson, L. G. M. Pettersson, and J. K. N[ø]{}rskov, (Elsevier, Amsterdam, 2008).
S. T. Oyama, editor, *The Chemistry of Transition Metal Carbides and Nitrides* (Blackie Academic and Professional, London, 1996).
H. O. Pierson, *Handbook of refractory carbides and nitrides: properties, characterisation, processing and applications* (Noyes Publications, Westwood, New Yersey, USA, 1996).
A. Neckel, P. Rastl, R. Eibler, P. Weinberger, and K. Schwarz, J. Phys. C: Solid State Phys. **9**, 579 (1976).
K. Schwarz, CRC Crit. Rev. Sol. St. Mater. Sci. **13**, 211 (1987).
V. P. Zhukov, V. A. Gubanov, O. Jepsen, N. E. Christensen, and O. K. Andersen, J. Phys. Chem. Solids **49**, 841 (1988).
D. L. Price, and B. R. Cooper, Phys. Rev. B **39**, 4945 (1989).
Y. Zhang, J. Liu, L. Zhou and S. Xiang, Solid State Commun. **121**, 411 (2002).
C. D. Gelatt, A. R. Williams, and V. L. Moruzzi, Phys. Rev. B **27**, 2005 (1983).
A. F. Guillermet, and G. Grimvall, Phys. Rev. B **40**, 10582 (1989).
J. Häglund, G. Grimvall, T. Jarlborg, A. F. Guillermet, Phys. Rev. B **43**, 14400 (1991).
A. Férnandez Guillermet, J. Häglund, G. Grimvall, Phys. Rev. B **45**, 11557 (1992).
A. F. Guillermet, J. Häglund, G. Grimvall, Phys. Rev. B **48**, 11673 (1993).
J. Häglund, A. Férnandez Guillermet, G. Grimvall, and M. Körling, Phys. Rev. B [**48**]{}, 11685 (1993).
L. I. Johansson, Surf. Sci. Rep. **21**, 177 (1995).
J. C. Grossman, A. Mizel, M. Côté, M. L. Cohen, and S. G. Louie, Phys. Rev. B **60**, 6343 (1999).
F. Vi$\tilde{\text{n}}$es, C. Sousa, P. Liu, J. A. Rodriguez, and F. Illas, J. Chem. Phys. **122**, 174709 (2005).
T. Das, S. Deb, and A. Mookerjee, Physica B [**367**]{}, 6 (2005).
http://wiki.fysik.dtu.dk/dacapo
D. Vanderbilt, Phys. Rev. B **41**, 7892 (1990).
K. Burke, J. P. Perdew, and Y. Wang, in *Electronic Density Functional Theory, Recent Progress and New Directions*, edited by J. F. Dobson, G. Vignale and M. P. Das (Plenum Press, New York and London 1998), pp. 81–111.
H. J. Monkhorst and J. D. Pack, Phys. Rev. B **13**, 5188 (1976).
F. D. Murnaghan, Proc. Natn. Acad. Sci. **30**, 244 (1944).
R. F. W. Bader, Chem. Rev. **59**, 893 (1991).
G. Henkelman, A. Arnoldsson and H. Jonsson, Comp. Mat. Sci. **36**, 354 (2006).
K. Nakamura, and M. Yashima, Materials Science and Engineering B, **148** 69 (2005).
Z. Dridi, B. Bouhafs, P. Ruterana and H. Aourag, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter **14** (1995).
B. Cordero, V. Gómez, A. E. Platero-Prats, M. Revés, J. Escheverría, E. Cremades, F. Barragán, and S. Alvarez, Dalton Trans. **21**, 2832 (2008).
R. D. Shannon, Acta Chrystallogr. **A32**, 751 (1976).
J. G. Chen, Surf. Sci. Rep. **30**, 1 (1997).
A. P. Sutton, *Electronic Structure of Materials*, (Oxford Science Publication, New York, United States, 1994).
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'Reversible reaction involving Li amide (LiNH$_{2}$) and Li imide (Li$_{2}$NH) is a potential mechanism for hydrogen storage. Recent synchrotron x-ray diffraction experiments \[W. I. David [*et al.*]{}, J. Am. Chem. Soc. [**129**]{}, 1594 (2007)\] suggest that the transformation between LiNH$_{2}$ and Li$_{2}$NH is a bulk reaction that occurs through non-stoichiometric processes and involves the migration of Li$^{+}$ and H$^{+}$ ions. In order to understand the atomistic mechanisms behind these processes, we carry out comprehensive first-principles studies of native point defects and defect complexes in the two compounds. We find that both LiNH$_{2}$ and Li$_{2}$NH are prone to Frenkel disorder on the Li sublattice. Lithium interstitials and vacancies have low formation energies and are highly mobile, and therefore play an important role in mass transport and ionic conduction. Hydrogen interstitials and vacancies, on the other hand, are responsible for forming and breaking N$-$H bonds, which is essential in the Li amide/imide reaction. Based on the structure, energetics, and migration of hydrogen-, lithium-, and nitrogen-related defects, we propose that LiNH$_{2}$ decomposes into Li$_{2}$NH and NH$_{3}$ according to two competing mechanisms with different activation energies: one mechanism involves the formation of native defects in the interior of the material, the other at the surface. As a result, the prevailing mechanism and hence the effective activation energy for decomposition depend on the surface-to-volume ratio or the specific surface area, which changes with particle size during ball milling. These mechanisms also provide an explanation for the dehydrogenation of LiNH$_{2}$+LiH mixtures.'
author:
- Khang Hoang
- Anderson Janotti
- 'Chris G. Van de Walle'
title: 'Mechanisms for the decomposition and dehydrogenation of Li amide/imide'
---
\[sec:intro\]Introduction
=========================
Hydrogen is a promising energy carrier in future energy systems, but storage of hydrogen is still a major challenge.[@eberle] Lithium amide (LiNH$_{2}$) is a promising material due to its high hydrogen density. Lithium imide (Li$_{2}$NH) is known for its high ionic conductivity (3$\times$10$^{-4}$ S/cm at 25$^{\circ}$C). [@boukamp] These two compounds have attracted a lot of attention ever since Chen [*et al.*]{}[@chenNATURE] demonstrated that Li$_{3}$N can absorb/desorb hydrogen at reasonable pressures following the reversible reaction: $$\label{eq:reaction1}
\mathrm{Li}_{3}\mathrm{N} + 2\mathrm{H}_{2} \leftrightarrow \mathrm{Li}_{2}\mathrm{NH} + \mathrm{LiH} + \mathrm{H}_{2} \leftrightarrow \mathrm{LiNH}_{2} + 2\mathrm{LiH}.$$ The theoretical amount of reversible hydrogen storage in this reaction is $\sim$11.5 wt% (expressed per mole of Li$_{3}$N). At temperatures below 300$^{\circ}$C, LiNH$_{2}$ was observed to reversibly store $\sim$6.5 wt% hydrogen during desorption and absorption under 0.04 and 20 bar, respectively, following the reaction: [@chenNATURE] $$\label{eq:reaction2}
\mathrm{LiNH}_{2} + \mathrm{LiH} \leftrightarrow \mathrm{Li}_{2}\mathrm{NH} + \mathrm{H}_{2}.$$ The drawback of this Li amide/imide reaction is that the dehydrogenation temperature and hydrogenation pressure are relatively high for practical applications. Yet, the fundamental mechanisms behind the decomposition and (de)hydrogenation processes are not fully understood, and we expect that once such understanding has been established, one can provide solutions for speeding up the reaction kinetics and lowering the dehydrogenation temperature and hydrogenation pressure.
Regarding the dehydrogenation reaction in Eq. (\[eq:reaction2\]), it has been suggested that LiNH$_{2}$ may react directly with LiH at the LiNH$_{2}$/LiH interface according to a polar mechanism to produce H$_{2}$. [@chenNATURE; @chenJPCB; @luIC] The mechanism is explained in terms of the strong affinity between protonic hydrogen (H$^{\delta+}$) in LiNH$_{2}$ and hydridic hydrogen (H$^{\delta-}$) in LiH where the redox reaction of H$^{\delta+}$ and H$^{\delta-}$ produces molecular hydrogen (H$_{2}$). [@chenJPCB] Thermal desorption measurements carried out on a LiNH$_{2}$+2LiD mixture, however, showed that it produces mainly H$_{2}$ in addition to HD and D$_{2}$ (instead of mainly HD as one would have expected). [@chenJPCB] This seems to be contrary to the redox hypothesis.
Others have proposed that NH$_{3}$ necessarily evolves as a transient gas and the dehydrogenation of LiNH$_{2}$+LiH mixtures involves an intermediate step: [@huIECR; @huJPCA; @ichikawa04; @ichikawaJPCB; @pinkerton05; @meisner; @ichikawa05; @isobe] $$\label{eq:reaction3}
2\mathrm{LiNH}_{2} \rightarrow \mathrm{Li}_{2}\mathrm{NH} + \mathrm{NH}_{3};$$ $$\label{eq:reaction4}
\mathrm{NH}_{3} + \mathrm{LiH} \rightarrow \mathrm{LiNH}_{2} + \mathrm{H}_{2}.$$ The first reaction releases 37 wt% NH$_{3}$ and was suggested to be diffusion-controlled, whereas the second reaction releases 5.8 wt% H$_{2}$ and is supposedly ultrafast. The decomposition of LiNH$_{2}$ into Li$_{2}$NH and NH$_{3}$ is well known, [@huJPCA; @chenJPCB; @ichikawa04] and it was Hu and Ruckenstein who pointed out that NH$_{3}$ reacts quickly with LiH. [@huIECR; @huJPCA] The activation energy for the decomposition of LiNH$_{2}$ was estimated to be 2.53 eV (before ball milling), and it was found to decrease with increasing ball-milling time. [@markmaitree] The above two-step pathway is supported by recent studies using variable-temperature [*in situ*]{} $^\mathrm{1}$H NMR spectroscopy. [@huJPS]
As noted by David [*et al.*]{},[@davidJACS] there are very close structural similarities between the tetragonal LiNH$_{2}$ and the antifluorite Li$_{2}$NH. Through structural refinement from synchrotron x-ray diffraction data, they suggested that the transformation between LiNH$_{2}$ and Li$_{2}$NH is a bulk reaction that occurs through non-stoichiometric processes within the cubic Li-N-H structure. David [*et al.*]{} further proposed a mechanism for the Li amide/imide decomposition and hydrogenation processes (within the abovementioned ammonia-mediated two-step reaction) that involves the migration of both Li$^{+}$ and H$^{+}$ ions; they also suggested that the non-stoichiometry observed in the Li-N-H system is a direct result of the ionic mobility. The most important step in this mechanism would be the movement of a lithium ion to an interstitial site, forming a lithium Frenkel defect pair. [@davidJACS]
In addition to the polar mechanism and the ammonia-mediated mechanism, Aguey-Zinsou [*et al.*]{}[@Aguey-Zinsou] have recently suggested that the reaction between LiNH$_{2}$ and LiH below 300$^{\circ}$C is a heterogeneous solid-state reaction, controlled by the diffusion of Li$^{+}$ from LiH to LiNH$_{2}$ across the interface. In this mechanism, the reaction is direct rather than ammonia-mediated. [@Aguey-Zinsou]
Theoretical studies of LiNH$_{2}$ and Li$_{2}$NH to date have focused mainly on structural, electronic, and thermodynamic properties of the bulk compounds. [@herbst; @miwa; @yangAPL; @song; @mueller; @kope; @tsumuraya] Experimental data, [@davidJACS] on the other hand, suggest that the rate-limiting process in the Li amide/imide reaction involves mass transport mediated by point defects. This scenario motivated us to perform first-principles calculations for point defects and defect complexes in LiNH$_{2}$ and Li$_{2}$NH in order to explore possible defect-related mechanisms that can explain the decomposition of LiNH$_{2}$ \[reaction (\[eq:reaction3\])\] and the hydrogenation of Li$_{2}$NH. Some preliminary results and partial conclusions of our work have been reported elsewhere. [@hoang_angew] Other research groups have also recently started investigating native defects, [@miceli; @hazrati; @wang] but our study goes much further in identifying specific mechanisms that can explain the experimental observations. A detailed comparison with the previous papers will be addressed in Sections \[ssec:N\] and \[ssec:decomp\].
Indeed, we show that LiNH$_{2}$ decomposes into Li$_{2}$NH and NH$_{3}$ via two competing mechanisms with different activation energies: one mechanism involves the formation of native defects in the interior of the material, the other at the surface. As a result, the prevailing mechanism and hence the effective activation energy for decomposition depend on the surface-to-volume ratio or the specific surface area, which changes with particle size during ball milling. The dehydrogenation of LiNH$_{2}$+LiH mixtures can be explained in terms of the two-step reaction \[Eqs. (\[eq:reaction3\]) and (\[eq:reaction4\])\] and the mechanisms we propose for LiNH$_{2}$ decomposition. However, NH$_{3}$ is not necessarily formed and released from a LiNH$_{2}$+LiH mixture if LiNH$_{2}$ and LiH are in intimate contact.
We also show that lithium interstitials and vacancies in LiNH$_{2}$ and Li$_{2}$NH can be formed in the interior of the materials via a Frenkel-pair mechanism and are highly mobile, and that Li amide (imide) units can be locally formed inside the bulk Li imide (amide). Our results support David [*et al.*]{}’s proposal that the Li amide/imide is a bulk reaction, and that there is a continuous transformation between LiNH$_{2}$ and Li$_{2}$NH via non-stoichiometric intermediates. [@davidJACS] It is, however, not the formation and migration of lithium-related defects that is the rate-limiting step in the kinetics of the Li amide/imide reaction, but the formation and migration of hydrogen interstitials and vacancies which are responsible for forming and breaking N$-$H bonds in LiNH$_{2}$ (and Li$_{2}$NH).
The remainder of this paper is arranged as follows: in Sec. II we provide technical details of the calculations and present the theoretical approach. Bulk properties of LiNH$_{2}$ and Li$_{2}$NH are discussed in Sec. III. In Secs. IV and V, we present the results for native defects and discuss their relevance to ionic conduction in LiNH$_{2}$ and Li$_{2}$NH, decomposition of LiNH$_{2}$, dehydrogenation of LiNH$_{2}$+LiH mixtures, and hydrogenation of Li$_{2}$NH. A summary in Sec. VI concludes the paper.
\[sec:metho\]Methodology
========================
Computational details
---------------------
Our calculations were based on density-functional theory within the generalized-gradient approximation (GGA) [@GGA] and the projector augmented wave method, [@PAW1; @PAW2] as implemented in the VASP code. [@VASP1; @VASP2; @VASP3] Calculations for bulk LiNH$_{2}$ (tetragonal $I\overline{4}$; 32 atoms/unit cell) were performed using a 10$\times$10$\times$5 Monkhorst-Pack $\mathbf{k}$-point mesh; [@monkhorst-pack] for Li$_{2}$NH (orthorhombic $Pbca$; 32 atoms/unit cell) we used a 10$\times$5$\times$10 $\mathbf{k}$-point mesh. For defect calculations, we used a (2$\times$2$\times$1) supercell for LiNH$_{2}$ and a (2$\times$1$\times$2) supercell for Li$_{2}$NH, both corresponding to 128 atoms/cell, and a 2$\times$2$\times$2 $\mathbf{k}$-point mesh and plane-wave basis-set cutoff of 400 eV. In these calculations, the lattice parameters were fixed to the calculated bulk values, but all the internal coordinates were fully relaxed. Convergence with respect to self-consistent iterations was assumed when the total energy difference between cycles was less than 10$^{-4}$ eV and the residual forces were better than 0.01 eV/[Å]{}. The migration of selected native point defects in LiNH$_{2}$ and Li$_{2}$NH was studied using the climbing image nudged elastic band method (NEB). [@ci-neb]
Defect formation energies
-------------------------
Throughout the paper we will use defect formation energies to characterize different native defects in LiNH$_{2}$ and Li$_{2}$NH. The formation energy ($E^{f}$) of a defect is a crucial factor in determining its concentration. In thermal equilibrium, the concentration of the defect X at temperature $T$ can be obtained via the relation [@vdwJAP; @janotti2009] $$\label{eq:concen}
c(\mathrm{X})=N_{\mathrm{sites}}N_{\mathrm{config}}\mathrm{exp}[-E^{f}(\mathrm{X})/k_BT],$$ where $N_{\mathrm{sites}}$ is the number of high-symmetry sites in the lattice per unit volume on which the defect can be incorporated, and $N_{\mathrm{config}}$ is the number of equivalent configurations (per site). Note that the energy in Eq. (\[eq:concen\]) is, in principle, a free energy; however, the entropy and volume terms are often neglected because they are negligible at relevant experimental conditions.[@janotti2009] It emerges from Eq. (\[eq:concen\]) that defects with low formation energies will easily form and occur in high concentrations.
The formation energy of a defect X in charge state $q$ is defined as [@vdwJAP; @peles07] $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:eform}
\nonumber
E^f({\mathrm{X}}^q)=E_{\mathrm{tot}}({\mathrm{X}}^q)&-&E_{\mathrm{tot}}({\mathrm{bulk}})-\sum_{i}{n_i\mu_i} \\
&+&q(E_{\mathrm{v}}+\Delta V+\mu_{e}),\end{aligned}$$ where $E_{\mathrm{tot}}(\mathrm{X}^{q})$ and $E_{\mathrm{tot}}(\mathrm{bulk})$ are, respectively, the total energies of a supercell containing the defect X and of a supercell of the perfect bulk material; $\mu_{i}$ is the atomic chemical potential of species $i$ (referenced to the standard state), and $n_{i}$ denotes the number of atoms of species $i$ that have been added ($n_{i}$$>$0) or removed ($n_{i}$$<$0) to form the defect. $\mu_{e}$ is the electron chemical potential, i.e., the Fermi level, referenced to the valence-band maximum in the bulk ($E_{\mathrm{v}}$). $\Delta V$ is the “potential alignment” term, i.e., the shift in the band positions due to the presence of the charged defect and the neutralizing background, obtained by aligning the average electrostatic potential in regions far away from the defect to the bulk value. [@vdwJAP]
Chemical potentials
-------------------
We note that the atomic chemical potentials $\mu_{i}$ are variables and can be chosen to represent experimental conditions. Given the reported continuous transformation between LiNH$_{2}$ and Li$_{2}$NH,[@davidJACS] for reactions (\[eq:reaction2\]) and (3), it is reasonable to assume that the two compounds are in equilibrium; i.e., the chemical potentials simultaneously satisfy: $$\label{eq:LiNH2}
\mu_{\rm Li} + \mu_{\rm N} + 2 \mu_{\rm H} = \Delta H_f({\rm LiNH_{2}}),$$ $$\label{eq:Li2NH}
2\mu_{\rm Li} + \mu_{\rm N} + \mu_{\rm H} = \Delta H_f({\rm Li_{2}NH});$$ where $\Delta H_f$ is the enthalpy of formation. The calculated formation enthalpies (at $T$=0 K) are $-$2.065 eV and $-$2.091 eV for LiNH$_{2}$ and Li$_{2}$NH, respectively, in good agreement with previously reported values. [@herbst; @siegelPRB; @herbstAPL; @mueller]
From Eqs. (\[eq:LiNH2\]) and (\[eq:Li2NH\]), the chemical potentials of Li and N can be expressed in terms of $\mu_{\rm H}$, which is now the only variable. The temperature and pressure values at which the dehydrogenation and hydrogenation processes occur then determine the chemical potential of H through equilibrium with H$_2$ gas. In the following discussion, we employ a set of conditions used by David [*et al.*]{} in their experiments, i.e., we use 10$^{-3}$ bar and 260$^{\circ}$C for hydrogen desorption, and 3 bar and 260$^{\circ}$C for absorption. [@davidJACS] These conditions correspond to $\mu_{\rm H}$=$-$0.49 eV and $\mu_{\rm H}$=$-$0.31 eV, respectively. [@H2gas] Two different sets of experimental conditions will be analyzed. $\mu_{\rm H}$=$-$0.49 eV corresponds to the dehydrogenation process and is therefore appropriate for analysis of defects in LiNH$_{2}$. $\mu_{\rm H}$=$-$0.31 eV, on the other hand, corresponds to the hydrogen absorption process, and is therefore the value we will use for analysis of defects in Li$_{2}$NH.
One can, of course, choose a different set of atomic chemical potentials which corresponds to different experimental conditions, and this may affect the relative formation energy between different defects. These formation energies can easily be obtained from the data we report. However, we have checked that the details of the choice we made here do not affect the physics of the mechanisms we are presenting.
\[sec:bulk\]Bulk Properties
===========================
LiNH$_{2}$ was reported to crystallize in the tetragonal space group $I\overline{4}$. [@yangAPL] The crystal structure of Li$_{2}$NH was, however, difficult to resolve. Using x-ray diffraction, Juza and Opp proposed that Li$_{2}$NH had an antifluorite structure with the $Fm\overline{\mathrm{3}}m$ symmetry, [@juza] but they were unable to obtain the positions of the hydrogen ions. More recent experimental studies suggested that hydrogen randomly occupies one of the sites around the nitrogen ion. [@noritake; @ohoyama]
On the theory side, significant efforts have been focused on finding low-energy ordered structures for Li$_{2}$NH and several structural models have been proposed. [@herbst; @kope; @mueller] Among these models, the orthorhombic structure with the $Pbca$ symmetry proposed by Mueller and Ceder was shown to have the lowest energy. [@mueller] We therefore employ this structure for our current studies of Li$_{2}$NH.
![(Color online) Relaxed structures of (a) tetragonal LiNH$_{2}$ and (b) orthorhombic Li$_{2}$NH. Large (gray) spheres are Li, medium (blue) spheres N, and small (red) spheres H. Inequivalent atoms are labeled as H1, H2, Li1, Li2, and Li3.[]{data-label="structures"}](structures){width="3.0in"}
The optimized structures of LiNH$_{2}$ and Li$_{2}$NH are shown in Figs. \[structures\](a) and \[structures\](b). For LiNH$_{2}$, the calculated lattice parameters are $a$=$b$=5.053 [Å]{}, and $c$=10.304 [Å]{}, in satisfactory agreement with experimental values ($a$=$b$=5.034 [Å]{}, $c$=10.256 [Å]{}). [@yangAPL] For Li$_{2}$NH, we find $a$=5.134 [Å]{}, $b$=10.461 [Å]{}, and $c$=5.28 [Å]{}, in good agreement with the values reported by Mueller and Ceder. [@mueller]
We can consider the bonding in LiNH$_{2}$ as composed of (Li)$^+$ and (NH$_{2}$)$^-$ units, like the ionic bonding in NaCl; the (NH$_{2}$)$^-$ units are surrounded by (Li)$^+$ and vice versa. Similarly, Li$_{2}$NH can be regarded as composed of (Li)$^+$ and (NH)$^{2-}$ units, where for each (NH)$^{2-}$ unit there are two (Li)$^+$ units. This picture will be useful when we discuss the energetics and local geometry of various defects in LiNH$_{2}$ and Li$_{2}$NH.
![(Color online) Band structure of tetragonal LiNH$_{2}$ along the high symmetry directions of the tetragonal BZ. The VBM is at the $M$ point, whereas the CBM is at the $\Gamma$ point. The zero of energy is set to the highest occupied state.[]{data-label="LiNH2;Bands"}](LiNH2_Bands){width="2.9in"}
Figure \[LiNH2;Bands\] shows the calculated band structure of tetragonal LiNH$_{2}$ along the high-symmetry directions of the Brillouin zone (BZ). We find an indirect band gap of 3.17 eV with the valence-band maximum (VBM) at the $M$ point and the conduction-band minimum (CBM) at the $\Gamma$ point. Band-gap values ranging from $\sim$3 to 3.48 eV have been reported for LiNH$_{2}$. [@herbst; @miwa; @yangAPL] An analysis of the wavefunctions shows that the VBM is composed of N-related unbonded states from the (NH$_{2}$)$^-$ units, whereas the CBM is composed of a mixture of N $p$ and H $s$ states.
![(Color online) Band structure of orthorhombic Li$_{2}$NH along the high symmetry directions of the orthorhombic BZ. The VBM and CBM are at the $\Gamma$ point. The zero of energy is set to the highest occupied state.[]{data-label="Li2NH;Bands"}](Li2NH_Bands){width="2.9in"}
Figure \[Li2NH;Bands\] shows the calculated band structure of orthorhombic Li$_{2}$NH along the high-symmetry directions of the orthorhombic BZ. We find a direct band gap of 2.26 eV at the $\Gamma$ point. Similar to LiNH$_{2}$, the VBM of Li$_{2}$NH is composed mostly of N-related unbonded states from the (NH)$^{2-}$ units, whereas the CBM is composed of N $p$ and H $s$ states. Previous studies reported a band gap of 2.65 eV for Li$_{2}$NH. [@tsumuraya] To the best of our knowledge, no experimental information on the band gaps of LiNH$_{2}$ and Li$_{2}$NH is available. As we illustrate in Sec. IV, knowing the nature of the electronic states near the VBM and CBM is extremely helpful in understanding the formation of defects in these systems.
\[sec:defects\]Point Defects and Complexes
==========================================
We investigated hydrogen-, lithium-, and nitrogen-related point defects in all the possible charge states in LiNH$_{2}$ and Li$_{2}$NH. Defect complexes were also considered, with special attention to Frenkel pairs, i.e., interstitial-vacancy pairs of the same species. Defect formation energies and migration barriers were obtained using the methods described in Sec. \[sec:metho\]. We also discuss the role of these native defects in mass transport and ionic conduction in LiNH$_{2}$ and Li$_{2}$NH.
LiNH$_{2}$
----------
### Hydrogen-related defects
![(Color online) Calculated formation energies of hydrogen-related defects in LiNH$_{2}$, plotted as a function of Fermi energy with respect to the VBM.[]{data-label="LiNH2;FE;H"}](LiNH2_FE_H){width="3.0in"}
{width="6.4in"}
Figure \[LiNH2;FE;H\] shows the calculated formation energies for hydrogen vacancies ($V_{\mathrm{H}}$), interstitials (H$_{i}$), and interstitial molecules (H$_{2}$)$_{i}$ in LiNH$_{2}$. Among these native defects, the negatively charged hydrogen vacancy ($V_{\mathrm{H}}^{-}$) and positively charged hydrogen interstitial (H$_{i}^{+}$) have the lowest formation energies over the entire range of Fermi-level values. The neutral hydrogen vacancy ($V_{\mathrm{H}}^{0}$) and interstitial (H$_{i}^{0}$) are high in energy. The formation energy of (H$_{2}$)$_{i}$ is also higher than that of $V_{\mathrm{H}}^{-}$ and H$_{i}^{+}$. The positively charged hydrogen vacancy ($V_{\mathrm{H}}^{+}$, not included in Fig. \[LiNH2;FE;H\]) is unstable, i.e., a locally stable configuration of this defect cannot be stabilized. If we try to create $V_{\mathrm{H}}^{+}$, it decays to a situation where the positive charge is not associated with the point defect but corresponds to free carriers in the valence band.
In order to understand the energetics of different hydrogen-related defects in LiNH$_{2}$, it is useful to refer back to the electronic structure and bonding geometry of LiNH$_{2}$. For example, the creation of $V_{\mathrm{H}}$ involves breaking an N$-$H bond from the (NH$_2$)$^-$ unit, resulting in an NH unit. Since the NH unit is most favorable in the (NH)$^{2-}$ configuration due to the high electronegativity of the N atom, it is expected that $V_{\mathrm{H}}$ will be most stable in the $V_{\mathrm{H}}^-$ configuration. Formation of $V_{\mathrm{H}}^{0}$, on the other hand, would involve removing one electron from the resulting (NH)$^{2-}$ unit, which is energetically highly unfavorable. Figure \[LiNH2;FE;H\] indeed shows $V_{\mathrm{H}}^-$ to be the most stable configuration.
The creation of H$_{i}^{0}$ or H$_{i}^{+}$ leads to the formation of an NH$_{3}$ unit, which is an (NH$_{2}$)$^-$ unit with an extra H atom. Since NH$_{3}$ forms a closed-shell unit, the interstitial is expected to be most stable in the H$_{i}^{+}$ configuration, in which the additional electron (which stabilized (NH$_{2}$)$^-$ but is now superfluous) is removed. H$_{i}^{-}$, on the other hand, prefers to stay in an interstitial void, with distances of 1.91 and 2.14 [Å]{} to the two nearest Li atoms. Finally, the creation of (H$_{2}$)$_{i}$ involves adding an H$_{2}$ molecule to the system. This interstitial molecule prefers to stay near the center of the octahedron formed by six NH$_{2}$ units, with the calculated H$-$H bond length being 0.75 [Å]{}, very close to that calculated for an isolated H$_{2}$ molecule.
For the migration of H$_{i}^{+}$, H$_{i}^{-}$, $V_{\rm{H}}^{-}$, and (H$_{2}$)$_{i}$, we find energy barriers of 0.61, 0.34, 0.71, and 0.19 eV, respectively. The energy barriers for H$_{i}^{+}$ and $V_{\rm{H}}^{-}$ are relatively high because the migration of these two defects involves breaking N$-$H bonds. For H$_{i}^{+}$, an H atom in the NH$_{3}$ unit moves to the nearest NH$_{2}$. The saddle-point configuration consists of an H atom located midway between two NH$_{2}$ units (i.e., NH$_{2}-$H$-$NH$_{2}$). Similarly, the migration of $V_{\rm{H}}^{-}$ involves moving an H atom from a nearby NH$_{2}$ unit to the vacancy. The saddle-point configuration in this case consists of a hydrogen atom located midway between two NH units (i.e., NH$-$H$-$NH). H$_{i}^{-}$ and (H$_{2}$)$_{i}$, on the other hand, can migrate without breaking and forming bonds, explaining their relatively low migration barriers. We note that the bond length of the H$_{2}$ dimer is preserved along the migration path of (H$_{2}$)$_{i}$.
We also investigated the formation of Frenkel pairs composed of H$_{i}$ and $V_{\mathrm{H}}$. The possible hydrogen-related Frenkel pairs are (H$_{i}^{+}$,$V_{\mathrm{H}}^{-}$) and (H$_{i}^{-}$,$V_{\mathrm{H}}^{+}$); the latter is not considered, since $V_{\mathrm{H}}^{+}$ is unstable. Figure \[LiNH2;Struct\](a) shows the structure of (H$_{i}^{+}$,$V_{\mathrm{H}}^{-}$) in LiNH$_{2}$. The configurations of the individual defects are preserved in this complex; i.e., H$_{i}^{+}$ forms an NH$_{3}$ unit and the creation of $V_{\mathrm{H}}^{-}$ leaves an (NH)$^{2-}$ unit. The distance between the two N ions in the pair is 3.37 [Å]{}, very close to the N$-$N distance in the bulk (3.38 [Å]{}). This Frenkel pair has a formation energy of 1.54 eV, and a binding energy of 0.38 eV (with respect to the isolated constituents). We note that these quantities are independent of the choice of chemical potentials.
![(Color online) Calculated formation energies of lithium-related defects in LiNH$_{2}$, plotted as a function of Fermi energy with respect to the VBM.[]{data-label="LiNH2;FE;Li"}](LiNH2_FE_Li){width="3.0in"}
### Lithium-related defects
Figure \[LiNH2;FE;Li\] shows the calculated formation energies for lithium vacancies ($V_{\mathrm{Li}}$), interstitials (Li$_{i}$), Li$_{\mathrm{H}}^{0}$ (Li replacing an H atom), and H$_{\mathrm{Li}}^{0}$ (H replacing an Li atom) in LiNH$_{2}$. Among the lithium-related defects, Li$_{i}^{+}$ and $V_{\mathrm{Li}}^{-}$ have the lowest formation energies for all the Fermi-level values, except for a very small range near $\mu_{e}$=2.49 eV, where Li$_{\mathrm{H}}^{0}$ has a slightly lower formation energy. $V_{\mathrm{Li}}^{+}$ and Li$_{i}^{-}$ are unstable, $V_{\mathrm{Li}}^{0}$ and Li$_{i}^{0}$ and not shown in Fig. \[LiNH2;FE;Li\].
In the case of $V_{\mathrm{Li}}^{-}$, a Li$^{+}$ ion was removed from the Li3 site ([*cf.*]{} Fig. \[structures\]), whereas for Li$_{i}^{+}$, a Li$^{+}$ ion was placed in the void formed by two NH$_{2}$ units where one of the two N$-$H bonds in each NH$_{2}$ unit points toward the interstitial Li atom. We find that these defects lead to structural relaxations such that the neighboring Li atoms and NH$_{2}$ units are slightly displaced and rotated.
The formation of Li$_{\mathrm{H}}^{0}$, on the other hand, results in an NH unit and a Li atom in the nearby region; see Fig. \[LiNH2;Struct\](b). Li$_{\mathrm{H}}^{0}$ can indeed be regarded as a complex of $V_{\mathrm{H}}^{-}$ and Li$_{i}^{+}$. The formation energy of Li$_{\mathrm{H}}^{0}$ is lower than the sum of the formation energies of Li$_{i}^{+}$ and $V_{\mathrm{H}}^{-}$ by 0.66 eV. In addition, considering the presence of the (NH)$^{2-}$ unit and the additional Li$^{+}$ ion, the region that includes Li$_{\mathrm{H}}^{0}$ can be locally considered as Li$_{2}$NH inside bulk LiNH$_{2}$.
Finally, H$_{\mathrm{Li}}^{0}$ was created by replacing a Li atom with an H atom. This leaves the system with an NH$_{3}$ unit and a Li vacancy. H$_{\mathrm{Li}}^{0}$ can be regarded as a complex of H$_{i}^{+}$ and $V_{\mathrm{Li}}^{-}$ with a binding energy of 0.62 eV. Note that, if equilibrium between LiNH$_2$ and Li$_2$NH is assumed, the formation energies of Li$_{\mathrm{H}}^{0}$ and H$_{\mathrm{Li}}^{0}$ are independent of the chemical potentials because the chemical potential terms in their formation energies occur as ($-$$\mu_{\rm Li}$+$\mu_{\rm H}$), which is a constant, as seen from Eqs. (\[eq:LiNH2\]) and (\[eq:Li2NH\]).
The migration of Li$_{i}^{+}$ involves moving the Li$^{+}$ ion between two ground-state configurations, giving an energy barrier as low as 0.30 eV. For $V_{\mathrm{Li}}^{-}$, the migration involves moving Li$^{+}$ from a nearby lattice site to the vacancy and this gives a barrier of 0.20 eV. These values are relatively small, suggesting that Li$_{i}^{+}$ and $V_{\mathrm{Li}}^{-}$ are highly mobile. For Li$_{\mathrm{H}}^{0}$, which is a complex of Li$_{i}^{+}$ and $V_{\mathrm{H}}^{-}$, a lower bound on the migration barrier is given by the migration barrier of the least mobile constituent, [@wilsonshort09] i.e., 0.71 eV, the value for $V_{\mathrm{H}}^{-}$. Similarly, the migration barrier of H$_{\mathrm{Li}}^{0}$ is estimated to be 0.61 eV, the value for H$_{i}^{+}$.
We also investigated possible formation of lithium Frenkel pairs. Since Li$_{i}^{-}$ and $V_{\mathrm{Li}}^{+}$ are unstable, the only possibility is (Li$_{i}^{+}$,$V_{\mathrm{Li}}^{-}$), whose structure is shown in Fig. \[LiNH2;Struct\](c). The distance between Li$_{i}^{+}$ and $V_{\mathrm{Li}}^{-}$ is 0.85 [Å]{}. This pair has a formation energy of 0.65 eV and a binding energy of 0.36 eV. The formation energy is, therefore, much lower than that of the hydrogen Frenkel pair, i.e., (H$_{i}^{+}$,$V_{\mathrm{H}}^{-}$). This result indicates that LiNH$_{2}$ is likely to exhibit Frenkel disorder on the Li sublattice.
![(Color online) Calculated formation energies of nitrogen-related defects in LiNH$_{2}$, plotted as a function of Fermi energy with respect to the VBM.[]{data-label="LiNH2;FE;N"}](LiNH2_FE_N){width="3.0in"}
### Nitrogen-related defects {#ssec:N}
Figure \[LiNH2;FE;N\] shows the calculated formation energies of nitrogen vacancies ($V_{\mathrm{N}}$), NH vacancies ($V_{\mathrm{NH}}$), and NH$_{2}$ vacancies ($V_{\mathrm{NH_{2}}}$) in LiNH$_{2}$. We find that $V_{\mathrm{NH_{2}}}$ is stable as $V_{\mathrm{NH_{2}}}^{+}$, and $V_{\mathrm{NH}}$ is stable in the neutral charge state ($V_{\mathrm{NH}}^0$). $V_{\mathrm{N}}$ is stable as $V_{\mathrm{N}}^+$ and $V_{\mathrm{N}}^-$. We also investigated interstitial NH$_{3}$ molecules but found them to have a very high formation energy (not included in Fig. \[LiNH2;FE;N\]), $E^{f}$=2.54 eV for the chosen set of chemical potentials. This suggests that ammonia is unlikely to form and diffuse through bulk LiNH$_{2}$ in the form of interstitial molecules.
$V_{\mathrm{NH_{2}}}^{+}$ corresponds to the removal of an entire (NH$_{2}$)$^{-}$ unit from bulk LiNH$_{2}$. We find that there is very little change in the local lattice structure surrounding this defect. The formation of $V_{\mathrm{NH}}^{0}$, on the other hand, leaves one H atom in the resulting void. This isolated H atom is surrounded by four Li atom with the Li$-$H distances in the range 1.95$-$2.15 [Å]{}. $V_{\mathrm{NH}}^{0}$ can then be regarded as a complex of $V_{\mathrm{NH_{2}}}^{+}$ and H$_{i}^{-}$ with a binding energy of 1.56 eV. Similarly, $V_{\mathrm{N}}^{+}$ can be regarded as a complex composed of $V_{\mathrm{NH_{2}}}^{+}$ and (H$_{2}$)$_{i}$ with a binding energy of 0.74 eV; and $V_{\mathrm{N}}^{-}$ as a complex of $V_{\mathrm{NH_{2}}}^{+}$ and two H$_{i}^{-}$ defects with a binding energy of 1.53 eV.
The migration of $V_{\mathrm{NH_{2}}}^{+}$ involves moving a nearby (NH$_{2}$)$^{-}$ unit to the vacancy, with an energy barrier of 0.87 eV. For $V_{\mathrm{NH}}^{0}$, which can be considered as a complex of $V_{\mathrm{NH_{2}}}^{+}$ and H$_{i}^{-}$, a lower bound on the barrier is 0.87 eV, determined by the least mobile species, i.e., $V_{\mathrm{NH_{2}}}^{+}$.
Other groups have recently reported first-principles calculations for native defects in LiNH$_{2}$, using methodologies similar to ours.[@miceli; @hazrati; @wang] The calculated formation energies and migration barriers of individual hydrogen-, lithium-, and nitrogen-related defects reported by Wang [*et al.*]{}[@wang] are in close agreement with our results (to within 0.1 eV for most defects, with a maximum deviation of 0.2 eV in the case of $V_{\rm H}^-$, our value being lower). Comparing to the results of Hazrati [*et al.*]{},[@hazrati] the deviations are somewhat larger (up to 0.4 eV), for which we cannot offer an explanation. Hazrati [*et al.*]{} did include vibrational zero-point energy corrections for those defects that involve hydrogen. However, while zero-point energies can be significant, a large degree of cancellation always occur between the terms in the solid and in the reservoirs and the effect on formation energies is typically small. Miceli [*et al.*]{} did not report calculated formation energies of individual point defects. For the (H$_{i}^{+}$,$V_{\mathrm{H}}^{-}$) Frenkel pair, Hazrati [*et al.*]{} and Wang [*et al.*]{} reported formation energies of 1.66 eV and 1.93 eV, respectively, compared to 1.54 eV in our calculations. For the (Li$_{i}^{+}$,$V_{\mathrm{Li}}^{-}$) Frenkel pair, their reported values are 0.72 eV and 0.79 eV, whereas our calculated value is 0.65 eV. Miceli [*et al.*]{}, on the other hand, reported a formation energy of 0.97 eV for the lithium Frenkel pair. We attribute the differences in the results for the Frenkel pairs to differences in the atomic configuration of the pairs. Our lower energies indicate that the configurations we identified are more stable.
Li$_{2}$NH
----------
### Hydrogen-related defects
![(Color online) Calculated formation energies of hydrogen-related defects in Li$_{2}$NH, plotted as a function of Fermi energy with respect to the VBM.[]{data-label="Li2NH;FE;H"}](Li2NH_FE_H){width="3.0in"}
{width="6.4in"}
Figure \[Li2NH;FE;H\] shows the calculated formation energies for H$_{i}$, $V_{\mathrm{H}}$, and (H$_{2}$)$_{i}$ in Li$_{2}$NH. Among the hydrogen-related defects, H$_{i}^{+}$ and H$_{i}^{-}$ have the lowest formation energies for the chosen set of chemical potentials. Neutral defects such as $V_{\mathrm{H}}^{0}$ and H$_{i}^{0}$ are high in energy, and the formation energy of (H$_{2}$)$_{i}$ is also significantly higher than that of H$_{i}^{+}$ and H$_{i}^{-}$. The positively charged $V_{\mathrm{H}}^{+}$ is unstable.
In Li$_{2}$NH, the removal of one H atom from an (NH)$^{2-}$ unit to form $V_{\mathrm{H}}$ results in an isolated N atom. Since N has high electronegativity, it is expected that $V_{\mathrm{H}}$ would be most stable in the $V_{\mathrm{H}}^{-}$ configuration, consistent with our results shown in Fig. \[Li2NH;FE;H\]. The formation of H$_{i}^{+}$ results in an (NH$_{2}$)$^-$ unit. H$_{i}^{-}$, on the other hand, prefers to stay in an interstitial site near three Li atoms with the Li$-$H distances in the range 1.78$-$1.87 [Å]{}. Finally, (H$_{2}$)$_{i}$ stays in an interstitial void, with a calculated H$-$H bond length of 0.77 [Å]{}, comparable to but slightly larger than that calculated for an isolated H$_{2}$ molecule (0.75 [Å]{}).
Regarding the migration of the hydrogen-related defects, we find energy barriers of 0.95, 0.65, and 1.66 eV for H$_{i}^{+}$, H$_{i}^{-}$, and $V_{\rm{H}}^{-}$, respectively. The migration barriers for H$_{i}^{+}$ and $V_{\rm{H}}^{-}$ are again high, even higher than in LiNH$_{2}$, because the migration of these two defects involves breaking of N$-$H bonds. For H$_{i}^{+}$, the H attached to an NH unit moves to the nearest NH unit. The saddle-point configuration consists of an H atom located midway between two NH units, i.e., NH$-$H$-$NH. Likewise, the migration of $V_{\rm{H}}^{-}$ involves moving an H$_{i}^{+}$ from an NH unit to the vacancy. The saddle-point configuration in this case consists of an H atom located midway between two N atoms, i.e., N$-$H$-$N.
Figure \[Li2NH;Struct\](a) shows the structure of the (H$_{i}^{+}$,$V_{\mathrm{H}}^{-}$) Frenkel pair in Li$_{2}$NH. Similar to the (H$_{i}^{+}$,$V_{\mathrm{H}}^{-}$) pair in LiNH$_{2}$, the configurations of individual defects are also preserved in this complex; i.e., H$_{i}^{+}$ forms an NH$_{2}$ unit and $V_{\mathrm{H}}^{-}$ leaves the system with an isolated N atom. The distance between the two N atoms in the pair is 3.39 [Å]{}, comparable to the N$-$N distance in the bulk (3.31 [Å]{}). (H$_{i}^{+}$,$V_{\mathrm{H}}^{-}$) has a formation energy of 1.32 eV and a binding energy of 0.14 eV. This low value of the binding energy suggests that, once created, the pair will easily dissociate.
![(Color online) Calculated formation energies of lithium-related defects in Li$_{2}$NH, plotted as a function of Fermi energy with respect to the VBM.[]{data-label="Li2NH;FE;Li"}](Li2NH_FE_Li){width="3.0in"}
### Lithium-related defects
Figure \[Li2NH;FE;Li\] shows the calculated formation energies for $V_{\mathrm{Li}}$, Li$_{i}$, H$_{\mathrm{Li}}^{0}$ (H replacing a Li atom), and Li$_{\mathrm{H}}^{0}$ (Li replacing a H atom) in Li$_{2}$NH. Among these defects, Li$_{i}^{+}$ and $V_{\mathrm{Li}}^{-}$ have the lowest formation energies. H$_{\mathrm{Li}}^{0}$ also has a relatively low formation energy. $V_{\mathrm{Li}}^{+}$, $V_{\mathrm{Li}}^{0}$, Li$_{i}^{-}$, and Li$_{i}^{0}$ are unstable. Note that, if equilibrium between LiNH$_2$ and Li$_2$NH is assumed, the formation energies of H$_{\mathrm{Li}}^{0}$ and Li$_{\mathrm{H}}^{0}$ are independent of the chemical potentials, similar to the equivalent defects in LiNH$_{2}$.
$V_{\mathrm{Li}}^{-}$ in Li$_2$NH corresponds to the removal of a (Li)$^{+}$ unit from the system, whereas Li$_{i}^{+}$ can be thought of as the addition of a Li$^{+}$ ion to the system. These two defects result in relatively small local perturbations in the Li$_2$NH lattice. The creation of H$_{\mathrm{Li}}^{0}$, on the other hand, leaves the system with an NH$_{2}$ unit and a Li vacancy, as seen in Fig. \[Li2NH;Struct\](b). Thus, H$_{\mathrm{Li}}^{0}$ can be regarded as a complex of H$_{i}^{+}$ and $V_{\mathrm{Li}}^{-}$. The formation energy of H$_{\mathrm{Li}}^{0}$ is lower than the sum of the formation energies of H$_{i}^{+}$ and $V_{\mathrm{Li}}^{-}$ by 0.55 eV. Since the resulting defects are an NH$_{2}$ unit and a Li vacancy, the region that includes H$_{\mathrm{Li}}^{0}$ can be considered as locally LiNH$_{2}$ inside bulk Li$_{2}$NH.
Finally, Li$_{\mathrm{H}}^{0}$ was created by replacing an H atom with a Li atom. This results in an N atom standing near seven Li atoms with Li$-$N distances of less than 2.2 [Å]{}. Li$_{\mathrm{H}}^{0}$ can actually be considered as a complex of Li$_{i}^{+}$ and $V_{\mathrm{H}}^{-}$ with a binding energy of 0.45 eV. This defect can act as a nucleation site for Li$_{3}$N formation in the dehydrogenation reaction of Li$_{2}$NH. For comparison, the Li$-$N bonds are 1.94 and 2.11 [Å]{} in bulk Li$_{3}$N.
The migration barriers of Li$_{i}^{+}$ and $V_{\mathrm{Li}}^{-}$ are 0.29 and 0.14 eV, respectively. For H$_{\mathrm{Li}}^{0}$, which is a complex of H$_{i}^{+}$ and $V_{\mathrm{Li}}^{-}$, we estimate a migration barrier of 0.95 eV, the value for H$_{i}^{+}$. Similarly, the migration barrier of Li$_{\mathrm{H}}^{0}$ is estimated to be 1.66 eV, the value for $V_{\mathrm{H}}^{-}$.
Figure \[Li2NH;Struct\](c) shows the structure of the (Li$_{i}^{+}$,$V_{\mathrm{Li}}^{-}$) Frenkel pair in Li$_{2}$NH. The distance between Li$_{i}^{+}$ and $V_{\mathrm{Li}}^{-}$ is 3.13 [Å]{}. The (Li$_{i}^{+}$,$V_{\mathrm{Li}}^{-}$) pair has a formation energy of 0.68 eV and a binding energy of 0.38 eV. The formation energy is much lower than that of the (H$_{i}^{+}$,$V_{\mathrm{H}}^{-}$) pair. This suggests that Li$_{2}$NH, like LiNH$_{2}$, is also prone to Frenkel disorder on the Li sublattice.
![(Color online) Calculated formation energies of nitrogen-related defects in Li$_{2}$NH, plotted as a function of Fermi energy with respect to the VBM.[]{data-label="Li2NH;FE;N"}](Li2NH_FE_N){width="3.4in"}
### Nitrogen-related defects {#nitrogen-related-defects}
Figure \[Li2NH;FE;N\] shows the calculated formation energies for $V_{\mathrm{N}}$ and $V_{\mathrm{NH}}$ in Li$_{2}$NH. Of all the possible nitrogen-related defects, $V_{\mathrm{N}}^{+}$ has the lowest formation energy for almost all Fermi-level values. $V_{\mathrm{N}}^{+}$ can be regarded as a complex of $V_{\mathrm{NH}}^{2+}$ and H$_{i}^{-}$, with a binding energy of 2.09 eV. The isolated H atom (i.e., H$_{i}^{-}$) is surrounded by six Li atom with the Li$-$H distances in the range 2.00$-$2.36 [Å]{}. $V_{\mathrm{N}}^{0}$ and $V_{\mathrm{N}}^{-}$ have high formation energies and are thus unlikely to form.
$V_{\mathrm{NH}}^{2+}$ in Li$_{2}$NH is similar to $V_{\mathrm{NH_{2}}}^{+}$ in LiNH$_{2}$, meaning they are both created by removing an entire anionic unit, i.e., (NH$_{2}$)$^{-}$ or (NH)$^{2-}$, from the bulk compounds. But, unlike $V_{\mathrm{NH_{2}}}^{+}$ in LiNH$_{2}$, which was stable over a wide range of Fermi levels (see Fig. \[LiNH2;FE;N\]), $V_{\mathrm{NH}}^{2+}$ in Li$_{2}$NH is stable only over a very narrow range of Fermi levels near the VBM (Fig. \[Li2NH;FE;N\]). Likewise, $V_{\mathrm{N}}^{+}$ in Li$_{2}$NH is similar to $V_{\mathrm{NH}}^{0}$ in LiNH$_{2}$ because they both have a H$_{i}^{-}$ in the interstitial void formed by removing an anionic unit.
For the migration of $V_{\mathrm{NH}}^{2+}$ in Li$_{2}$NH, we find an energy barrier of 0.91 eV. For $V_{\mathrm{N}}^{+}$, the estimated energy barrier is also 0.91 eV, the energy barrier for $V_{\mathrm{NH}}^{2+}$.
We have also investigated interstitial NH$_{3}$ molecules in Li$_{2}$NH and find that they have relatively high formation energies if the NH$_{3}$ unit is preserved. Instead, we find that the NH$_{3}$ molecule prefers to combine with a host (NH)$^{2-}$ unit to form two (NH$_{2}$)$^-$ units, lowering the energy by 0.54 eV. Even with this lower-energy configuration, the formation energy of 2.60 eV is still too high for it to be a relevant defect. Our results clearly indicate that NH$_{3}$ is unlikely to form and diffuse as interstitial molecules in bulk Li$_{2}$NH (as we already found in the case of LiNH$_{2}$).
Discussion
==========
------------ -------------------- ------------ --------------- ---------------------------------------
Defect $E^f$ (eV) $E_m$ (eV) Complex
LiNH$_{2}$ H$_{i}^+$ 1.28 0.61
H$_{i}^-$ 1.34 0.34
$V_{\rm{H}}^-$ 0.63 0.71
(H$_{2}$)$_{i}$ 1.75 0.19
Li$_{i}^+$ 0.51 0.30
$V_{\rm{Li}}^-$ 0.51 0.20
Li$_{\rm{H}}^0$ 0.48 0.71$^{\ast}$ Li$_{i}^{+}$+$V_{\rm{H}}^{-}$
H$_{\rm{Li}}^0$ 1.17 0.61$^{\ast}$ H$_{i}^{+}$+$V_{\rm{Li}}^{-}$
$V_{\rm{NH_2}}^+$ 0.62 0.87
$V_{\rm{NH}}^0$ 0.40 0.87$^{\ast}$ $V_{\rm{NH}_{2}}^{+}$+H$_{i}^{-}$
$V_{\rm{N}}^+$ 1.64 0.87$^{\ast}$ $V_{\rm{NH}_{2}}^{+}$+(H$_{2}$)$_{i}$
$V_{\rm{N}}^-$ 1.77 0.87$^{\ast}$ $V_{\rm{NH}_{2}}^{+}$+2H$_{i}^{-}$
Li$_{2}$NH H$_{i}^+$ 0.74 0.95
H$_{i}^-$ 0.65 0.65
$V_{\rm{H}}^-$ 0.72 1.66
(H$_{2}$)$_{i}$ 1.47 -
Li$_{i}^+$ 0.66 0.30
$V_{\rm{Li}}^-$ 0.39 0.14
H$_{\rm{Li}}^0$ 0.58 0.95$^{\ast}$ H$_{i}^{+}$+$V_{\rm{Li}}^{-}$
Li$_{\rm{H}}^0$ 0.93 1.66$^{\ast}$ Li$_{i}^{+}$+$V_{\rm{H}}^{-}$
$V_{\rm{NH}}^{2+}$ 1.83 0.91
$V_{\rm{N}}^+$ 0.39 0.91$^{\ast}$ $V_{\rm{NH}}^{2+}$+H$_{i}^{-}$
------------ -------------------- ------------ --------------- ---------------------------------------
: Calculated formation energies ($E^{f}$) and migration barriers ($E_{m}$) for native defects in LiNH$_2$ and Li$_{2}$NH. Atomic chemical potentials were chosen to reflect equilibrium with LiNH$_{2}$ and Li$_2$NH, and the experimental conditions at which the (de)hydrogenation processes occur (see text). Migration energies denoted by an asterisk ($^{\ast}$) are estimated by considering the defect as a complex (last column in the Table) and taking the higher of the migration energies of the constituents.[]{data-label="tab"}
Table \[tab\] lists formation energies and migration barriers for all relevant native defects in LiNH$_{2}$ and Li$_2$NH. For charged defects in LiNH$_{2}$, we set $\mu_{e}$=2.49 eV, where the formation energies of Li$_{i}^{+}$ and $V_{\rm{Li}}^{-}$ are equal. This choice of Fermi level is based on the assumption that electrically active impurities are either absent or present in lower concentrations than the native point defects. In this case, the Fermi level is determined by oppositely charged defects with lowest formation energies, i.e., Li$_{i}^{+}$ and $V_{\rm{Li}}^{-}$ for the chosen set of chemical potentials in LiNH$_{2}$ that represents the dehydrogenation conditions ($\mu_{\rm H}$=$-$0.49 eV). The charge neutrality condition then requires these defects to be present in equal concentrations.[@peles07; @wilsonshort09; @hoang2009] Similarly, in the case of Li$_2$NH the defect formation energies are taken at $\mu_{e}$=1.59 eV, i.e., the Fermi level value at which the formation energies of $V_{\mathrm{N}}^{+}$ and $V_{\mathrm{Li}}^{-}$ are equal, where the chemical potentials are chosen to represent the hydrogenation conditions ($\mu_{\rm H}$=$-$0.31 eV).
It emerges from our analysis in the previous sections that the structure and energetics of all relevant native defects in LiNH$_{2}$ and Li$_{2}$NH can be interpreted in terms of basic building blocks, which include H$_{i}^+$, H$_{i}^-$, $V_{\rm{H}}^-$, (H$_{2})_{i}$, Li$_{i}^+$, $V_{\rm{Li}}^-$, and $V_{\rm{NH_2}}^+$ (or $V_{\rm{NH}}^{2+}$). Understanding the electronic and structural properties of these elementary defects is, therefore, crucial for understanding the defect complexes and the role these defects play in mass transport and ionic conduction. Based on the results presented in Sec. IV, in the following we discuss Li-ion conduction in LiNH$_{2}$ and Li$_{2}$NH, and propose mechanisms for the decomposition of LiNH$_2$ and hydrogenation of Li$_2$NH. We also discuss the dehydrogenation of LiNH$_{2}$+LiH mixtures and the effects of ball milling.
Li-ion conduction
-----------------
Let us first discuss ionic mobility on the Li sublattice and its consequences for ionic conduction. It is evident from Table \[tab\] that, in both LiNH$_{2}$ and Li$_2$NH, Li$_{i}^{+}$ and $V_{\rm{Li}}^{-}$ have low formation energies and are highly mobile. The (Li$_{i}^{+}$,$V_{\rm{Li}}^{-}$) pair that is composed of these two defects also has a low formation energy, 0.65 eV in LiNH$_{2}$ and 0.68 eV in Li$_2$NH, suggesting that Li$_{i}^{+}$ and $V_{\rm{Li}}^{-}$ can be created in the interior of the materials via a Frenkel pair mechanism. Our results are therefore in agreement with recent studies by Ludueña [*et al.*]{} using first-principles path integral molecular dynamics simulations and solid-state $^1$H NMR experiments where they observed significant disorder on the Li sublattice. [@luduena]
Experimentally, Li$_{2}$NH was found to be a good ionic conductor, with an activation energy of 0.58 eV. [@boukamp] This conductivity has been ascribed to the high mobility of Li ions. Our calculations show that both Li$_{i}^{+}$ and $V_{\rm{Li}}^{-}$ can contribute to the ionic conductivity. However, since the calculated migration barrier of $V_{\rm{Li}}^{-}$ is lower than that of Li$_{i}^{+}$, we expect that in Li$_{2}$NH (and LiNH$_{2}$) lithium diffusion by the vacancy mechanism is dominant. The calculated activation energy for self-diffusion of $V_{\rm{Li}}^{-}$ in Li$_{2}$NH is estimated to be 0.53 eV (the formation energy plus the migration barrier, [*cf.*]{} Table \[tab\]), which is very close to the experimental activation energy. [@boukamp] Similarly, we estimate the activation energy for self-diffusion of $V_{\rm{Li}}^{-}$ in LiNH$_{2}$ to be 0.71 eV, somewhat lower than the reported experimental value (0.94 eV). [@matsuo; @matsuo2011] As discussed in the next sections, the highly mobile Li$_{i}^{+}$ and $V_{\rm{Li}}^{-}$ also play an important role in the decomposition of LiNH$_{2}$ and hydrogenation of Li$_{2}$NH.
Decomposition of LiNH$_{2}$ {#ssec:decomp}
---------------------------
Here we address the decomposition of LiNH$_{2}$ into Li$_{2}$NH and NH$_{3}$ according to reaction (\[eq:reaction3\]). The transformation from LiNH$_{2}$ to Li$_{2}$NH involves breaking N$-$H bonds. This can be accomplished through the formation of $V_{\mathrm{H}}^{-}$, which in turn can occur in the interior of the material or at the surface. The required energies are not necessarily the same. The creation of $V_{\mathrm{H}}^{-}$ in the interior of LiNH$_2$, for instance, is necessarily accompanied by the creation of H$_{i}^{+}$ so that mass and charge are conserved. At the surface, one can create $V_{\mathrm{H}}^{-}$ by removing a proton (H$^{+}$) from LiNH$_{2}$ and this H$^{+}$ could be accommodated as an adsorbed atom or react with nearby species. These two possibilities, namely forming $V_{\mathrm{H}}^{-}$ in the interior of LiNH$_2$ or at the surface, can be interpreted as two different possible mechanisms for the reaction. As discussed below, the difference in the activation energies of these two mechanisms will lead to an effective dependence on the surface-to-volume ratio or the specific surface area (SSA) which can be measured experimentally. First we describe the mechanisms in more detail:
[*Mechanism 1*]{}: $V_{\mathrm{H}}^{-}$ and H$_{i}^{+}$ are created simultaneously in the interior of LiNH$_{2}$ through forming a (H$_{i}^{+}$,$V_{\mathrm{H}}^{-}$) Frenkel pair, i.e., moving H$^{+}$ from a lattice site to an interstitial site. This results in an (NH)$^{2-}$ next to an NH$_3$ unit representing $V_{\mathrm{H}}^{-}$ and H$_{i}^{+}$, respectively, as shown in Fig. \[LiNH2;Struct\](a). Next, $V_{\mathrm{H}}^{-}$ and H$_{i}^{+}$ become separated as H$_{i}^{+}$ jumps from one (NH$_2$)$^-$ unit to another. This is equivalent to displacing the NH$_3$ unit away from the (NH)$^{2-}$ unit, leaving two Li$^+$ next to (NH)$^{2-}$; i.e., a formula unit of Li$_2$NH is locally formed inside LiNH$_2$. H$_{i}^{+}$ then migrates to the surface and is released as NH$_{3}$. Note that here we assume that as H$_{i}^{+}$ migrates from one (NH$_{2}$)$^{-}$ unit to the next, a corresponding Li$^+$ moves in the opposite direction in the form of Li$_{i}^+$ (see more below). The overall activation energy ($E_{a}$) for this mechanism then consists of the formation energy of the (H$_{i}^{+}$,$V_{\mathrm{H}}^{-}$) Frenkel pair (1.54 eV), the cost for separating the species in this Frenkel pair (0.38 eV), plus the migration barrier of H$_{i}^{+}$ (0.61 eV), i.e., $E_{a}$=1.54+0.38+0.61=2.53 eV. This activation energy is in very good agreement with the experimental value of 2.53 eV for the activation energy related to the decomposition of LiNH$_{2}$ before ball milling. [@markmaitree]
[*Mechanism 2*]{}: $V_{\rm H}^-$ is created at the surface by removing an H$^{+}$ from LiNH$_{2}$. This H$^{+}$ ion can combine with a surface (NH$_2$)$^-$ unit to form NH$_3$ that is subsequently released. Given the ionic nature of the bonding between Li$^+$ and (NH$_2$)$^-$, we believe that such a process will be possible, irrespective of the details of the surface structure. Note that the rate-limiting step in this mechanism is not the formation of $V_{\rm H}^-$ at the surface, but the hydrogen mass transport to the surface; i.e., in order to maintain this reaction, hydrogen atoms have to be transported to the surface. Here our only assumption is that the formation energy of $V_{\rm H}^-$ on the surface is lower than (or equal to) the formation energy in the bulk, which is a safe assumption given that the bonding environment at the surface is less constrained than in the bulk. In this mechanism, the activation energy is given by hydrogen self-diffusion mediated by $V_{\rm H}^-$, i.e., the sum of its formation energy and migration barrier: $E_{a}$=0.63+0.71=1.34 eV. The Li$^+$ unit that was left with after the surface (NH$_2$)$^-$ unit was released with the H$^{+}$ (in form of NH$_3$) assists the hydrogen self-diffusion in the form of Li$_i^+$, as required by the charge neutrality condition. Note also that the complex formed by $V_{\rm H}^-$ and Li$_{i}^+$ corresponds to a formula unit of Li$_2$NH inside LiNH$_2$. The calculated activation energy of 1.34 eV is also in good agreement with experimentally determined activation energies for the decomposition of ball-milled LiNH$_{2}$, ranging from 1.33 to 1.43 eV. [@pinkerton05; @markmaitree]
Since Mechanism 1 starts with the formation of defects in the bulk and Mechanism 2 with the formation of defects at the surface, we expect the prevalent mechanism and hence the effective activation energy for decomposition to be dependent on the surface-to-volume ratio. In samples composed of sufficiently large particles of LiNH$_2$, the surface-to-volume ratio is small and Mechanism 1 prevails. On the other hand, in samples composed of relatively small particles, i.e., with large surface-to-volume ratio, Mechanism 2 prevails. Indeed, it has been observed that in LiNH$_2$ samples subjected to ball milling, the activation energy for decomposition decreases with milling time, from 2.53 eV (before ball milling, SSA: 3.72 m$^{2}$/g) to 2.30 eV (after 45min of milling, SSA: 40.71 m$^{2}$/g) to 1.43 eV (after 3h, SSA: 46.65 m$^{2}$/g);[@markmaitree] i.e., as the milling time increases the particle size is decreased and the SSA increased, and we expect the prevalent mechanism to change from 1 to 2. These experimental activation energy values are within the range (1.34$-$2.52 eV) established by the calculated activation energies for Mechanisms 1 and 2. It should be noted that the increase in SSA upon ball milling not only increases the likelihood of point defect formation at the surface, it also increases the chance that the point defects can reach all parts of the “bulk” within a given amount of time. While surfaces are of course present even in Mechanism 1, they simply fail to make enough of a difference to modify the observed activation energy.
In both mechanisms the highly mobile and low-formation-energy Li$_{i}^{+}$ and $V_{\rm{Li}}^{-}$ provide local charge neutrality and additional mass transport. Without the accompanying Li$_{i}^{+}$ defect, for example, $V_{\mathrm{H}}^{-}$ would not be able to diffuse into the bulk because local charge neutrality has to be maintained. On the other hand, Li$_{\mathrm{H}}^{0}$ (a complex of Li$_{i}^+$ and $V_{\rm H}^-$) in LiNH$_{2}$ and H$_{\mathrm{Li}}^{0}$ (a complex of H$_{i}^+$ and $V_{\rm Li}^-$) in Li$_2$NH have very low formation energies, suggesting that Li amide (imide) can be locally formed within the bulk Li imide (amide). Our results therefore support David [*et al.*]{}’s observations that the Li amide/imide reaction is a bulk reaction, and that there is a continuous transformation between LiNH$_{2}$ and Li$_2$NH via non-stoichiometric intermediates. [@davidJACS]
We acknowledge that Mechanisms 1 and 2, which are based on calculations of point defects in the dilute limit, do not present a complete picture of the decomposition process. However, the formation and migration of point defects is an initial, but essential and critical, step toward decomposition. In this initial step, the concentration of point defects will be low, thus justifying our focus on the dilute limit. Other processes certainly play a role as well in the ultimate decomposition, but the agreement with experiment indicates that these other processes have activation energies that are either lower than, or comparable to, the point-defect-related mechanisms we are describing. In addition, the fact that we predict different activation energies for different particle sizes, in agreement with experiment, provides support for the point-defect mechanisms indeed being the rate-limiting step.
As mentioned in Sec. \[sec:intro\], other research groups have also tried to understand the decomposition of LiNH$_{2}$ into Li$_{2}$NH and NH$_{3}$ based on first-principles defect calculations. Although not clearly stated, Miceli [*et al.*]{}[@miceli] seemed to suggest that for small LiNH$_{2}$ particles the decomposition process occurs at the surface with the formation of (H$_{i}^{+}$,$V_{\mathrm{H}}^{-}$) Frenkel pairs; and for larger particles, the formation of (H$_{i}^{+}$,$V_{\mathrm{H}}^{-}$) would also occur in the bulk. This is somewhat similar to the two mechanisms we described above. However, Miceli [*et al.*]{} suggested further that, in the former case, the rate-limiting step at the early stage of decomposition is the formation of (H$_{i}^{+}$,$V_{\mathrm{H}}^{-}$) at the surface in the presence of lithium Frenkel pairs. This is different from our Mechanism 2 where the rate-limiting step is self-diffusion of $V_{\mathrm{H}}^{-}$. Hazrati [*et al.*]{}[@hazrati] also proposed that the decomposition process occurs at the surface with the formation of (H$_{i}^{+}$,$V_{\mathrm{H}}^{-}$) Frenkel pairs. Wang [*et al.*]{},[@wang] on the other hand, did not provide any specific mechanism but suggested that the formation of H$_{i}^{+}$ is the rate-limiting step in hydrogen mass transport.
Dehydrogenation of LiNH$_{2}$+LiH mixtures {#ssec:dehydro}
------------------------------------------
The mechanisms we have proposed can also provide an understanding of the dehydrogenation of LiNH$_{2}$+LiH mixtures, i.e., reaction (\[eq:reaction2\]). In these systems, one expects that LiNH$_{2}$ and LiH are in intimate contact if the reactants are carefully mixed. At the LiNH$_{2}$/LiH interface, LiH can provide H$^-$ ions. Our calculated formation energy for $V_{\rm H}^+$ vacancies in LiH is 0.69 eV, and since indiffusion of $V_{\rm H}^+$ is equivalent to outdiffusion of H$_i^-$, this result confirms that LiH can indeed supply the H$^-$ ions that we invoke. These H$^-$ ions can combine with H$_{i}^{+}$ (that is created in the bulk of LiNH$_{2}$ and migrates to the LiNH$_{2}$/LiH interface via Mechanism 1) or H$^{+}$ (that is liberated from LiNH$_{2}$ when creating $V_{\mathrm{H}}^{-}$ via Mechanism 2) to form H$_{2}$ without releasing any NH$_{3}$. This explains the formation of H$_{2}$ in reaction (\[eq:reaction2\]). If LiNH$_{2}$ and LiH are not in intimate contact, NH$_{3}$ can still be produced from LiNH$_{2}$ according to reaction (\[eq:reaction3\]) because the H$^{-}$ (from LiH) is not immediately available to combine with H$_{i}^{+}$ or H$^{+}$ before the latter is released from LiNH$_{2}$ in the form of NH$_{3}$. In this case, the resulting NH$_{3}$ can be captured by LiH according to reaction (\[eq:reaction4\]) and/or released as one of the products.
It has been demonstrated that the activation energy for the dehydrogenation of LiNH$_2$+LiH mixtures also decreases with increasing ball-milling time. [@shaw2008; @varin] Shaw [*et al.*]{} reported activation energies of 1.70 eV (SSA: 4.65 m$^{2}$/g), 1.36 eV (SSA: 47.36 m$^{2}$/g), 1.18 eV (SSA: 51.32 m$^{2}$/g), and 0.65 eV (SSA: 62.35 m$^{2}$/g) for the dehydrogenation of the LiNH$_2$+LiH mixture before ball milling and after the samples were ball-milled for 1.5h, 3h, and 24h, respectively. [@shaw2008] Varin [*et al.*]{}, on the other hand, reported a different set of activation energies: 2.46 eV (before milling, SSA: 16.5 m$^{2}$/g), 0.98 eV (after 1h, SSA: 26.4 m$^{2}$/g), 0.88 eV (after 25h, SSA: 59.6 m$^{2}$/g), and 0.91 eV (after 100h, SSA: 45.6 m$^{2}$/g). [@varin] Both sets of experimental values show the same trend: the activation energy is reduced significantly with ball milling and there is a correlation with the measured SSA.
We suggest that the activation energy for the dehydrogenation of LiNH$_2$+LiH mixtures with relatively short milling times is predominantly determined by that for the decomposition of LiNH$_{2}$. The above mentioned experimental data can therefore be explained in terms of our discussion in Sec. \[ssec:decomp\] about LiNH$_{2}$ decomposition, meaning the dehydrogenation of the mixtures is expected to proceed via Mechanisms 1 and/or 2, and the extent to which one mechanism dominates over the other depends on the surface-to-volume ratio (or the SSA). This provides an explanation for the observed activation energies in the range from 1.34 to 2.52 eV. For those samples that exhibit activation energies lower than that of Mechanism 2 (1.34 eV), produced after long milling times, we suggest that the milling process may have created a high degree of damage in the LiNH$_2$+LiH mixtures, even to the point of local amorphization. Formation energies for defects in these damaged regions would be lower than in the pristine bulk, resulting in defect concentrations well above the equilibrium concentrations; this lowering of the cost of forming the rate-limiting defects results in a lowering of the activation energy for dehydrogenation.
Shaw [*et al.*]{} suggested that NH$_{3}$ diffusion through a Li$_{2}$NH product layer outside a LiNH$_{2}$ shrinking core is the rate-limiting step in the kinetics of the dehydrogenation of LiNH$_2$+LiH mixtures. [@markmaitree; @shawJPS] We find that this is very unlikely if the Li$_{2}$NH layer is thick enough. As presented in Sec. \[sec:defects\], our results clearly indicate that NH$_{3}$ is not likely to form (and diffuse) as interstitial molecules in either LiNH$_{2}$ or Li$_{2}$NH because the formation energy is too high. In Li$_{2}$NH, interstitial NH$_{3}$ molecules are even unstable toward forming (NH$_{2}$)$^-$ units, by combining with host (NH)$^{2-}$ units.
Note that the calculated activation energy of Mechanism 2 reported in Sec. \[ssec:decomp\] depends on the formation energy of $V_{\mathrm{H}}^{-}$ at the Fermi-level value $\mu_{e}$ determined by the charge neutrality condition, which in turn depends on the chemical potentials of Li, N, and H. However, we have checked several possible scenarios and found that the calculated activation energy is not sensitive to the choice of chemical potentials. In the case of LiNH$_2$+LiH mixtures, for example, if the two reactants are carefully mixed, one can assume equilibrium between LiNH$_{2}$, Li$_{2}$NH, and LiH, which gives rise to a different set of chemical potentials where $\mu_{\mathrm{H}}$=$-$0.40 eV. The Fermi level of LiNH$_2$ is then at $\mu_{e}$=2.58 eV where Li$_{i}^{+}$ and $V_{\mathrm{Li}}^{-}$ have equal formation energies. We find that in this case the activation energy of Mechanism 2 is still 1.34 eV.
Hydrogenation of Li$_{2}$NH
---------------------------
Before discussing the hydrogenation mechanism of Li$_{2}$NH, let us summarize what is known about the hydrogenation process in metals. The absorption of hydrogen to form a metal hydride includes several steps: [@vincent] (i) the applied H$_{2}$ is physisorbed on the surface of the metal; (ii) the physisorbed H$_{2}$ is dissociated at the surface and becomes chemisorbed; (iii) H atoms move to subsurface sites and diffuse through the metal; (iv) as the hydrogen concentration increases, a metal hydride phase nucleates. In this process, the rate-limiting step changes from the dissociation and penetration of hydrogen at the metal/H$_{2}$ interface to the nucleation of the hydride phase, and possibly the diffusion of hydrogen through the metal hydride layer that forms around the metal particle. [@vincent] We expect to see similar processes in Li$_{2}$NH.
For the hydrogenation reaction in Eq. (\[eq:reaction2\]), the highly mobile Li$_{i}^{+}$ and $V_{\mathrm{Li}}^{-}$ in Li$_{2}$NH are expected to play an important role. These two defects can be created at the surface or simultaneously in the interior of the material via a Frenkel pair mechanism. Li$_{i}^{+}$ is likely to interact with the applied H$_{2}$ gas at the surface, or with the chemisorbed H that diffuses into the material, and form LiH and H$_{i}^{+}$, i.e., Li$_{i}^{+}$ + H$_{2}$ $\rightarrow$ LiH + H$_{i}^{+}$. This H$_{i}^{+}$ will then be attracted toward the $V_{\mathrm{Li}}^{-}$ defect to form H$_{\mathrm{Li}}^{0}$ (a complex of H$_{i}^{+}$ and $V_{\mathrm{Li}}^{-}$), which provides (NH$_{2}$)$^{+}$ units for the formation of LiNH$_{2}$. This is similar to the mechanism proposed by David [*et al.*]{}[@davidJACS] for Li amide/imide hydrogenation. The rate-limiting step in this process could be the diffusion of H$_{i}^{+}$ in the bulk of Li$_{2}$NH. However this cannot be claimed with certainty without explicit investigations of all other possible steps involved in the hydrogenation process.
Summary
=======
We have carried out comprehensive first-principles studies of native defects in LiNH$_{2}$ and Li$_{2}$NH. Both compounds are found to be prone to Frenkel disorder on the Li sublattice, which is consistent with experimental observations. Lithium interstitials and vacancies have low formation energies and are highly mobile; they can therefore participate in ionic conduction and mass transport, and act as accompanying defects for hydrogen-related defects in mass transport. Hydrogen interstitials and vacancies, on the other hand, are responsible for forming and breaking N$-$H bonds, which are essential in the Li amide/imide reaction. Based on the structure, energetics, and migration of hydrogen-, lithium-, and nitrogen-related point defects and defect complexes, we have proposed that LiNH$_{2}$ decomposes into Li$_{2}$NH and NH$_{3}$ according to two competing mechanisms, one involving the formation of native defects in the interior of the material, and the other at the surface. As a result, the prevalent mechanism and hence the effective activation energy for decomposition depend on the surface-to-volume ratio or the specific surface area, which changes with particle size during ball milling. These mechanisms also provide an explanation for the particle-size dependence of the activation energy of the decomposition of LiNH$_{2}$ and that of the dehydrogenation of LiNH$_{2}$+LiH mixtures.
K.H. was supported by General Motors Corporation, and A.J. by the U.S. Department of Energy (Grant No. DE-FG02-07ER46434). We acknowledge the use of the CNSI Computing Facility under NSF Grant No. CHE-0321368, NERSC resources supported by the DOE Office of Science under Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231, and the Ranger supercomputer from the TeraGrid computing resources supported by the NSF under Grant No. DMR070072N.
U. Eberle, M. Felderhoff, and F. Schüth, Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. [**48**]{}, 6608 (2009). B. A. Boukamp and R. A. Huggins, Phys. Lett. [**72**]{}A, 464 (1979). P. Chen, Z. Xiong, J. Luo, J. Lin, and K. L. Tan, Nature (London) [**420**]{}, 302 (2002). P. Chen, Z. Xiong, J. Luo, J. Lin, and K. L. Tan, J. Phys. Chem. B [**107**]{}, 10967 (2003). J. Lu, Z. Z. Fang, and H. Y. Sohn, Inorg. Chem. [**45**]{}, 8749 (2006). Y. H. Hu and E. Ruckenstein, Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. [**42**]{}, 5135 (2003). Y. H. Hu and E. Ruckenstein, J. Phys. Chem. A [**107**]{}, 9737 (2003). T. Ichikawa, S. Isobe, N. Hanada, H. Fujii, J. Alloys Compd. [**365**]{}, 271 (2004). T. Ichikawa, N. Hanada, S. Isobe, H. Leng, and H. Fujii, J. Phys. Chem. B [**108**]{}, 7887 (2004). F. E. Pinkerton, J. Alloys Compd. [**400**]{}, 76 (2005). G. P. Meisner, F. E. Pinkerton, M. S. Meyer, M. P. Balogh, and M. D. Kundrat, J. Alloys Compd. [**404**]{}-[**406**]{}, 24 (2005). T. Ichikawa, N. Hanada, S. Isobe, H.Y. Leng, and H. Fujii, J. Alloys Compd. [**404**]{}-[**406**]{}, 435 (2005). S. Isobe, T. Ichikawa, S. Hino, and H. Fujii, J. Phys. Chem. B [**109**]{}, 14855 (2005). T. Markmaitree, R. Ren, and L. L. Shaw, J. Phys. Chem. B [**110**]{}, 20710 (2006). J. Z. Hu, J. H. Kwak, Z. Yang, W. Osborn, T. Markmaitree, L. L. Shaw, J. Power Sources [**181**]{}, 116 (2008). W. I. David, M. O. Jones, D. H. Gregory, C. M. Jewell, S. R. Johnson, A. Walton, and P. P. Edwards, J. Am. Chem. Soc. [**129**]{}, 1594 (2007). K.-F. Aguey-Zinsou, J. Yao, and Z. Xiao Gua, J. Phys. Chem. B [**111**]{}, 12531 (2007). J. F. Herbst and L. G. Hector, Jr., Phys. Rev. B [**72**]{}, 125120 (2005). K. Miwa, N. Ohba, S. I. Towata, Y. Nakamori, and S.-i. Orimo, Phys. Rev. B [**71**]{}, 195109 (2005). J. B. Yang, X. D. Zhou, Q. Cai, W. J. James, and W. B. Yelon, Appl. Phys. Lett. [**88**]{}, 041914 (2006). Y. Song and Z. X. Guo, Phys. Rev. B [**74**]{}, 195120 (2006). T. Mueller and G. Ceder, Phys. Rev. B [**74**]{}, 134104 (2006). B. Magyari-Köpe, V. Ozolins, and C. Wolverton, Phys. Rev. B [**73**]{}, 220101 (2006). T. Tsumuraya, T. Shishidou, and T. Oguchi, J. Alloys Compds. [**446**]{}-[**447**]{}, 323 (2007). K. Hoang, A. Janotti, and C. G. Van de Walle, Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. [**50**]{}, 10170 (2011). G. Miceli, C. S. Cucinotta, M. Bernasconi, and M. Parrinello, J. Phys. Chem. C [**114**]{}, 15174 (2010). E. Hazrati, G. Brocks, B. Buurman, R. A. de Groot, and G. A. de Wijs, Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. [**13**]{}, 6043 (2011). J. Wang, Y. Du, H. Xu, C. Jiang, Y. Kong, L. Sun, and Z.-K. Liu, Phys. Rev. B [**84**]{}, 024107 (2011). J. P. Perdew, K. Burke, and M. Ernzerhof, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**77**]{}, 3865 (1996). P. E. Blöchl, Phys. Rev. B [**50**]{}, 17953 (1994). G. Kresse and D. Joubert, Phys. Rev. B [**59**]{}, 1758 (1999). G. Kresse and J. Hafner, Phys. Rev. B [**47**]{}, 558 (1993). G. Kresse and J. Furthmüller, Phys. Rev. B [**54**]{}, 11169 (1996). G. Kresse and J. Furthmüller, Comput. Mat. Sci. [**6**]{}, 15 (1996). H. J. Monkhorst and J. D. Pack, Phys. Rev. B [**13**]{}, 5188 (1976). G. Henkelman, B. P. Uberuaga, and H. Jónsson, J. Chem. Phys. [**113**]{}, 9901 (2000). C. G. Van de Walle and J. Neugebauer, J. Appl. Phys. [**95**]{}, 3851 (2004). A. Janotti and C. G. Van de Walle, Rep. Prog. Phys. [**72**]{}, 126501 (2009). A. Peles and C. G. Van de Walle, Phys. Rev. B [**76**]{}, 214101 (2007). D. J. Siegel, C. Wolverton, and V. Ozolins, Phys. Rev. B [**75**]{}, 014101 (2007). J. F. Herbst and L. G. Hector, Jr., Appl. Phys. Lett. [**88**]{}, 231904 (2006). H. Hemmes, A. Driessen, and R. Griessen, J. Phys. C: Solid State Phys. [**19**]{}, 3571 (1986). R. Juza and K. Opp, Z. Anorg. Allg. Chem. [**266**]{}, 325 (1951). T. Noritake, H. Nozaki, M. Aoki, S. Towata, G. Kitahara, Y. Nakamori, and S.-i. Orimo, J. Alloys Compd. [**393**]{}, 264 (2005). K. Ohoyama, Y. Nakamori, S.-i. Orimo, and K. Yamada, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. [**74**]{}, 483 (2005). G. B. Wilson-Short, A. Janotti, K. Hoang, A. Peles, and C. G. Van de Walle, Phys. Rev. B [**80**]{}, 224102 (2009). K. Hoang and C. G. Van de Walle, Phys. Rev. B [**80**]{}, 214109 (2009). G. A. Ludueña, M. Wegner, L. Bj[å]{}lie, and D. Sebastiani, Chem. Phys. Chem. [**11**]{}, 2353 (2010). M. Matsuo, A. Remhof, P. Martelli, R. Caputo, M. Ernst, Y. Miura, T. Sato, H. Oguchi, H. Maekawa, H. Takamura, A. Borgschulte, A. Züttel, and S.-i. Orimo, J. Am. Chem. Soc. [**131**]{}, 16389 (2009). M. Matsuo and S.-i. Orimo, Adv. Energy Mater. [**1**]{}, 161 (2011). L. L. Shaw, R. Ren, T. Markmaitree, and W. Osborn, J. Alloys Compds. [**448**]{}, 263 (2008). R. A. Varin, M. Jang, and M. Polanski, J. Alloys Compds. [**491**]{}, 658 (2010). L. L. Shaw, W. Osborn, T. Markmaitree, and X. Wan, J. Power Sources [**177**]{}, 500 (2008). V. Bérubé, G. Radlke, M. Dresselhaus, and G. Chen, Int. J. Energy Res. [**31**]{}, 637 (2007).
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
Rare gas solid surfaces and films provide an important testing ground for a variety of surface phase transitions. Surface melting [@SM], roughening [@vanbejeren], and more recently preroughening (PR) [@dennijs] have been identified or at least claimed at the free rare gas solid-vapor interface. Layering transitions of thin rare gas films on smooth substrates have given rise to a wide literature [@younbook]. The discovery of reentrant layering (RL) – the unexpected disappearance and subsequent reappearance (well below the roughening temperature) of layering steps in adsorption isotherms on smooth substrates [@younhess; @day] – has led to a debate [@comment]. One possible explanation is PR, a phase transition which takes a surface from a low-temperature “ordered flat” state, with essentially full surface coverage ($T<T_{PR}$), to a high temperature “disordered flat” (DOF) state, with half coverage, and a network of meandering steps ($T>T_{PR}$). Layering would disappear at PR, but re-enter in the DOF state [@dennijs; @weichman]. The competing explanation is based on the possibility of a melting-solidification-melting sequence in the top surface layer, similar to that seen for increasing temperature in canonical molecular dynamics simulations [@phillips]. In this picture, RL would result directly from a layer-promotion-driven melting of the top surface layer, and the subsequent advance of a solid-liquid interface [@comment]. Both approaches appear to capture some important physics, but both also have problems. The non-atomistic statistical mechanics lattice models provide, in presence of an attractive substrate potential, an overall adsorption phase diagram with zig-zag lines of heat capacity peaks (whose behavior has been called “zippering” [@zippering]) which are centered at $T_{PR}$ and strikingly resemble experimental observations [@day]. Because they contain PR, the models can naturally explain why the coverage jump across RL should be about half a monolayer, as seen in ellipsometry [@younhess] and in X-ray measurements [@rieutord]. However, they fail to account for continuous atom dynamics, in particular melting, and it remains unclear how bad the total neglect of these aspect might be at these relatively high temperatures. In Ar (111), RL takes place near $69 K$, not too far from melting at $T_m=84 K$. By contrast, the atomistic canonical simulation approach does not suffer from that problem, and can describe quite well all the surface degrees of freedom, including thermal evolution of each surface layer from solid to liquid. It finds, realistically, that top-layer surface melting seems to be setting on precisely near the RL temperature. However, it does not explain the half layer coverage jump across RL. A crucial underlying difficulty of this approach lies in the fixed particle number – a difficulty which the lattice models, being naturally grand canonical, do not encounter. In this situation Grand Canonical Monte Carlo (GCMC) atomistic simulation should be the method of choice, applied since long ago [@rowley] to describe adsorption, albeit of a single monolayer. Recently, we demonstrated how a free rare gas (111) surface can be realistically simulated by GCMC with a Lennard-Jones potential, and found indications that PR is indeed incipient at $0.8\,T_{m}$ [@franck1]. That work however remained incomplete, because a full equilibrium stabilization of the grand canonical surface proved to be increasingly hard with increasing temperature, and failed above $ 0.8 T_m$, where a value of $\mu$ that would cause neither decrease nor increase of the total particle number could no longer be found.
In this Letter we present results of a fully equilibrated realistic GCMC simulation of multilayer rare gas adsorption on a flat attractive substrate. In this case, the substrate potential naturally provides the necessary stabilization for the system. We obtain realistic adsorption isotherms, whose main features compare directly with experiment. Reentrant layering is recovered, and layer occupancies confirm its association with a DOF surface and thus with PR. At the same time however, surface diffusion and pair correlations show that while the virtually full monolayer below $T_{\rm PR}$ is solid, with only a gas of adatoms and vacancies, the half-full monolayer found above $T_{\rm PR}$ is made of a 2D liquid islands (even if in a strong periodic potential). A new picture emerges, where the fractional monolayer melting, besides opening the way to surface melting, is also a key element favoring the preroughening of these surfaces.
We simulate adsorption by classical GCMC, implementing small displacement moves (m), creations (c), and destructions (d) with relative probabilities $\alpha^{(m)}=1-2\alpha$ and $\alpha^{(c)}=\alpha^{(d)}=\alpha$. Small moves apply to all particles, whereas creation/destruction is restricted to a fixed surface region, about four layers wide, since their acceptance in the fourth layer of this region is already negligible on the entire MC run. In standard bulk GCMC the fastest convergence to the Markov chain is for $\alpha=1/3$ [@norman]. For our surface geometry and our potential, the optimal value of $\alpha$ is found to be small, of order $10^{-3}$ (the precise value depending on the outer layer population relative to the total), as needed to allow for a more effective equilibration after each creation/destruction move. Creation and destruction acceptance probabilities were checked explicitly to satisfy the detailed balance. We simulated adsorption of atoms interacting via the (12,6) Lennard-Jones potential truncated at $2.5 \sigma$. The bulk fcc triple point temperature $T_m$ of this model is $\sim 0.7 \epsilon$ [@xjc] (note that pressure dependence is negligible, [*i.e.*]{} $P_m/T_m (dT_m/dP) \simeq 2 \times 10^{-4}$ for Ar), and we will from now on switch notation to a reduced temperature $ t = T/T_m$. The substrate was taken to be flat and unstructured. Periodic boundary conditions were assumed along the $x$ and $y$ directions, with a reflecting wall along $z$, placed way above the surface. Interactions between atoms and substrate were also of the Lennard-Jones form, giving rise to a laterally invariant (3,9) potential $V(z)=A (B/z^9 - C/z^3)$, with $A=40 \pi/3$, $B=1/15$ and $C=1/2$, the latter $\simeq 10$ times larger than the true Ar/graphite value, so as to avoid the stabilization problems encountered previously with the free solid-vapor interface [@franck1]. The $(xy)$ simulation box size was of $22 \times 23 $ $\sigma$ units and a full fcc layer contained $N_l=480$ atoms. We focused on two temperatures, $t_1= 0.75$ and $t_2 = 0.86$, (respectively below and above the RL temperature $ t \simeq 0.83$), where we obtained full and converged adsorption isotherms. For each temperature we increased the chemical potential $\mu$ ([*i.e.*]{}, increased the pressure of the fictitious perfect gas in contact with the system) by intervals of $\simeq\rm 0.02 \epsilon$ and waited for stabilization of both total energy and particle number. Generally half a million Monte-Carlo (MC) moves/particle were sufficient to reach equilibrium. Then $30$ to $50$ uncorrelated configurations were generated from a subsequent half million MC moves and analyzed.
Fig. 1 shows the calculated adsorption isotherms – the number of adsorbed layers versus $(\mu_0 -\mu)^{-1/3}$ – $\mu_0$ being the saturation chemical potential (where a bulk quantity of matter would condense). At the lower temperature $t_1$ we find clear layering steps between consecutive integer layers numbers. Analysis of layer occupancies shows that after each coverage jump the first layer is nearly full, with $\simeq 15-20 \%$ of vacancies, and only few adatoms. In the subsequent plateau the adatom population gradually increases to $\simeq 15-20 \%$ and vacancies in the first layer are filled, until the next jump suddenly occurs, and so on. Between $t_1$ and $t_2$ we generally observed that, as in experiments, the layering steps tended to disappear; however here it became very difficult to obtain a stable surface and thus well defined adsorption isotherms. At the higher temperature $t_2$ we did recover stability, and we found that layering was again present, but with two important qualitative differences with the low temperature isotherm: coverage was shifted by half a monolayer, and plateaus were broader. Adsorption began at a half-full layer here, and it progressed continuously, leading to a broader plateau, until the next jump to another half integer coverage. We plot in Fig. 1 the $t_2$ isotherm up to eight adsorbed layers, the maximum thickness before encountering again stabilization problems. The large plateau breadths are clearly due to our strong substrate potential. The film grand potential can be crudely modeled as a periodic part, say $k\cos (2\pi n)$, plus an effective interface repulsion, $ c/(2 (n-n_0)^2)$ [@weeks], plus a growth term $\mu n$ ($n$ is the total number of layers). The plateau breadth is thus predicted to decrease asymptotically in the form $\Delta n \simeq 1/(1+ \gamma^{-1}(n-n_0)^{4})$, where $\gamma=3c/(4\pi ^2 k)$ measures the strength of the substrate. As Fig. 1 (inset) shows, this law fits well the experimental data, with $c/k = 1200$. It also agrees fairly well with our actual GCMC plateau widths, once $\gamma$ is increased by the correct factor $10$. We also note from Fig. 1 the relatively large compressibility $k^{-1}$ of the half-coverage state with respect to the low-temperature state.
We conclude that our simulation reproduces the basic RL phenomenon, making it possible to probe deeply into its nature. For a better understanding of the layering reentrance, we plot in Fig. 2 the occupancies, at $t_2=0.86$, of the different layers for increasing chemical potential. The jumps leading to fractional coverage states are clearly observable. Following each jump (A, layer \#5), the coverage increases continuously by a fraction of monolayer, enriching the adatom population, as well as first and second layers, until at (B) the surface (layer \#6) is ready for the next jump, leading to (C) where, following the jump, former adatoms (layer \#6) increase in density to form a new half layer, and a new adatom layer (\#7) is started. We found no trace of the non-monotonic occupancies reported in earlier canonical studies[@phillips]. The top layer occupancy extrapolates to about $50$ % for large adsorbate thickness, strongly supporting the identification with a DOF state: an ordinary 2D liquid should display a much higher average lateral density. The occupancies of the three outermost layers (0.1, 0.5, 0.8) for what we thus suppose to describe a realistic DOF state differ somewhat from the simplistic ones expected from lattice models, namely (0.0, 0.5, 1.0). The finding of a DOF surface at $t_2$, against an ordinary flat surface \[occupancies (0.15, 0.85, 1.0)\] at $t_1$ indicates that PR of the free rare gas solid surface must take place in between. This conclusion is also supported by the evidence of DOF phase separation taking place at $t \simeq 0.83$ independently obtained by canonical simulations of the free Lennard-Jones surface [@jayanthi].
One might thus be led to think that apart from details, the physics is just that dictated by simple SOS models [@weichman]. However, a closer look at our MC configurations reveals that the situation is different, and richer. Following [@phillips] we studied the lateral positional ordering and diffusion coefficients of different layers at the two temperatures by examining pair correlation functions, in particular at $t_2=0.86$. For this purpose we carried out two separate canonical molecular dynamics simulations (the diffusion coefficient is ill-defined in a grand canonical simulation), one with an integer layer number, and another with half-integer (no substrate). They were meant to approximate free stable grand canonical surfaces below and above $t_{RL}= 0.83$, and thus chosen with the same coverages $\sim 0.5$ and $\sim 1$ of the grand canonical states A and B described earlier. Fig. 3 shows a selection of lateral pair correlation functions $g(r)$ calculated at $t_2$. Presence of shell-related peaks/shoulders indicates a solid layer, their absence a liquid layer[@phillips]. We see that the top layer is always liquid, but that it solidifies right after being covered by the next half layer. Consider for instance state A in Fig. 2. The upper layer (\#6) has 10% of adatoms (a 2D gas), the lower layer (\#4) has 20% of vacancies and is solid, but the the middle half filled layer (\#5) is liquid. As coverage increases, layer \#5 gets denser, but remains liquid until jump B (see Fig. 3). After that, at C, the former adatoms condense into another fluid half layer \#6, while at the same time layer \#5 solidifies, leading to a surface identical to the starting one except for one extra layer. This picture is close to that suggested by heat capacity studies [@day]. It is also similar to that described by canonical simulations [@phillips], differing however in two crucial respects, namely (i) the lack of a solid-fluid-solid evolution for any layer and, more importantly, (ii) the [*half occupancy*]{} of the fluid layer. The latter is the hallmark of the DOF state, which here therefore emerges as the likeliest explanation for RL.
In order to further elucidate the connection between surface melting and PR, we examined the lateral diffusion coefficient layer by layer. Mean square displacements were averaged for all particles spending time within three vertical windows corresponding to adatom layer, first layer (surface) and second layer. Not surprisingly, adatoms are very diffusive (gas-like), while buried layers are solid, and poorly diffusive. The top layer diffusivity was always sizable, but larger by about a factor two in the half-covered case, where it is similar to the surface mass transport coefficient near $T_m$ [@brough] (Fig. 4). This confirms that a height jump by about half a layer across PR also takes the top layer from solid to liquid, in agreement with the GCMC analysis. Thus sudden formation of the liquid half layer at PR represents the threshold for the first appearance of the liquid, which will subsequently extend to lower layers and grow critically to a thicker liquid film as temperature is further raised to approach $T_m$.
Summarizing, our results can explain the experimental evidence of RL occurring in the adsorption of rare gas on a solid substrate. Layer by layer occupancies and direct insight on the surface processes that are not directly accessible from experiments, confirm the interpretation of the reentrant layering transition in terms of preroughening. The DOF state consists of a half monolayer of barely percolating 2D liquid islands, floating on top of a solid substrate. We found a coincidence of the onset of premelting in the top layer with a PR transition, where coverage jumps from full to partial. These two surface phenomena, apparently very different, appear here to be intimately connected. A lattice model addressing this connection has been published separately [@jagla].
It is a pleasure to thank S. Prestipino, E. Jagla, and G. Santoro for many constructive discussions. We acknowledge support from INFM, and from MURST. Work at SISSA by F. C. was under European Commission sponsorship, contract ERBCHBGCT940636.
see, [*e.g.*]{}, A. C. Levi, in [*Phase Transitions and Surface Films 2*]{}, Eds H. Taub, G. Torzo, H. J. Lauter and S. C. Fain, Jr. (NATO ASI series, Series B, Physics, v. 267), p. 327; L. Pietronero and E. Tosatti, Solid State Comm. [**32**]{}, 255 (1979).
H. Van Bejieren and I. Nolden, in [*Structure and Dynamics of Surfaces II*]{}, Eds. W. Schommers and P. von Blanckenhagen (Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg, 1987) p. 259.
K. Rommelse and M. den Nijs, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**59**]{}, 2578 (1987); M. den Nijs and K. Rommelse, Phys. Rev. B [**40**]{}, 4709 (1989).
G. B. Hess, in [*Phase Transitions and Surface Films 2*]{}, [*op. cit.*]{}, p. 357.
H. S. Youn and G. B. Hess, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**64**]{}, 918 (1990), H. S. Youn, X. F. Meng and G. B. Hess, Phys. Rev. B [**48**]{}, 14556 (1993); G. B. Hess, in [*Phase Transitions in Surface Films 2*]{}, edited by H. Taub [*et al.*]{} (Plenum, New York, 1992).
P. Day, M. Lysek, M. LaMadrid, and D. Goodstein, Phys. Rev. [**47**]{}, 10716 (1993).
J. M. Phillips and J. Z. Larese, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**75**]{}, 4330 (1995); P. B. Weichman and D. Goodstein, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**75**]{}, 4331 (1995).
P. B. Weichman, P. Day and D. Goodstein, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**74**]{}, 418 (1995).
J. M. Phillips, Q. M. Zhang and J. Z. Larese, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**71**]{}, 2971 (1993); J.M. Phillips and J. Z. Larese, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**75**]{}, 4330 (1995); and Phys. Rev. B [**56**]{}, 15938 (1997).
P. B. Weichman and A. Prasad, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**76**]{}, 2322 (1997).
F. Rieutord, R. Simon, R. Conradt, and P. Muller-Buschbaum, [*Europhys. Lett.*]{} [**37**]{}, 565 (1997).
L. A. Rowley, D. Nicholson and N. G. Parsonage, J. Comput. Phys. [**26**]{}, 66 (1975).
F. Celestini, D. Passerone, F. Ercolessi and E. Tosatti, Surf. Sci. [**402-404**]{}, 886 (1998).
G. E. Norman and V. S. Filipov, High Temp. (USSR) [**7**]{}, 216 (1969).
X. J. Chen, F. Ercolessi, A. C. Levi and E. Tosatti, Surf. Sci [**249**]{}, 237 (1991).
J. D. Weeks, Phys. Rev. B [**26**]{}, 3998 (1982).
S. Prestipino, C. S. Jayanthi, F. Ercolessi, and E. Tosatti, Surf. Rev. and Lett. [**4**]{}, 843 (1997); C. S. Jayanthi [*et al.*]{}, Surf. Sci. Lett., accepted.
J. Q. Broughton and G. H. Gilmer, J. Chem. Phys. [**79**]{}(1983)5119.
E. A. Jagla, S. Prestipino and E. Tosatti , Phys. Rev. Lett. [**83**]{}, 2753 (1999).
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'Let $N$ be a $(n+1)$-dimensional globally hyperbolic Lorentzian manifold with a compact Cauchy hypersurface $\mathcal{S}_0$ and $F$ a curvature function, either the mean curvature $H$, the root of the second symmetric polynomial ${{\sigma}}_2 = \sqrt{H_2}$ or a curvature function of class $(K^*)$. We consider curvature flows with curvature function $F$ and a volume preserving term and prove long time existence of the flow and exponential convergence of the corresponding graphs in the $C^\infty$-topology to a hypersurface of constant $F$-curvature, provided there are barriers. Furthermore we examine stability properties and foliations of constant $F$-curvature hypersurfaces.'
address:
- 'Matthias Makowski, Universität Konstanz, 78457 Konstanz, Germany'
- 'http://www.math.uni-konstanz.de/\~makowski/'
author:
- Matthias Makowski
bibliography:
- 'Bibliography.bib'
date: 'April 12, 2011'
title: Volume preserving curvature flows in Lorentzian manifolds
---
Introduction {#Introduction}
============
We show the long time existence and convergence to a constant $F$-hypersurface of the following curvature flow in a globally hyperbolic Lorentzian manifold with compact Cauchy hypersurface under suitable assumptions: $$\label{floweq}
\begin{split}
\dot{x} &= (\Phi(F) - f)\, \nu,\\
x(0) &= x_0,
\end{split}$$ where $x_0$ is the embedding of an initial, compact, connected, spacelike hypersurface $M_0$ of class $C^{m+2,\alpha}$, $2\leq m \in {\mathbb{N}}$, $0< \alpha < 1$, $\nu$ is the corresponding past directed normal, $F$ is a curvature function of class $C^{m,\alpha}(\Gamma)$ evaluated at the principal curvatures of the flow hypersurfaces $M(t)$, $x(t)$ denotes the embedding of $M(t)$, $\Phi$ is a smooth supplementary function satisfying $\Phi' > 0$, $\Phi'' \leq 0$, and $f$ is a volume preserving global term, $f = f_k$, see the definition below.
Furthermore the initial hypersurface should be
admissible
, meaning that its principal curvatures belong to the defining cone $\Gamma$ of the curvature function $F$, which will be specified below.
Depending on which type of volume has to be preserved, we define the global term as in [@McCoyMixedAreaGen]: $$\label{globTerm}
f_k(t) = \frac{\int_{M_t}{H_k \Phi(F)\, \mathrm{d\mu_t}}}{\int_{M_t}{H_k\,\mathrm{d\mu_t}}}.$$ Here $H_k$, $k = 0, ..., n$, denotes the k-th elementary symmetric polynomial, where $H_0 = 1$. For an overview of the notation (especially concerning the curvature functions) we refer to section 2.
We assume that the ambient space $N$ is a $(n+1)$-dimensional smooth, connected, globally hyperbolic Lorentzian manifold with a compact, smooth, connected Cauchy hypersurface $\mathcal{S}_0$, and $N$ is covered by a future directed Gaussian coordinate system $(x^\alpha)$, such that the metric $(\bar{g}_{\alpha\beta})$ can be expressed in the form $$\label{GKS}
d\bar{s}^2 = e^{2\psi(x^0, x)}\{ - (dx^0)^2 + \sigma_{ij}(x^0, x)\, dx^idx^j\},$$ where $x^0$ is the time function defined on an interval $I = (a,b)$, we suppose without loss of generality $0 \in I$ and $(x^i)$ are local coordinates for the Cauchy hypersurface $\mathcal{S}_0$. The coordinates can be chosen such that $$\mathcal{S}_0 = \{x^0 = 0\}.$$ The existence of a smooth, proper function $f:N \rightarrow {\mathbb{R}}$ with non-vanishing timelike gradient in a merely connected, smooth Lorentzian manifold $N$ already assures the existence of such a special coordinate system, see [@GerhCP Theorem 1.4.2], implying that $N$ is globally hyperbolic with a compact Cauchy hypersurface. Alternatively one can deduce the existence of the special coordinate system in smooth, globally hyperbolic Lorentzian manifolds with compact Cauchy hypersurface from [@Split2 Theorem 1.1] and [@Split1 Lemma 2.2].
We need one further assumption on the ambient manifold, namely we consider curvature flows in cosmological spacetimes, a terminology due to Bartnik, meaning a Lorentzian manifold with the above properties, which furthermore satisfies the timelike convergence condition, an assumption which is quite natural in the setting of general relativity as it corresponds to the strong energy condition (see for example [@HawEll]). Hence for all $p\in N$ there holds $$\label{TCC}
\bar{R}_{\alpha\beta}V^\alpha V^\beta \geq 0 \quad\forall \text{ timelike } V \in T_pN.$$ We only mention that for the proof of Theorem \[MainTheorem1\] (with $F=H$) this condition could be relaxed to the case where the lower bound is $-\Lambda$ with a constant $\Lambda > 0$, where in this case one needs to assume that there holds $H > \sqrt{n\Lambda}$ on the initial hypersurface.
In the case of general curvature functions however we will need to assume that the timelike sectional curvatures of $N$ are non-positive, i.e. at points $p \in N$ there holds $$\label{NPTSC}
\bar{R}_{\alpha\beta\gamma\delta}V^\alpha W^\beta V^\gamma W^\delta \geq 0 \quad\forall \text{ timelike } V\in T_pN, \,\forall\, \text{ spacelike } W \in T_pN.$$
The possible curvature functions are $F =H$, $F={{\sigma}}_2$ or $F \in (K^*)$. For these we have to distinguish their cones of definition $\Gamma$ and the supplementary function $\Phi$:
- Let $F = H$ and $k=0$, then let $\Phi(x) = x$ and $\Gamma = {\mathbb{R}}^n$. For $k=1$ let $\Gamma = \Gamma_1$ and $\Phi \in C^{m,\alpha}({\mathbb{R}}_+)$ be an arbitrary function satisfying merely $\Phi' > 0$ and $\Phi'' \leq 0$. For example, one could consider the surface-area preserving inverse mean curvature flow, $\Phi(x) = -x^{-1}$. For higher $k$ the flow is not well defined, since convexity does not need to be preserved during the flow.
- For $F = {{\sigma}}_2 = H_2^{\frac{1}{2}}$ let $\Gamma = \Gamma_2$ and $\Phi(x) = x$ or $\Phi(x) = -x^{-1}$. Again, the flow is only well defined for $k \in \{0,1,2\}$ for the same reasons as above.
- Lastly, let $F \in (K^*)$ be a homogeneous function of degree 1 and of class $C^{m,\alpha}(\Gamma_+)$, then for $k \in \{0, \ldots, n\}$ we choose $\Phi(x) = \log(x)$ and $\Gamma = \Gamma_+$.
We denote by $(F, \Gamma, \Phi)$ one of the possible choices of curvature functions and their respective cones of definitions as well as supplementary functions stated above.
In order to be able to derive $C^0$-estimates we have to add an additional assumption, first we provide the necessary definition:
\[DefVolDec\] Let $F$ be a continuous curvature function defined on an open, convex, symmetric cone $\Gamma \subset {\mathbb{R}}^n$. Then we define (here we distinguish the cases considering the future or the past by brackets):
Let $c$ be a constant, then we say we have a future (past) curvature barrier for $(F, \Gamma, c)$ of class $C^{k, \beta}$, where $k\in {\mathbb{R}}$, $k\geq 2$, $0\leq \beta \leq 1$, if there exists a compact, connected, spacelike and admissible hypersurface $M$ of class $C^{k, \beta}$, satisfying $$\label{Barrier}
F_{|M} \geq (\leq)\, c.$$
With the definition $$c_1 = \underset{M_0}{\min}\, F \quad \textnormal{ and } \quad c_2 = \underset{M_0}{\max}\, F,$$ we can state the following assumption:
\[MainAssumption\] We have a future curvature barrier for $(F, \Gamma, c_2)$ of class $C^{2}$ and a past curvature barrier for $(F, \Gamma, c_1)$ of class $C^{2}$. If in the case $F=H$, $\Gamma = {\mathbb{R}}^n$, for $i=1$ or $i=2$ there holds $c_i = 0$, then we assume the corresponding barrier to be strict.
If the curvature function is not the mean curvature, we assume the existence of a strictly convex function $\chi_{{\Omega}}\in C^2(\bar{{{\Omega}}})$, where ${{\Omega}}\subset N$ is the region between the barriers. For geometric conditions implying the existence of such a function see Lemma \[ExistenceStrictlyConvex\].
Now we state the theorem:
\[MainTheorem1\] Let $N$, $M_0$ and $(F, \Gamma, \Phi)$ be as above, $m \geq 2$, $0< \alpha < 1$, and suppose there holds assumption \[MainAssumption\]. Then the flow with $f= f_k$ has a unique solution existing for all times $0\leq t < \infty$, such that for fixed time $M_t \in C^{m+2,\alpha}$ and the $M_t's$ considered as graphs $u(t, \cdot)$ converge exponentially in $C^{m+2}$ to a compact, connected, spacelike hypersurface of class $C^{m+2,\alpha}$, which is a stable solution of the equation $$F = c_0,$$ where $c_0 = \lim\limits_{t\rightarrow \infty}{\Phi^{-1}(f_k)}$.
If $M_0$ and $F$ are smooth, then the convergence of the graphs is exponential in the $C^\infty$-topology.
For $k=0$ the enclosed volume, for $k=1$ the volume of the hypersurfaces and if the ambient space has constant curvature $K_N = 0$, then for $1 <k \leq n$ the mixed volume $V_{n+1-k}$ is preserved.
Finally, we want to name some of the works about volume preserving curvature flows in different ambient manifolds and discuss shortly the results obtained in this work.
Volume preserving curvature flows have been considered for various curvature functions in different settings. Roughly speaking, if one assumes a certain convexity assumption or pinching condition on the initial hypersurface and shows that this condition is preserved during the flow, then after proving a priori estimates the existence of the flow for all times $t \in [0,\infty)$ and the exponential convergence in the $C^\infty$-topology of the flow to a sphere or a geodesic sphere can be deduced.
In the case the ambient manifold is ${\mathbb{R}}^{n+1}$, volume preserving mean curvature flows have been previously considered by Gage for $n=1$ in [@Gage] and by Huisken for $n\geq 2$ in [@HuisVol]. McCoy considered mixed volume preserving mean curvature flows in ${\mathbb{R}}^{n+1}$ in [@McCoyMixedArea] and later on extended the results to very general curvature functions in [@McCoyMixedAreaGen].
Recently Cabezas-Rivas and Miquel proved similar results for a volume preserving mean curvature flow in the hyperbolic space under the assumption of horosphere-convexity of the initial hypersurface, see [@CabMiqHyp]. Cabezas-Rivas and Sinestrari then considered the volume-preserving flow by powers of the elementary symmetric polynomials in the euclidean setting in [@RivSin] by assuming a pinching condition on the principal curvatures of the initial hypersurface.
However, to our knowledge the only result concerning volume preserving curvature flows in Lorentzian manifolds can be found in the paper [@EckerHuisken] by Ecker and Huisken, where the volume preserving mean curvature flow has been considered. The method in the Lorentzian case differs substantially from the euclidean case. Neither convexity nor the pinching condition on the principal curvatures is preserved, but assuming in the case of $F=H$ and in the case of a general curvature function respectively, investigating the evolution equation for the curvature function one can see that the upper and lower bound of the curvature function is preserved during the flow, which is also valid if an arbitrary, but bounded global term is considered. This result is the crucial part that enables one to prove $C^0$-estimates under the assumption of barriers. Now the $C^1$ and $C^2$-a priori estimates can be deduced by the same methods used in the case of a time-independent force-term and do not rely on the special choice of the global term. The higher order estimates can not be deduced directly from the results of Krylov-Safonov in view of the global term (which is merely bounded at this moment), instead we use a method already employed in the papers [@McCoyMixedAreaGen] and [@RivSin]. Then again the evolution equation for the curvature function is the starting point to conclude the exponential convergence to a hypersurface of constant $F$-curvature.
From the above remark about the dependence of the proofs on the global term $f$ one can conclude, that, as far as long time existence is concerned, a far wider class of global terms can be considered than the ones used throughout the paper. In particular one can look as well at curvature flows that preserve volumes with different densities and obtain the same results stated above, as they neither disturb the boundedness of the curvature function nor the analysis carried out to achieve convergence.
It is also possible to prove the foliation of a future end of $N$ by CMC-hypersurfaces by a similar method as in [@GerhCP] by using the volume preserving curvature flow. However, since the proof is more complicated than the proof by using the mean curvature flow without a global term, we omit the proof of this result. Instead, we show in section 10 that a region enclosed by barriers for the $F$-curvature can be foliated by hypersurfaces of constant $F$-curvature. Furthermore we show that each CFC-surface in the interior of this region can be obtained as the limit hypersurface of a nontrivial curvature flow which preserves the volume respectively the area.
[**Acknowledgement:**]{} This work is part of the doctoral dissertation of the author at the University of Heidelberg. The author wishes to thank Prof. Dr. C. Gerhardt for the introduction to the subject of geometric analysis and for the most important parts of his mathematical education in general.
Notation and Definitions {#Notation}
========================
The main objective of this section is to formulate the governing equations of a hypersurface in a Lorentzian $(n+1)$-dimensional manifold $N$ and to provide the definitions of the classes of curvature as well as some well-known properties of certain curvature functions which will be used throughout this paper. Note that the main differences of hypersurfaces in Lorentzian manifolds compared to hypersurfaces in Riemannian manifolds arise from the sign change in the Gauß formula and hence the Gauß equation. For more detailed definitions about curvature functions, we refer the reader to [@GerhCP Chapter 2.1, 2.2] and for an account of the differential geometry to [@GerhAna Chapter 11, 12] and especially Chapter 12.5 therein with respect to Gaussian coordinate systems and Lorentzian manifolds.
Throughout this section $N$ will be assumed to be a $(n+1)$-dimensional Lorentzian manifold and, unless stated otherwise, the summation convention is used throughout the paper.
We will denote geometric quantities in the ambient space $N$ by greek indices with range from $0$ to $n$ and usually with a bar on top of them, for example the metric and the Riemannian curvature tensor in the ambient space will be denoted by $(\bar{g}_{\alpha\beta})$ and $(\bar{R}_{\alpha\beta\gamma\delta})$ respectively, etc., and geometric quantities of a spacelike hypersurface $M$ by latin indices ranging from $1$ to $n$, i.e. the induced metric and the Riemannian curvature tensor on M are denoted by $(g_{ij})$ and $(R_{ijkl})$ respectively. Generic coordinate systems in $N$ and $M$ will be denoted by $(x^\alpha)$ and $(\xi^i)$ respectively. Ordinary partial differentiation will be denoted by a comma whereas covariant differentiation will be indicated by indices or in case of possible ambiguity they will be preceded by a semicolon, i.e. for a function $u$ in $N$, $(u_\alpha)$ denotes the gradient and $(u_{\alpha\beta})$ the Hessian, but e.g. the covariant derivative of the curvature tensor will be denoted by $(\bar{R}_{\alpha\beta\gamma\delta;\epsilon})$. We also point out that (with obvious generalizations to other quantities) $$\bar{R}_{\alpha\beta\gamma\delta;i} = \bar{R}_{\alpha\beta\gamma\delta;\epsilon} x_i^\epsilon,$$ where $x$ denotes the embedding of $M$ in $N$ in local coordinates $(x^\alpha)$ and $(\xi^i)$.
The induced metric of the hypersurface will be denoted by $g_{ij}$, i.e. $$g_{ij} = \langle x_i, x_j \rangle \equiv \bar{g}_{\alpha \beta} x_i^\alpha x_j^\beta,$$ the second fundamental form will be denoted by $(h_{ij})$ and the normal by $\nu$, which is a
timelike
vector, i.e. for $p \in M$ there holds $$\nu(p) \in C_p := \{\xi \in T_p^{1,0}(N): \langle \xi, \xi \rangle < 0\},$$ where $T_p^{k, l}(N)$ denotes the k-times contravariant and l-times covariant tensors and we note that the light cone $C_p$ consists of two connected components, $C_p^+$ and $C_p^-$, which we call
future directed
and
past directed
respectively.
The geometric quantities of the spacelike hypersurface $M$ are connected through the
Gauß formula
, which can be considered as the definition of the second fundamental form, $$x_{ij} = h_{ij}\nu,$$ where we are free to choose the future or the past directed normal, but we stipulate that we always use the past directed normal.
Note that here and in the sequel a covariant derivative is always a full tensor, i.e. $$x_{ij}^\alpha = x_{,ij}^\alpha -\Gamma_{ij}^k x_k^\alpha + \bar{\Gamma}_{\beta\gamma}^\alpha x_i^\beta x_j^\gamma,$$ where $\bar{\Gamma}^\alpha_{\beta \gamma}$ and $\Gamma^k_{ij}$ denote the Christoffel-symbols of the ambient space and hypersurface respectively.
The second equation is the
Weingarten equation
: $$\nu_i = h_i^k x_k = g^{kj} h_{ij} x_k.$$
Finally, we have the
Codazzi equation
$$h_{ij;k} = h_{ik;j} + \bar{R}_{\alpha\beta\gamma\delta}\nu^\alpha x_i^\beta x_j^\gamma x_k^\delta,$$
as well as the
Gauß equation
$$R_{ijkl} = -\{h_{ik}h_{jl} - h_{il}h_{jk}\} + \bar{R}_{\alpha\beta\gamma\delta}x^\alpha_i x_j^\beta x_k^\gamma x_l^\delta.$$
Note that in the last equation the sign change comes into play.
Now we want to define the different classes of curvature functions, first we provide the definition of such functions and mention some identifications, which will be used in the sequel without explicitly stating them again.
Let $\Gamma \subset {\mathbb{R}}^n$ be an open, convex, symmetric cone, i.e. $$(\kappa_i) \in \Gamma \Longrightarrow (\kappa_{\pi i}) \in \Gamma \quad \forall \, \pi \in \mathcal{P}_n,$$ where $\mathcal{P}_n$ is the set of all permutations of order $n$. Let $f \in C^{m, \alpha}(\Gamma)$, $m \in {\mathbb{N}}$, $0\leq \alpha \leq 1$, be *symmetric*, i.e., $$f(\kappa_i) = f(\kappa_{\pi i}) \quad \forall \, \pi \in \mathcal{P}_n.$$ Then $f$ is said to be a *curvature function* of class $C^{m,\alpha}$. For simplicity we will also refer to the pair $(f, \Gamma)$ as a curvature function.
Now denote by $\mathbf{S}$ the symmetric endomorphisms of ${\mathbb{R}}^n$ and by $\mathbf{S}_\Gamma$ the symmetric endomorphisms with eigenvalues belonging to $\Gamma$, an open subset of $\mathbf{S}$. Then we can define a mapping $$\begin{split}
F: &\mathbf{S} \rightarrow {\mathbb{R}},\\
&A\mapsto f(\kappa_i),
\end{split}$$ where the $\kappa_i$ denote the eigenvalues of $A$. For the relation between these different notions, especially the differentiability properties and the relation between their derivatives, see [@GerhCP Chapter 2.1]. Since the differentiability properties are the same for $f$ as for $F$ in our setting, see [@GerhCP Theorem 2.1.20], we do not distinguish between these notions and write always $F$ for the curvature function. Hence at a point $x$ of a hypersurface we can consider a curvature function $F$ as a function defined on a cone $\Gamma \subset {\mathbb{R}}^n$, $F = F(\kappa_i)$ for $(\kappa_i) \in \Gamma$ (representing the principal curvatures at the point $x$ of the hypersurface), as a function depending on $(h_i^j)$, $F = F(h_i^j)$ or even as a function depending on $(h_{ij})$ and $(g_{ij})$, $F = F(h_{ij}, g_{ij})$. However, we distinguish between the derivatives with respect to $\Gamma$ or $\mathbf{S}$. We summarize briefly our notation and important properties:
For a (sufficiently smooth) curvature function $F$ we denote by $F^{ij} = \frac{\partial F}{\partial h_{ij}}$, a contravariant tensor of order 2, and $F^j_i = \frac{\partial F}{\partial h_j^i}$, a mixed tensor, contravariant with respect to the index $j$ and covariant with respect to $i$. We also distinguish the partial derivative $F_{,i} = \frac{\partial F}{\partial \kappa_i}$ and the covariant derivative $F_{;i} = F^{kl}h_{kl;i}$. Furthermore $F^{ij}$ is diagonal if $h_{ij}$ is diagonal and in such a coordinate system there holds $F^{ii} = \frac{\partial F}{\partial \kappa_i}$. For a relation between the second derivatives see [@GerhCP Lemma 2.1.14]. Finally, if $F \in C^2(\Gamma)$ is concave, then $F$ is also concave as a curvature function depending on $(h_{ij})$. With these definitions we can turn to special classes of curvature functions.
But first we remind the definition of an admissible hypersurface:
A spacelike, orientable hypersurface $M$ of class $C^2$ in a Lorentzian manifold $N$ is said to be
admissible
with respect to a continuous curvature function $(F, \Gamma)$, if its principal curvatures with respect to the past directed normal lie in $\Gamma$.
\[curvClass\] We distinguish three classes of curvature functions:
- A symmetric curvature function $F \in C^{2,\alpha}(\Gamma_+)\cap C^0(\bar{\Gamma}_+)$, where $\Gamma_+ := \{(\kappa_i) \in {\mathbb{R}}^n: \kappa_i > 0, 1 \leq i \leq n\}$, positively homogeneous of degree $d_0 > 0$, is said to be of class $(K)$, if it is strictly monotone, i.e. $$F_{,i} = \frac{\partial F}{\partial \kappa^i} > 0 \quad \text{in } \Gamma_+ \, \text{,}$$ vanishes on the boundary of $\Gamma_+$ and fulfills the following inequality: $$F^{ij,kl}\eta_{ij}\eta_{kl} \leq F^{-1}(F^{ij}\eta_{ij})^2 - F^{ik}\tilde{h}^{jl}\eta_{ij}\eta_{kl} \quad \forall\, \eta \in \mathbf{S},$$ where $F$ is evaluated at $(h_{ij}) \in {\mathbf{S}}_{\Gamma_+}$ and $(\tilde{h}^{ij})$ is the inverse of $(h_{ij})$.
- A function $F \in (K)$ is said to be of class $(K^*)$ if there exists $0 < \epsilon_0 = \epsilon_0(F)$ such that $$\epsilon_0 F H\leq F^{ij}h_{ik} h^k_j \quad \forall\, (h_{ij}) \in \mathbf{S}_{\Gamma_+},$$ where $F$ is evaluated at $(h_{ij})$ and $H$ represents the mean curvature, i.e. the sum of the eigenvalues of $(h_{ij})$.
- A differentiable curvature function $F$ is said to be of class $(D)$, if for every admissible hypersurface $M$ the tensor $F^{ij}$, evaluated at $M$, is divergence free.
First, we define the most important curvature functions, the elementary symmetric polynomials $$H_k(\lambda_1, \cdots, \lambda_n) = \sum_{i_1<\cdots <i_k} \lambda_{i_1}\cdots\lambda_{i_k},\quad \lambda = (\lambda_i) \in {\mathbb{R}}^n, \, 1\leq k \leq n,$$ and note that the $n$-th root of the gaussian curvature ${{\sigma}}_n = K^{\frac{1}{n}} = H_n^{\frac{1}{n}}$ is an example of a curvature function of class $(K^*)$.
Further examples are given by noticing that if $F \in (K^*)$ then $F^a \in (K^*)$ for $a > 0$ and if furthermore $G \in (K)$ (where in this case it does not have to vanish on the boundary) then $FG \in (K^*)$. Possible choices of $G$ would be the inverses of the symmetric polynomials $\tilde{H}_k(\kappa_i) = \frac{1}{H_k(\kappa_i^{-1})}$, see [@GerhCP Chapter 2.2]. Secondly, we remark, that a curvature function of class $(K)$ and homogeneous of degree 1 is also concave, see [@GerhCP Lemma 2.2.14].
We note some important properties of the elementary symmetric polynomials:
\[symPol\] Let $1\leq k \leq n$ be fixed.
- We define the convex cone $$\Gamma_k = \{(\kappa_i) \in {\mathbb{R}}^n: H_1(\kappa_i) > 0, H_2(\kappa_i) > 0, \ldots, H_k(\kappa_i) > 0 \}.$$ Then $H_k$ is strictly monotone on $\Gamma_k$ and $\Gamma_k$ is exactly the connected component of $$\{(\kappa_i) \in {\mathbb{R}}^n: H_k(\kappa_i) > 0\}$$ containing the positive cone.
- The $k$-th roots $\sigma_k = H_k^{\frac{1}{k}}$ are concave on $\Gamma_k$.
- For $ 1 < s < t < n$ and $\tilde{\sigma}_k = \Bigl(\frac{H_k}{{n \choose k}}\Bigr)^{\frac{1}{k}}$ there holds $$\tilde{\sigma}_n \leq \tilde{\sigma}_t \leq \tilde{\sigma}_s \leq \tilde{\sigma}_1,$$ where the principal curvatures have to lie in $\Gamma_n \equiv \Gamma_+$ for the first, in $\Gamma_t$ for the second and in $\Gamma_s$ for the third inequality.
- For fixed $i$, no summation over $i$, there holds $$H_k = \frac{\partial H_{k+1}}{\partial \kappa_i} + \kappa_i \frac{\partial H_k}{\partial \kappa_i}.$$
The convexity of the cone $\Gamma_k$ and (i) follows from [@HuiskSinestr Section 2], (ii) and (iii) from [@Lieberman], Lemma 15.12 and Theorem 15.16, and (iv) follows directly from the definition of the $H_k$.
A consequence of the preceding Lemma is the following
\[divFree\] Let $N$ be a semi-Riemannian space of constant curvature, then the symmetric polynomials $F= H_k$, $1\leq k \leq n$, are of class $(D)$. In case $k=2$ it suffices to assume that $N$ is an Einstein manifold.
The proof of the Lemma can be found in [@GerhSurvey Lemma 5.8]. The proof consists of induction on $k$ and (iv) of Lemma \[symPol\].
Now we state a well-known inequality for general curvature functions:
\[FHineq\] Let $F \in C^2(\Gamma)$ be a concave curvature function, homogeneous of degree 1 with $F(1,\ldots, 1) > 0$, then $$F\leq \frac{F(1, \ldots, 1)}{n} H.$$
See [@GerhCP Lemma 2.2.20].
To estimate tensors, we will need a Riemannian metric on $N$. We use a Riemannian reference metric, which we define by $$\tilde{g}_{\alpha\beta}dx^\alpha dx^\beta = e^{2\psi} \left\{(dx^0)^2 + {{\sigma}}_{ij}dx^i dx^j\right\}.$$ The corresponding norm of a vector field $\eta$ on $N$ will be denoted by $$|||\eta||| = (\tilde{g}_{\alpha\beta}\eta^\alpha \eta^\beta)^{\frac{1}{2}}.$$
Finally, we want to note that we will use the parabolic Hölder spaces in later sections, where for the notation we refer to [@GerhCP Definition 2.5.2].
Evolution equations
===================
In this chapter we state some facts about the representation of hypersurfaces as graphs and the evolution equations of the geometric quantities needed throughout the paper. For a derivation of the latter we refer to [@GerhCP Chapter 2]. Note that there is a slight but significant difference in the evolution equations compared to the Riemannian case due to the sign change in the Gauß equation. First of all, we have in view of [@KroenerInv Lemma 3.1] the following
Let $N$ be a smooth, connected, globally hyperbolic Lorentzian manifold with a compact, connected Cauchy hypersurface $\mathcal{S}_0$ and $M \subset N$ a compact, connected, spacelike hypersurface of class $C^{m, \alpha}$, $0\leq \alpha \leq 1$, $1\leq m \in {\mathbb{N}}$, then $M$ can be written as a graph over $\mathcal{S}_0$ $$M = \textnormal{graph }u_{|\mathcal{S}_0},$$ with $u \in C^{m,\alpha}(\mathcal{S}_0)$.
We remark that the additional regularity mentioned above follows by the same proof as in [@KroenerInv Lemma 3.1], the implicit function theorem being the main theorem used in the proof.
From now on we assume to work in local coordinates of the special coordinate system given by .
The flow hypersurfaces can be written as graphs over $\mathcal{S}_0$ $$M(t) = \{x^0 = u(x^i): x = (x^i) \in \mathcal{S}_0\},$$ where we use the symbol $x$ ambiguously by denoting points $p = (x^\alpha) \in N$ as well as points $p = (x^i) \in \mathcal{S}_0$. Now suppose the flow hypersurfaces are given by an embedding $x = x(t, \xi)$, where $\xi = (\xi^i)$ are local coordinates of a compact manifold $M$, i.e. initially we have the embedding $x:M \rightarrow N$, $M_0 := x(M)$. Then there holds $$\begin{split}
&x^0 = u(t, \xi) = u(t, x(t,\xi)),\\
&x^i = x^i(t, \xi).
\end{split}$$ The induced metric has the form $$\label{NotMetric}
g_{ij} = e^{2\psi}\{-u_i u_j + {{\sigma}}_{ij}\},$$ where ${{\sigma}}_{ij}$ is evaluated at $(u(x), x)$. Its inverse $(g^{ij}) = (g_{ij})^{-1}$ can be expressed as $$\label{InvMetric}
g^{ij} = e^{-2\psi}\big\{{{\sigma}}^{ij} + \frac{\breve{u}^i}{v}\, \frac{\breve{u}^j}{v}\big\},$$ where $({{\sigma}}^{ij}) = ({{\sigma}}_{ij})^{-1}$ and we distinguish $u^i = g^{ij}u_j$ and $$\breve{u}^i = {{\sigma}}^{ij}u_j$$ and where we define $$\label{v}
v^2 = 1 - {{\sigma}}^{ij}u_i u_j \equiv 1 - |Du|^2.$$ Hence, graph $u$ is spacelike if and only if $|Du| < 1$, in view of .
The past-directed normal has the form $$\label{normal}
(\nu^\alpha) = - v^{-1}e^{-\psi}(1, \breve{u}^i).$$
Furthermore, looking at the component $\alpha = 0$ in the gaussian formula, we obtain $$\label{EvHU}
e^{-\psi}\tilde{v} \, h_{ij} = - u_{;ij} - \bar{\Gamma}^0_{00}u_i u_j - \bar{\Gamma}^0_{0i}u_j - \bar{\Gamma}^0_{0j}u_i - \bar{\Gamma}^0_{ij},$$ where the covariant derivatives are taken with respect to the induced metric of the considered hypersurface and $\tilde{v} = v^{-1}$. For later use, we reformulate the above expression as in [@GerhCP (2.5.11)], such that $$\label{EvHUlin}
e^{-\psi}\tilde{v}\, h_{ij} = -v^{-2}u_{ij} + e^{-\psi}\bar{h}_{ij} - e^{-\psi} \psi_\alpha\bar{\nu}^{\alpha}\bar{g}_{ij}+ v^{-1}e^{-\psi}\psi_{\alpha}\nu^\alpha g_{ij},$$ where $\bar{\nu}$, $\bar{g}_{ij}$ and $\bar{h}_{ij}$ denote the normal, metric and second fundamental form of the coordinate slices $\{x^0 = \textnormal{const}\}$ and where the covariant derivatives of $u$ are now taken with respect to the metric ${{\sigma}}_{ij}(u, x)$.
In the Lorentzian case controlling the $C^1$-norm of graph $u$ is tantamount to controlling $\tilde{v}$ in view of and $$||Du||^2 = g^{ij}u_iu_j = e^{-2\psi}\frac{|Du|^2}{v^2}.$$ Finally, as for the curvature flows with general curvature functions we had to assume the existence of a strictly convex function $\chi \in C^2(\bar{{{\Omega}}})$ in a given domain ${{\Omega}}$, we shall state a geometric condition guaranteeing the existence of such a function. For a proof of the following Lemma see [@GerhCP Lemma 1.8.3].
\[ExistenceStrictlyConvex\] Let $N$ be a smooth, globally hyperbolic Lorentzian manifold, $\mathcal{S}_0$ a Cauchy surface, $(x^\alpha)$ a future directed Gaussian coordinate system associated with $\mathcal{S}_0$ and $\bar{{{\Omega}}} \subset N$ compact. Then there exists a strictly convex function $\chi \in C^2(\bar{{{\Omega}}})$, i.e. a function satisfying $$\chi_{\alpha\beta} \geq c_0 \bar{g}_{\alpha\beta}$$ with a positive constant $c_0$, provided the level hypersurfaces $\{x^0 = \textnormal{const}\}$ that intersect $\bar{{{\Omega}}}$ are strictly convex.
We consider a curvature function $F \in C^{m,\alpha}(\Gamma)$, $2 \leq m \in {\mathbb{N}}$, $0< \alpha <1$, a function $f = f(t)$ and a real function $\Phi \in C^{m,\alpha}({\mathbb{R}})$ and write from now on $\Phi = \Phi(F)$.
The curvature flow is then given by the evolution problem with $f=f_k$, $0\leq k \leq n$, as defined in (where we remark again that not all values of $k$ are allowed for $F=H$ or $F={{\sigma}}_2$, see the remarks after equation ).
We will assume throughout the next sections that short time existence has already been assured and we consider a solution $x \in H^{m+\alpha, \frac{m+\alpha}{2}}(Q_{T^*})$ of the curvature flow on a maximal interval $[0, T^*)$, $0 < T^* \leq \infty$, where $Q_T = [0, T) \times M$. Short-time existence is well known for the curvature flow without the global term as we are dealing with a parabolic problem and with a fixed point argument we can extend this result to the flow including the global term. This will be supplemented in section \[shorttime\].
Hence we consider a sufficiently smooth solution of the initial value problem and show how the geometric quantities of the hypersurfaces $M(t)$ evolve. All time derivatives are *total* derivatives, i.e., covariant derivatives of tensor fields defined over the curve $x(t)$, cf. [@GerhAna Chapter 11.5].
First, we consider the evolution equations for the hypersurfaces represented as graphs.
Looking at the component $\alpha = 0$ of the flow we obtain the scalar flow equation $$\label{totalU}
\dot{u} = -e^{-\psi}v^{-1}(\Phi - f),$$ where the time derivative is a total time derivative of $u = u(t, x(t, \xi))$. If however we consider $u$ to depend on $u = u(t, \xi)$ we obtain the partial derivative $$\label{partialU}
\begin{split}
\frac{\partial u}{\partial t} &= \dot{u} - u_k\dot{x}^k\\
&= -e^{-\psi}v(\Phi - f).
\end{split}$$ Let us now state the evolution equations, where we note that all covariant derivatives appearing in these equations are taken with respect to the induced metric of the flow hypersurfaces:
We have the following evolution equations: [$$\begin{aligned}
\label{EvMetrik}
&\dot{g}_{ij} = 2(\Phi - f) h_{ij}, \\
\label{EvVolumen}
& \frac{d}{dt}\sqrt{g} = (\Phi - f) H \sqrt{g},\quad \textnormal{where } g = \det{g_{ij}},\\
\label{EvNormal}
& \dot{\nu} = g^{ij}\Phi_i x_j,\\
\label{EvSecFF1}
& \dot{h}^j_i = \Phi_{;i}^{\,j} - (\Phi - f)\{h^k_ih^j_k +\bar{R}_{\alpha\beta\gamma\delta}\nu^\alpha x_i^\beta\nu^\gamma x_k^\delta g^{kj}\},\\
\label{EvSecFF1b}
& \dot{h}_{ij} = \Phi_{;ij} - (\Phi - f)\{- h^k_ih_{kj} + \bar{R}_{\alpha\beta\gamma\delta}\nu^\alpha x_i^\beta\nu^\gamma x_j^\delta\},\\
\label{EvPhi}
& \dot{\Phi} - \Phi' F^{ij}\Phi_{;ij} = -\Phi' (\Phi - f)\{F^{ij}h_i^kh_{kj} + F^{ij}\bar{R}_{\alpha\beta\gamma\delta}\nu^\alpha x_i^\beta \nu^\gamma x_j^\delta\}, \\
& \quad \textnormal{where } \Phi' = \frac{d}{dr} \Phi(r)\notag,\\
\label{EvParGraph}
&\dot{u} - \Phi' F^{ij}u_{ij} = -e^{-\psi}\tilde{v}(\Phi - f) + \Phi'Fe^{-\psi}\tilde{v}\\
&\quad + \Phi' F^{ij}\{\bar{\Gamma}^0_{00}u_iu_j + 2 \bar{\Gamma}^0_{0i}u_j + \bar{\Gamma}^0_{ij}\}\notag ,\\
\label{EvV}
& \dot{\tilde{v}} - \Phi' F^{ij}\tilde{v}_{;ij} = - \Phi' F^{ij}h_{ik}h^k_j \tilde{v} + [(\Phi - f) - \Phi' F] \eta_{\alpha\beta} \nu^\alpha \nu^\beta\\
& \quad - 2\Phi' F^{ij}h^k_j x_i^\alpha x_k^\beta \eta_{\alpha\beta} - \Phi' F^{ij}\eta_{\alpha \beta \gamma} x_i^\beta x_j^\gamma \nu^\alpha \notag\\
& \quad - \Phi' F^{ij} \bar{R}_{\alpha\beta\gamma\delta} \nu^\alpha x_i^\beta x_k^\gamma x_j^\delta \eta_\epsilon x_l^\epsilon g^{kl}\notag ,\\
& \quad \textnormal{where } \eta \textnormal{ is the covariant vector field } (\eta_\alpha) = e^\psi (-1, 0, ..., 0) \notag ,\\
\label{EvSecFF2}
& \dot{h}^j_i - \Phi' F^{kl}h^j_{i;kl} = - \Phi' F^{kl}h_{rk}h^r_lh_i^j + \Phi' Fh_{ri}h^{rj}\\
& \quad - (\Phi - f)h^k_ih_k^j + \Phi' F^{kl,rs}h_{kl;i}h_{rs;}^{\quad j} + \Phi'' F_iF^j \notag\\
& \quad + 2\Phi' F^{kl}\bar{R}_{\alpha\beta\gamma\delta}x_m^\alpha x_i^\beta x_k^\gamma x_r^\delta h_l^mg^{rj} - \Phi' F^{kl}\bar{R}_{\alpha\beta\gamma\delta} x_m^\alpha x_k^\beta x_r^\gamma x_l^\delta h_i^mg^{rj} \notag\\
& \quad -\Phi' F^{kl}\bar{R}_{\alpha\beta\gamma\delta}x_m^\alpha x_k^\beta x_i^\gamma x_l^\delta h^{mj} - \Phi' F^{kl}\bar{R}_{\alpha\beta\gamma\delta}\nu^\alpha x_k^\beta \nu^\gamma x_l^\delta h_i^j \notag\\
& \quad + \Phi' F \bar{R}_{\alpha\beta\gamma\delta}\nu^\alpha x_i^\beta \nu^\gamma x_m^\delta g^{mj} - (\Phi - f) \bar{R}_{\alpha\beta\gamma\delta}\nu^\alpha x_i^\beta \nu^\gamma x_m^\delta g^{mj} \notag\\
& \quad + \Phi' F^{kl}\bar{R}_{\alpha\beta\gamma\delta ;\epsilon}\{\nu^\alpha x_k^\beta x_l^\gamma x_i^\delta x_m^\epsilon g^{mj} + \nu^\alpha x_i^\beta x_k^\gamma x_m^\delta x_l^\epsilon g^{mj}\}.\notag\end{aligned}$$ ]{}
See [@GerhCP Lemma 2.3.1 for the first two equations, then Lemma 2.3.2, Lemma 2.3.3 for the next two equations, Lemma 2.3.4, equation together with , Lemma 2.4.4, Lemma 2.4.1].
Height estimates and volume preservation of the flow {#C0}
====================================================
First, we remind the definition of the mixed volume, for $k \in \{0, \ldots, n\}$ and a hypersurface $M$ represented by a graph $u$ we have: $$V_{n+1-k} =
\begin{cases}
\int_{\mathcal{S}_0}{\int_0^u{{e^{\psi}\sqrt{\bar{g}}}}} , & k = 0\\
\{(n+1) {n \choose k} \}^{-1}\int_{M}{H_{k-1}\, \mathrm{d\mu}}, & k = 1, \ldots, n,
\end{cases}$$ where for $(t, x) \in N$ we denote by $\bar{g}(t, x) = \det(\bar{g}_{ij})(t,x)$ the volume element of the level hypersurface $x^0 = t$ at the point $x \in {\mathcal{S}}_0$. The choice of the reference point $0 \in (a,b)$ for the enclosed volume is arbitrary. Now we are going to prove the claimed volume preservation property of the flow with $f=f_k$, $0\leq k\leq n$.
\[VolPreservation\] For $k=0$ the enclosed volume $V_{n+1}$ and for $k=1$ the volume of the hypersurfaces $V_n$ is preserved.\
If the ambient space has vanishing sectional curvatures, then for $1 <k \leq n$ the mixed volume $V_{n+1-k}$ is preserved.
First we observe that for $x\in \mathcal{S}_0$ we have $$\sqrt{g(u(x), x)} = v\sqrt{\det(\bar{g}_{ij}(u(x), x))},$$ where $\bar{g}_{ij}(t, \cdot)$ denotes the metric of the level hypersurface $x^0 = t$.
Taking this into account, we have for $k=0$ in view of : $$\begin{split}
\frac{d}{dt} V_{n+1} &= \int_{\mathcal{S}_0}{\frac{\partial u}{\partial t}\,e^\psi\sqrt{\bar{g}(u(x), x)} \, \mathrm{dx}}\\
&= -\int_{\mathcal{S}_0}{(\Phi - f_0) \sqrt{g(u(x),x)}\,\mathrm{dx}} = 0,
\end{split}$$ in view of the definition of $f_0$. Hence the enclosed volume is preserved by the flow.
For $k=1$ we have in view of $$\begin{split}
(n+1)n \frac{d}{dt} V_n = \frac{d}{dt} |M_t|
= \int_{M_t}{(\Phi - f_1) H\, \mathrm{d\mu_t}} = 0.
\end{split}$$ Finally, for $1 < k \leq n$ we assume the ambient space has vanishing sectional curvatures. Then we exploit Lemma \[divFree\] and Lemma \[symPol\].\
We get $$\begin{split}
(n+1){n \choose k}&\frac{d}{dt} \int_{M_t}{H_{k-1} \mathrm{d\mu_t}} = \int_{M_t}{kH_k(\Phi - f_k) \mathrm{d\mu_t}} \\
&- \int_{M_t}{(\Phi - f_k)(H_{k-1})^i_j\bar{R}_{\alpha\beta\gamma\delta}\nu^\alpha x_i^\beta \nu^\gamma x_k^\delta g^{kj} \mathrm{d\mu_t}}\\
&= k \int_{M_t}{(\Phi - f_k) H_k \,\mathrm{d\mu_t}} = 0.
\end{split}$$
In order to prove the $C^0$-estimates we will show that the curvature function is bounded during the evolution. Together with the monotonicity of the constant $F$-curvature hypersurfaces, which we will prove afterwards, we then obtain that the flow stays within the domain bounded by the barriers for all times.
\[FBoundsLemma\] Let $$c_1 := \underset{M_0}{\min} \,\Phi(F) \quad \textnormal{ and }\quad c_2 := \underset{M_0}{\max} \,\Phi(F),$$ then there holds for all times $0 < t < T^*$ $$\label{FBounds}
c_1 \leq \Phi(F) \leq c_2.$$ Moreover $\Phi^{\sup}(t) := \underset{M_t}{\max} \,\Phi$ is monotonically decreasing and $\Phi^{\inf}(t) := \underset{M_t}{\min} \,\Phi$ is monotonically increasing.
We will prove holds until $T_0$, where $0 < T_0 < T^*$ is arbitrary. This will prove the first statement and the second one follows by observing that the argument holds as well for the interval $[t_1, T^*)$, where $0 < t_1 < T^*$ is arbitrary.
We only prove the upper bound, the proof for the lower bound follows analogously.
Let $$\tilde{\Phi} := (\Phi(F) - c_2) - {{\epsilon}}t - {{\epsilon}},$$ where ${{\epsilon}}>0$ is chosen arbitrarily. Therefore there holds $$\tilde{\Phi}_{|t=0} < 0$$ and from we get $$\label{EvPhiTilde}
\dot{\tilde{\Phi}} - \Phi' F^{ij} \tilde{\Phi}_{;ij} = -\Phi' (\Phi - f) \{F^{ij}h_{ik}h^k_j + F^{ij}\bar{R}_{\alpha\beta\gamma\delta}\nu^\alpha x_i^\beta \nu^\gamma x_j^\delta\} - {{\epsilon}}.$$ Suppose there is a point $(t_0, x_0)$, $0 < t_0 \leq T_0$, $x_0 \in \mathcal{S}_0$ such that $$\tilde{\Phi}(t_0, x_0) = 0$$ and where $t_0$ is the first time for this to happen.
Hence there holds for all $x\in \mathcal{S}_0$ $$\tilde{\Phi}(t_0, x) \leq \tilde{\Phi}(t_0, x_0)$$ and this implies by the definition of $\tilde{\Phi}$ and $f_k$ $$f_{k}(t_0) \leq \Phi(t_0, x_0).$$ Evaluating at $(t_0, x_0)$ yields therefore in view of the maximum principle $$0 \leq - {{\epsilon}}< 0,$$ where we used the timelike convergence condition in case of the mean curvature flow and for general curvature functions as well as the non-negativity of the term $F^{ij}h_{ik}h^{k}_j$.
This contradiction implies $$\Phi < {{\epsilon}}t + {{\epsilon}}+ c_2 \leq {{\epsilon}}T_0 + {{\epsilon}}+ c_2$$ and the Lemma follows because ${{\epsilon}}$ can be chosen arbitrarily small.
Note that this Lemma ensures in the case of $F=H$ or $F={{\sigma}}_2$, that the principal curvatures of the flow lie in the cone of definition, where we use Lemma \[FHineq\] for $F= {{\sigma}}_2$. Furthermore, with regard to the supplementary function, the proof merely depends on the fact that $\Phi' > 0$.
We also want to point out the following observation, which can be used to prove long time existence for bounded, but otherwise more general global force terms, than the ones we consider in this paper, as long as we have suitable barriers:
\[FBoundsRem\] The proof of the preceding Lemma shows that for a global term $f = f(t)$ which is bounded from below and above by $c_1$ and $c_2$ respectively, where these are arbitrary constants, the curvature function $\Phi(F)$ is bounded by the same constants if $\Phi(F)_{|t=0}$ is.
Now we want to show the monotonicity of hypersurfaces with respect to their $F$-curvature. For the mean curvature in a cosmological spacetime the proof can be found in [@GerhCP Lemma 4.7.1], for general $F$ the proof needs a minor modification:
\[FMonotone\] Let $N$ be a smooth cosmological spacetime with compact Cauchy-hypersurface ${\mathcal{S}}_0$ and non-positive timelike sectional curvatures, $F$ a strictly monotone curvature function defined on an open, convex, symmetric cone $\Gamma$, $F \in C^1(\Gamma)\cap C^0(\bar{\Gamma})$, such that $F$ vanishes on the boundary of $\Gamma$ and $F > 0$ in $\Gamma$.
Let $M_i = \text{graph}\, u_i$, $i=1,2$ be two compact, connected, spacelike, admissible hypersurfaces of class $C^2$, such that the respective $F$-curvatures $F_i$ satisfy $$\label{F1lessF2}
F_1 < (\le) \,\underset{M_2}{\min} \,F_2,$$ and if $p \in {\mathcal{S}}_0$ is a point such that $F_1(u_1(p), p) = \underset{M_2}{\min} \, F_2$, then we assume that the principal curvatures of $M_2$ at $(u_2(p), p)$ are not all equally to zero.
Then there holds $$u_1 < (\leq)\, u_2.$$
In view of the equation and the maximum principle it suffices to show $$\label{u1kleineru2}
u_1 \leq u_2.$$ Now suppose is not valid, so that $$E(u_1) = \{x \in \mathcal{S}_0: u_2(x) < u_1(x)\} \neq \emptyset.$$ Thus there exist points $p_i \in M_i$ such that $$0 < d_0 = d(M_2, M_1) = d(p_2, p_1) = \sup\,\{d(p,q): (p,q) \in M_2 \times M_1\},$$ where $d$ is the Lorentzian distance function, which is finite and continuous in our setting, see [@GerhAna Theorem 12.5.9].
Now let $\phi$ be a maximal geodesic from $M_2$ to $M_1$ realizing this distance with endpoints $p_2$ and $p_1$ and parametrized by arc length.
Denote by $\bar{d}$ the Lorentzian distance function to $M_2$, i.e. for $p\in I^+(M_2)$ $$\bar{d}(p) = \underset{q\in M_2}{\sup} d(q, p).$$ Since $\phi$ is maximal, $\Lambda = \{\phi(t): 0\leq t < d_0\}$ contains no focal points of $M_2$, cf [@ONeill Theorem 34, p.285], hence there exists an open neighbourhood $\Pi = \Pi(\Lambda)$ such that $\bar{d}$ is of class $C^2$ in $\Pi$, cf [@GerhCP Theorem 1.9.15] and $\Pi$ is part of the largest tubular neighbourhood of $M_2$ and hence covered by an associated normal Gaussian coordinate system $(x^\alpha)$ satisfying $x^0 = \bar{d}$ in $\{x^0 >0\}$, see [@GerhCP Theorem 1.9.22].
In this coordinate system $M_2$ is the level set $\{\bar{d} = 0\}$ and the level sets $$M(t) = \{p \in \Pi: \bar{d}(p) = t\}$$ are $C^2$-hypersurfaces.
Next we want to derive a formula for the evolution of the $F$-curvature of the level hypersurfaces of this coordinate system. Let us define the flow of the level hypersurfaces by $$\begin{aligned}
&\dot{x} = - \nu,\\
&x(0) = x_0,
\end{aligned}$$ where $x_0$ is the embedding of $M_2$. Then we infer from [@GerhCP Proposition 1.9.4] $$\label{Tubenumg}
x, \,\dot{x} \in C^1((-{{\epsilon}}_0, d_0) \times B_\rho(\xi_0)),$$ where ${{\epsilon}}_0 >0$, $x_0(\xi_0) = \phi(0)$ and $(-{{\epsilon}}_0, d_0) \times x_0(B_\rho(\xi_0)) \subset \Pi$. Hence $g_{ij} = \langle x_i, x_j \rangle$ as well as $h_{ij} = - \frac{1}{2} \dot{g}_{ij}$ (see equation with $f=1$) are continuously differentiable with respect to space and time. From we then obtain the equation $$\dot{h}_j^i = h^i_k h^k_j + \bar{R}_{\alpha \beta \gamma \delta}\nu^\alpha x_k^\beta \nu^\gamma x_j^\delta g^{ki},$$ where we note that in view of one can verify that $\bar{R}_{\alpha \beta \gamma \delta}\nu^\alpha \nu^\gamma = \bar{R}_{0\beta 0\delta}$ is continuous in this coordinate system, since $\bar{\Gamma}^0_{\alpha \beta} = \frac{1}{2}\bar{g}_{\alpha \beta,0}$.
For the $F$-curvature of $M(t)$ we obtain then the equation $$\label{FRise}
\dot{\bar{F}} = \bar{F}^l_k\bar{h}_l^m \bar{h}_m^k + \bar{F}_k^l\bar{R}_{\alpha\beta\gamma\delta}\nu^\alpha x_l^\beta \nu^\gamma x_m^\delta \bar{g}^{mk},$$ where the geometric quantities like $\bar{g}_{ij}$, $\bar{h}_{ij}$ and so on denote the geometric quantities of the level hypersurfaces and they are not to be confused with the quantities of the ambient space. This implies that the $F$-curvature of $M(t)$ is monotonically increasing with respect to $t$ in view of the strict monotonicity of the $F$-curvature, hence the level hypersurfaces are admissible, since $F$ vanishes only on $\partial \Gamma$.
Next, consider a tubular neighbourhood $\mathcal{U}$ of $M_1$ with corresponding normal Gaussian coordinate system $(x^\alpha)$. The level sets $$\tilde{M}(s) = \{ x^0 = s\}\quad, -\delta < s < 0,$$ lie in the past of $M_1 = \tilde{M}(0)$ and are all of class $C^2$ for small $\delta$.
Since the geodesic $\phi$ is normal to $M_1$, it is also normal to $\tilde{M}(s)$ and the length of the geodesic segment of $\phi$ from $\tilde{M}(s)$ to $M_1$ is exactly $-s$, thus equal to the distance from $\tilde{M}(s)$ to $M_1$, hence we deduce $$d(M_2, \tilde{M}(s)) = d_0 + s.$$ We infer that $\{\phi(t): 0\leq t \leq d_0 +s \}$ also represents a maximal geodesic from $M_2$ to $\tilde{M}(s)$ and we conclude further that, for fixed $s$, the hypersurface $\tilde{M}(s) \cap \Pi$ is contained in the past of $M(d_0+s)$ and touches $M(d_0+s)$ in $p_s = \phi(d_0 +s)$.
Hence by the maximum principle there holds $$F_{|\tilde{M}(s)}(p_s) \geq F_{|M(d_0+s)}(p_s). $$ Furthermore, if $$\label{FGleichheit}
F_{1|\phi(0)} = \underset{M_2}{\min}\, F_2,$$ then by using the additional assumption we conclude that if we choose $\delta > 0$ small enough, then in view of there exists ${{\epsilon}}> 0$ not depending on $s$, $-\delta < s < 0$, such that there holds $$F_{|M(d_0+s)}(p_s) > \underset{M_2}{\min}\,F_2 + {{\epsilon}}.$$ On the other hand the $F$-curvature of $\tilde{M}(s)$ converges to the $F$-curvature of $M_1$ if $s$ tends to zero, hence we conclude $$\label{Finequality}
F_1(p_1) \geq \underset{M_2}{\min}\, F_2 + {{\epsilon}},$$ where ${{\epsilon}}> 0$ if is satisfied (otherwise it can be equal to zero), yielding in either case a contradiction to .
The barrier condition and the preceding Lemmata imply the following
If $u_i = $ graph $M_i$, $i = 1,2$, where $M_1$ and $M_2$ denote the lower and upper barrier respectively, then there holds $$u_1 \leq u(t) \leq u_2.$$
In the case $F= H$, $\Gamma = {\mathbb{R}}^n$, this Proposition follows by the proof of Lemma \[FMonotone\], since now all appearing hypersurfaces are admissible.
Lemma \[FMonotone\] also yields the uniqueness of constant $F$-curvature hypersurfaces:
Let $N$ be as in Lemma \[FMonotone\] and $F$ be a curvature function of class $(K)$ defined on $\Gamma_+$ or $F= {{\sigma}}_k$, $1\leq k \leq n$, defined on $\Gamma_k$. Then a compact, connected, spacelike hypersurface of class $C^2$ with $F \equiv c$ for some constant $c > 0$, is uniquely determined.
Gradient estimates
==================
Let $\Phi$ be a function in $C^{2,\alpha}({\mathbb{R}})$, which satisfies $$\Phi' > 0 \quad \text{ and }\quad \Phi'' \leq 0.$$ Let $f =f(t)$ be a bounded function and suppose $C^0$-estimates have already been established, i.e. the flow stays inside a compact region $\bar{{{\Omega}}} \subset N$. Let $F$ be a curvature function which is monotone, concave and homogeneous of degree 1. Then we show, following the proof in [@EnzDiplom Section 5],
\[C1estimates\] During the evolution of the flow the term $\tilde{v}$ is uniformly bounded: $$\tilde{v} \leq c = c({{\Omega}}, |\Phi|_0, |\Phi'|_0).$$
We can allow for such a general supplementary function $\Phi$ as above, because we already established bounds for $\Phi$ in Lemma \[FBoundsLemma\].
First we need some Lemmata:
The composite function $$\label{C1phi}
\phi = e^{\mu e^{\lambda u}},$$ where $\mu$, $\lambda$ are constants, satisfies the equation $$\begin{split}
\dot{\phi} - \Phi' F^{ij}\phi_{ij} = &\,e^{-\psi}\tilde{v}\{\Phi'F - \Phi + f\} \mu\lambda e^{\lambda u} \phi \\
&+\Phi'F^{ij}\{\bar{\Gamma}^0_{00}u_iu_j + 2 \bar{\Gamma}^0_{0i}u_j + \bar{\Gamma}^0_{ij}\}\mu\lambda e^{\lambda u}\phi \\
&- [1+ \mu e^{\lambda u}] \Phi'F^{ij}u_i u_j\mu \lambda^2 e^{\lambda u}\phi.
\end{split}$$
The Lemma follows from .\
For a proof of the following two Lemmata we refer to [@GerhScalar]:
\[C1PrepLemma\] There is a constant $c=c({{\Omega}})$ such that for any positive function $0 < {{\epsilon}}= {{\epsilon}}(x)$ on $\mathcal{S}_0$ and any hypersurface $M(t)$ of the flow we have $$\begin{aligned}
|||\nu||| &\leq c \tilde{v},\\
g^{ij} &\leq c \tilde{v}^2 {{\sigma}}^{ij},\\
F^{ij} &\leq F^{kl}g_{kl}g^{ij},\\
|F^{ij}h_j^kx_i^\alpha x_k^\beta \eta_{\alpha\beta}| &\leq \frac{{{\epsilon}}}{2}F^{ij}h_i^kh_{kj}\tilde{v} + \frac{c}{2{{\epsilon}}}F^{ij}g_{ij}\tilde{v}^3,\\
|F^{ij}\eta_{\alpha\beta\gamma}x_i^\beta x_j^\gamma \nu^\alpha| &\leq c \tilde{v}^3 F^{ij}g_{ij},\\
|F^{ij}\bar{R}_{\alpha\beta\gamma\delta}\nu^\alpha x_i^\beta x_k^\gamma x_j^\delta \eta_{{\epsilon}}x_l^{{\epsilon}}g^{kl}| &\leq c\tilde{v}^3 F^{ij}g_{ij},\\
\label{C1VectorEst}
|||x_i^\alpha\xi^i||| &\leq c \tilde{v} \quad \forall (p, \xi) \in TM(t).\end{aligned}$$
\[C1EstDerivatives\] Let $M \subset \bar{{{\Omega}}}$ be a graph over $\mathcal{S}_0$, $M = $ graph $u$, and ${{\epsilon}}= {{\epsilon}}(x)$ a function defined in $\mathcal{S}_0$, $0< {{\epsilon}}< \frac{1}{2}$. Let $\phi$ be defined through $$\phi = e^{\mu e^{\lambda u}},$$ where $0< \mu$ and $\lambda < 0$. Then there exists $c = c({{\Omega}}, |\Phi|_0, |\Phi'|_0)$ such that $$\begin{split}
2\Phi'|F^{ij}\tilde{v}_i\phi_j| \leq &c F^{ij}g_{ij} \tilde{v}^3 |\lambda|\mu e^{\lambda u} \phi + (1 - 2{{\epsilon}}) \Phi' F^{ij} h_i^kh_{kj} \tilde{v}\phi \\
& + \frac{1}{1 - 2{{\epsilon}}} \Phi' F^{ij}u_i u_j \mu^2\lambda^2 e^{2\lambda u} \tilde{v}\phi.
\end{split}$$
Now we can prove Proposition \[C1estimates\]:
We consider the function $$w = \tilde{v} \phi,$$ where $\phi$ is chosen as in and we will choose $$\mu = \frac{1}{4},$$ $\lambda$ negative with $|\lambda|$ large enough. Showing that $w$ is bounded is tantamount to show that $\tilde{v}$ is bounded.
Let us furthermore assume that $u \leq -1$, for otherwise we could replace $u$ in the definition of $\phi$ by $(u - c)$, where $c > 1 + |u|$. We derive in view of the evolution equations and Lemma \[FBoundsLemma\], \[C1PrepLemma\] and \[C1EstDerivatives\] the parabolic inequality $$\label{C1EvW}
\begin{split}
\dot{w} - \Phi'F^{ij}w_{ij} \leq & -{{\epsilon}}\Phi' F^{ij}h_i^kh_{kj}\tilde{v}\phi + c[{{\epsilon}}^{-1} + |\lambda|\mu e^{\lambda u}] F^{ij}g_{ij} \tilde{v}^3 \phi \\
&+ [\frac{1}{1-2{{\epsilon}}} - 1] \Phi'F^{ij}u_iu_j \mu ^2 \lambda ^2 e^{2\lambda u}\tilde{v} \phi \\
&- \Phi' F^{ij}u_i u_j \mu \lambda^2 e^{\lambda u}\tilde{v}\phi\\
&+ c [|\eta_{\alpha\beta} \nu^\alpha\nu^\beta| + e^{-\psi}\mu\lambda e^{\lambda u}\tilde{v}^2]\phi,
\end{split}$$ where the function $0 < {{\epsilon}}= {{\epsilon}}(x) < \frac{1}{2}$ is the one chosen in Lemma \[C1PrepLemma\].
We use the maximum principle to show that $w$ is bounded, let $0 < T < T^*$ and $x_0 = x(t_0, \xi_0)$ be such that $$\underset{[0,T]}{\sup} \underset{M(t)}{\sup} w = w(t_0, \xi_0).$$ We choose a coordinate system $(\xi^i)$ such that in the critical point $$g_{ij} = \delta_{ij}\qquad \text{and} \qquad h_i^k = \kappa_i \delta_i^k,$$ and there holds $$\label{C1PCup}
\kappa_1 \leq \kappa_2 \leq \ldots \leq \kappa_n.$$ Now assume $\tilde{v}(x_0) \geq 2$ and let $i = i_0$ be an index such that $$\label{C1GradientU}
|u_{i_0}|^2 \geq \frac{1}{n} ||Du||^2.$$ We set $(e^i) = \frac{\partial}{\partial \xi^{i_0}}$ and assume without loss of generality that $0 < u_ie^i$. At $x_0$ there holds $Dw(x_0) = 0$, hence taking the scalar product with $(e^i)$ yields $$\begin{split}
-\tilde{v}_ie^i &= \mu\lambda e^{\lambda u}\tilde{v}u_ie^i\\
& = e^\psi h_i^k u_k e^i - \eta_{\alpha\beta}\nu^\alpha x_i^\beta e^i,
\end{split}$$ where the second equation follows from $\tilde{v} = \eta_\alpha \nu^\alpha$ and the Weingarten equation (we remind that $\eta = e^\psi(-1, 0, \ldots, 0)$).
Rearranging the terms and taking as well as into account, we get for large $|\lambda|$ $$\kappa_{i_0} \leq [\mu\lambda e^{\lambda u} + c]\tilde{v} e^{-\psi} \leq \frac{1}{2}\mu\lambda e^{\lambda u}\tilde{v}e^{-\psi}.$$ Hence it follows that $\kappa_{i_0}$ is negative and of the same order as $\tilde{v}$, which already finishes the proof, if we have a lower bound for the principal curvatures.
Next, considering the special coordinate system chosen above and the fact that $\kappa_{i_0}$ is negative, we conclude $$-F^{ij}h_i^kh_{kj} \leq -\sum_{i=1}^{i_0} F_i\kappa_i^2 \leq - \sum_{i=1}^{i_0}F_i \kappa_{i_0}^2.$$ Since $F$ is concave, we have at $x_0$ $$\label{C1FDeriv}
F_1 \geq F_2\geq \ldots \geq F_n,$$ hence there holds $$-\sum_{i=1}^{i_0} F_i \leq - F_1 \leq -\frac{1}{n} \sum_{i=1}^n F_i.$$ We conclude $$-F^{ij}h_i^kh_{kj} \leq - c F^{ij}g_{ij}\mu^2 \lambda^2e^{2\lambda u}\tilde{v}^2.$$ Inserting this estimate in yields at $x_0$ with the choice ${{\epsilon}}= e^{-\lambda u}$: $$\begin{split}
0 &\leq - c F^{ij}g_{ij}\mu^2 \lambda^2e^{\lambda u}\tilde{v}^3\phi + cF^{ij}g_{ij}\mu |\lambda|e^{\lambda u}\tilde{v}^3\phi\\
& + \frac{2}{1-2{{\epsilon}}}\Phi' F^{ij}u_iu_j \mu^2\lambda^2 e^{\lambda u}\tilde{v}\phi - \Phi' F^{ij}u_iu_j\mu\lambda^2 e^{\lambda u}\tilde{v}\phi\\
& + c \mu |\lambda|e^{\lambda u} \tilde{v}^2 \phi.
\end{split}$$ The second row is negative due to the choice of $\mu$. The first term is the dominant one, if we choose $|\lambda|$ large enough, hence the right hand side is negative, which implies that the maximum of $w$ cannot occur at a point where $\tilde{v} \geq 2$.
Curvature estimates
===================
In this section we prove the boundedness of the principal curvatures during the flow, which together with the estimates in the next section will imply the long time existence of the flow by well-known arguments.
Now in view of Lemma \[FBoundsLemma\] we are in an expedient situation, as $C^2$-estimates can be derived in the same way as for a constant force term $f \equiv c$. Nevertheless we will provide them for the sake of completeness.
First, we provide the curvature estimates for $F=H$, cf. [@GerhCP Lemma 4.4.1]:
The principal curvatures of the flow with curvature function $F = H$ and supplementary function $\Phi(x) = x$ for $k=0$ or $\Phi \in C^{m,\alpha}({\mathbb{R}}_+, {\mathbb{R}})$ an arbitrary function satisfying $\Phi'>0$ and $\Phi'' \leq 0$ for $k = 1$, are uniformly bounded during the flow.
Let $\zeta$ be defined by $$\zeta = \sup\,\{ h_{ij}\eta^i\eta^j: ||\eta|| = 1\}.$$ Let $0 < T < T^*$ and $x_0 = x_0(t_0)$ with $0 < t_0 \leq T$ be a point in $M(t_0)$ such that $$\label{C2SupZeta}
\underset{M_0}{\sup } \,\zeta < \sup\, \{ \underset{M_t}{\sup } \,\zeta:0 <t \leq T\} = \zeta(x_0).$$ At first, we follow the usual argument, which allows one to substitute $\zeta$ by $h_n^n$ and use the evolution equation for the latter quantity to estimate $\zeta$:
We choose Riemannian normal coordinates $(\xi^i)$ at $x_0 \in M(t_0)$ such that at this point we have $$g_{ij} = \delta_{ij} \qquad \text{and}\qquad \zeta = h^n_n = \kappa_n,$$ where we assume the principal curvatures are labelled as in .
Let $\tilde{\eta} = (\tilde{\eta}^i)$ be the contravariant vector field defined by $$\tilde{\eta} = (0, \ldots, 0, 1),$$ and set $$\tilde{\zeta} = \frac{h_{ij}\tilde{\eta}^i\tilde{\eta}^j}{g_{ij}\tilde{\eta}^i\tilde{\eta}^j}.$$ We note that $\tilde{\zeta}$ is well defined in a neigbourhood of $(t_0, x_0)$ and $\tilde{\zeta}$ assumes its maximum at $(t_0, x_0)$ as well. Moreover at $(t_0, x_0)$ we have $$\dot{\tilde{\zeta}} = \dot{h}^n_n$$ and the spatial derivatives do also coincide. Hence at $(t_0, x_0)$ the function $\tilde{\zeta}$ satisfies the same differential equation as $h^n_n$. For the sake of greater clarity, we will treat therefore $h_n^n$ like a scalar and pretend that $\zeta$ is defined by $$\zeta = \log h^n_n.$$ In view of the maximum principle and Lemma \[FBoundsLemma\] we deduce that there holds at $(t_0, x_0)$ $$0 \leq - \Phi' ||A||^2h^n_n + c H|h^n_n|^2 + c(1+ h^n_n),$$ where $||A||^2 = h_{ij}h^{ij} = \sum_{i=1}^n \kappa_i^2$. This proves that $\zeta$ is bounded and since we already have a lower bound on $H$ we are done.
Before we prove the next estimates, let us state the following
Let $\chi \equiv \chi_{{{\Omega}}}$ be the strictly convex function, where we assume $\bar{{{\Omega}}}$ is the region determined by the $C^0$-estimates. Then there exist constants $c= c(|\Phi|, |\Phi'|)$ and $c_0 > 0$ (depending on $|\Phi'|$ and the strict convexity of $\chi$), such that $$\dot{\chi} - \Phi'F^{ij}\chi_{ij} \leq c\chi_\alpha\nu^\alpha - c_0F^{ij}g_{ij}.$$
Next, we treat the case $F= {{\sigma}}_2$. The proof is as in [@EnzDiplom] :
The principal curvatures of the flow with $F = {{\sigma}}_2$, $\Phi(x) = x$ or $\Phi(x) = -x^{-1}$, are uniformly bounded during the flow, provided there exists a strictly convex function $\chi \in C^2(\bar{{{\Omega}}})$.
Let $\zeta$ and $w$ be respectively defined by $$\begin{split}
&\zeta = \sup \{h_{ij}\eta^i\eta^j: ||\eta|| = 1\},\\
\label{C2EvW}
& w = \log \zeta + \lambda \chi,
\end{split}$$ where $\lambda > 0$ is a large constant. We will show that $w$ is bounded, if we choose $\lambda$ sufficiently large.
Let $0 < T < T^*$ and $x_0 = x_0(t_0)$ with $0 < t_0 \leq T$ be a point in $M(t_0)$ such that $$\label{C2SupW}
\underset{M_0}{\sup }\, w < \sup \, \{ \underset{M_t}{\sup }\, w:0 <t \leq T\} = w(x_0).$$ By the same procedure as in the last proof we introduce normal coordinates at $x_0 = x(t_0, \xi_0)$, and we may define $w$ by $$w = \log h_n^n + \lambda \chi.$$ If we assume $h^n_n$ and $\lambda$ to be greater than $1$, we deduce the following inequality at $(t_0, \xi_0)$ $$\label{C2EvWEst}
\begin{split}
0 &\leq -c F^{ij}h_{ik}h^k_j + c h^n_n + cF^{ij}g_{ij} + \lambda c -\lambda c_0 F^{ij}g_{ij} \\
&+ \Phi' F^{ij}(\log h_n^n)_i (\log h_n^n)_j + \Phi' \frac{2}{\kappa_n - \kappa_1}\sum_{i=1}^n(F_n - F_i)(h_{ni;}^{\quad n})^2(h_n^n)^{-1},
\end{split}$$ where we have estimated bounded terms by a constant $c$ and the last term is due to the term with the second derivatives of $F$ in the evolution equation of $h_n^n$ (we use formula (2.1.72) in [@GerhCP] and note that the two parts in this formula are both negative for a concave curvature function, see [@GerhCP Proposition 2.1.23]).
We distinguish two cases:
Case 1.
Suppose that $$|\kappa_1| \geq {{\epsilon}}_1 \kappa_n,$$ where we choose some fixed ${{\epsilon}}_1$ so that $0 < {{\epsilon}}_1 < \frac{1}{2}$.
Then we have in view of the concavity of $F$, see , $$F^{ij}h_{ik}h^k_j \geq F_1 \kappa_1^2 \geq \frac{1}{n}F^{ij}g_{ij}{{\epsilon}}_1^2 \kappa_n^2.$$ Since $Dw=0$, $$D\log h^n_n = - \lambda D\chi.$$ Hence $$F^{ij}(\log h_n^n)_i (\log h_n^n)_j \leq \lambda^2 F^{ij}\chi_i \chi_j \leq c \lambda^2 F^{ij}g_{ij}.$$ For large $\kappa_n$ the first term in is dominating, so we can conclude $\kappa_n$ is a priori bounded in this case.
Case 2.
Suppose that $$\kappa_1 \geq - {{\epsilon}}_1 \kappa_n.$$ Then, by using the Codazzi equations, we can estimate the last term in from above (where we omit the factor $\Phi'$ for a moment): $$\begin{split}
\frac{2}{1+{{\epsilon}}_1}\sum_{i=1}^n (F_n - F_i) (h_{ni;}^{\quad n})^2 (h^n_n)^{-2} \leq &\frac{2}{1+2{{\epsilon}}_1}\sum_{i=1}^n(F_n - F_i) (h_{nn;}^{\quad\, i})^2 (h^n_n)^{-2}\\
&+ c({{\epsilon}}_1)\sum_{i=1}^n(F_i - F_n) (h^n_n)^{-2}.
\end{split}$$ The second sum can be estimated by a constant, since $F_1 \leq c\kappa_n$.
The terms in containing the derivative of $h_n^n$ can therefore be estimated from above by (again omitting the common factor $\Phi'$) $$\begin{split}
&-\frac{1-2{{\epsilon}}_1}{1+2{{\epsilon}}_1}\sum_{i=1}^n F_i(h_{nn;}^{\quad\, i})^2 (h^n_n)^{-2} + \frac{2}{1+2{{\epsilon}}_1}F_n\sum_{i=1}^n(h_{nn;}^{\quad \, i})^2(h^n_n)^{-2}\\
& \leq 2 F_n \sum_{i=1}^n (h_{nn;}^{\quad\, i})^2 (h^n_n)^{-2} = 2\lambda^2F_n||D\chi||^2.
\end{split}$$ Hence we get the inequality $$\begin{split}
0 \leq &- c F_n\kappa_n^2 + \lambda^2 c F_n + c\kappa_n + cF^{ij}g_{ij}\\
& + \lambda c - \lambda c_0 F^{ij}g_{ij}.
\end{split}$$ Because of $(H_2)_i \geq c_1 \kappa_n$ and the fact that ${{\sigma}}_2\leq c_0$ we deduce $$F^{ij}g_{ij} \geq c \kappa_n.$$ Hence we can uniformly estimate $\kappa_n$ from above, if $\lambda$ has been chosen large enough. The proposition now follows from $|A|^2 < H^2$ and $H>0$, which are valid in $\Gamma_2$ by definition.
Finally we provide the $C^2$-estimates in the case of a curvature function of class $(K^*)$, see also [@GerhCP Lemma 4.1.3].
The principal curvatures of the flow with $F \in (K^*)$, $\Phi(x) = \log(x)$, are uniformly bounded during the flow, provided there exists a strictly convex function $\chi \in C^2(\bar{{{\Omega}}})$.
Let $\zeta$ be defined as in the preceding proof and define $$w = \log \zeta +\lambda\tilde{v} + \mu \chi,$$ where $\lambda$, $\mu$ are large positive parameters which we specify later and we will prove that $w$ is bounded if we choose $\lambda$ and $\mu$ approprietly.
By the same procedure as in the last proofs we suppose $x_0$ is a point in $M(t_0)$ such that holds, where $0 < T < T^*$ and $0 < t_0 \leq T$, we introduce normal coordinates at $x_0 = x(t_0, \xi_0)$, and we may define $w$ by $$w = \log h_n^n + \lambda \tilde{v} + \mu \chi.$$ At $(t_0, \xi_0)$ we have in view of the maximum principle $$\label{C2WEst2}
\begin{split}
0 \leq & \,c(h_n^n + \lambda) + c\lambda F^{ij}g_{ij} + \mu c - \mu c_0 F^{ij}g_{ij}\\
& - \lambda \Phi' F^{ij}h_i^kh_{kj} + \Phi' F^{ij}(\log h_n^n)_i (\log h_n^n)_j\\
& + \{\Phi'' F_nF^n + \Phi' F^{kl,rs}h_{kl;n}h_{rs;}^{\quad n}\}(h_n^n)^{-1},
\end{split}$$ where we have assumed that $h_n^n$, $\lambda$ and $\mu$ are larger than $1$ and used the boundedness of $\Phi$.
Since $F \in (K^*)$, by choosing $\lambda$ and $\mu$ large enough it suffices to estimate the term, which is quadratic in the derivatives. This will be done by exploiting the last term, which is negative (both its components are).
Since $F \in (K)$ and $\Phi''(x) \leq -\frac{\Phi'(x)}{x}$, we can estimate the last term from above by $$\label{C2KEst}
- (h_n^n)^{-2} \Phi' F^{ij}h_{in;n}h_{jn;}^{\quad n}.$$ The Codazzi equation implies $$h_{in;n} = h_{nn;i} + \bar{R}_{\alpha\beta\gamma\delta}\nu^\alpha x_n^\beta x_i^\gamma x_n^\delta,$$ hence by abbreviating the curvature term by $\bar{R}_i$, we conclude that is equal to $$- (h_n^n)^{-2}\Phi' F^{ij}((h_n^n)_{;i} + \bar{R}_i)((h_n^n)_{;j} + \bar{R}_j).$$ Hence the last two terms in are estimated from above by $$-2(h_n^n)^{-1}\Phi'F^{ij}(\log h_n^n)_{;i} \bar{R}_j.$$ Now $Dw = 0$ yields $$D\log h_n^n = - \lambda D\tilde{v} - \mu D\chi,$$ hence we can finally estimate the last two terms by $$\lambda c + (h_n^n)^{-1} (\lambda+\mu) c F^{ij}g_{ij}.$$ This establishes the uniform bound of $\kappa_n$ from above and implies that $\kappa_1$ is uniformly bounded from below by a positive constant in view of $F \geq c > 0$ and $F_{|\partial \Gamma} = 0$.
Higher order estimates {#higherorder}
======================
In view of the a priori estimates obtained so far, we know that $$\label{graphC2estimates}
|u|_{2,0, \mathcal{S}_0} \leq c_0$$ and $$\Phi(F) \text{ is uniformly elliptic in } u$$ independently of $t$, $0 < t < T^*$, because the principal curvatures lie in a compact subset of $\Gamma$. Denote the ellipticity constants by $\lambda, \Lambda$.
Next, we look at the nonlinear, but uniformly parabolic equation $$\frac{\partial u}{\partial t} = - e^{-\psi}v \, (\Phi(F) - f),$$ where the operator $\Phi(F)$ is concave in $h_{ij}$, hence $-\Phi(F)$ is concave in $u_{ij}$. However, we cannot apply the Krylov-Safonov estimates since $f = f(t)$ is a merely bounded function. Instead, we can follow an argumentation similar to the one used in [@McCoyMixedAreaGen] and, with certain modifications, in [@RivSin] to obtain a uniform, time-independent bound on $u$ in $H^{2+\beta, \frac{2+\beta}{2}}([\delta, T]\times{\mathcal{S}}_0)$ for some $0 < \beta < 1$, where we choose $\delta > 0$ to be arbitrary but fixed and $\delta < T < T^*\leq \infty$ arbitrary.
The idea is roughly as follows: First one obtains $H^{\beta, \frac{\beta}{2}}([\delta, T]\times \mathcal{S}_0)$-estimates, $0< \beta <\alpha$, for $u$ and $\Phi(F)$ using the parabolic Harnack-inequality. Then we fix $t \geq \delta$ and consider $u$ to be a solution of the nonlinear, but uniformly elliptic equation $$\Phi(F(\cdot, u(t, \cdot), Du(t, \cdot), D^2u(t, \cdot))) \equiv g \in C^{0, \beta}(\mathcal{S}_0).$$ As this equation is not well-defined on the whole set $\mathcal{S}_0 \times {\mathbb{R}}\times {\mathbb{R}}^n \times {\mathbf{S}}$, where ${\mathbf{S}}\subset {\mathbb{R}}^{n\times n}$ denotes the space of symmetric matrices, we are going to use the Bellman-extension in a similar way as in the papers cited above. Now we can apply $C^{0,\beta}(\mathcal{S}_0)$-estimates for $D^2u(t, \cdot)$ using a result of Caffarelli ([@CafCab Theorem 8.1]). We remark that in this section $Du$ and $D^2u$ denote the first respectively second derivatives with respect to space. This then enables us to use the estimates from [@AndFN Sections 3.3, 3.4] to obtain parabolic Hölder estimates for $Du$ and $D^2u$. Finally, the higher order estimates can then be derived by using essentially the parabolic Schauder-theory, thereby asserting long-time existence.
From now on let ${{\epsilon}}, \delta, T$ be fixed constants with $0 < {{\epsilon}}< \delta < T < T^*$. By choosing a finite covering of $\mathcal{S}_0$ it suffices to show inner estimates in a fixed coordinate chart. Hence from now on all quantities of the hypersurface are expressed in local coordinates and depend on $x \in \Omega$, where $\Omega \subset\subset {\mathbb{R}}^n$ is an open, precompact set. First, we derive the Hölder-estimates for $u$ and $\Phi(F)$:
\[HEFirstStep\] There exist constants $\beta$, $0< \beta < 1$, and $c_1$ depending on the already obtained estimates, such that $$\begin{aligned}
\label{PhiHoelder}
&||\Phi||_{\beta, \frac{\beta}{2}, \, [{{\epsilon}}, T]\times {\mathcal{S}}_0} \leq c_1,\\
\label{HEbeta}
&||u||_{\beta, \frac{\beta}{2}, \, [{{\epsilon}}, T]\times {\mathcal{S}}_0} \leq c_1.
\end{aligned}$$
Looking at the equation we have $$\begin{split}
\dot{\Phi} - a^{ij} \Phi_{,ij} &+ b^k \Phi_k \equiv \dot{\Phi} - \Phi' F^{ij}\Phi_{,ij} + \Phi' F^{ij}\Gamma_{ij}^k \Phi_k \\
&= -\Phi' (\Phi - f)\{F^{ij}h_i^kh_{kj} + F^{ij}\bar{R}_{\alpha\beta\gamma\delta}\nu^\alpha x_i^\beta \nu^\gamma x_j^\delta\} =: g,
\end{split}$$ and $g$ as well as $b^k$ are bounded in view of . Since this is a uniformly parabolic equation, we can apply [@Lieberman Corollary 7.41] or [@SchnuererPde Theorem 3.16] to obtain . Next we look at : $$\begin{aligned}
\dot{u} - \Phi' F^{ij}u_{,ij} &+ \Phi'F^{ij}\Gamma_{ij}^k u_k = -e^{-\psi}\tilde{v}(\Phi - f) + \Phi'Fe^{-\psi}\tilde{v}\\
& + \Phi' F^{ij}\{\bar{\Gamma}^0_{00}u_iu_j + 2 \bar{\Gamma}^0_{0i}u_j + \bar{\Gamma}^0_{ij}\}\notag
\end{aligned}$$ Since we are in the same situation as before, proceeding as above yields .
Next, we want to use the result of Caffarelli to obtain spatial $C^{2,\beta}$ estimates for $u$. First we extend $F$ using the Bellman-extension to all of ${\mathbb{R}}^{n\times n}$, where we consider $F = F(h^i_j)$:
\[FExtension\] Let $\Gamma \subset {\mathbb{R}}^n$ be an open, convex, symmetric cone and $f \in C^2(\Gamma)$ be a symmetric, concave function, positively homogeneous of degree 1 and vanishing on the boundary of $\Gamma$. Denote by $F \in C^2(\mathbf{S}_\Gamma)$ the corresponding curvature function. Let $C_1, C_2$ be positive constants. Then there exists a function $\tilde{F}$ defined on all of ${\mathbb{R}}^{n\times n}$, which agrees with $F$ on the set $$C = \left\{ A\in \mathbf{S}_\Gamma: C_1 \leq F \, \wedge \, \underset{1\leq i \leq n}{\max}\, \kappa_i \leq C_2\right\},$$ where the $\kappa_i$ denote the eigenvalues of $A$. Furthermore $\tilde{F}$ is uniformly Lipschitz continuous, positively homogeneous of degree 1, concave and uniformly elliptic, where the ellipticity constants depend on $C_1$ and $C_2$.
Define $\tilde{F}$ for arbitrary $(b_j^i) \in {\mathbb{R}}^{n\times n}$ as follows: $$\tilde{F}(b_j^i) = \underset{(h_j^i) \in C}{\min}\, F^k_l(h_j^i) \, b^l_k.$$ First of all, in view of Eulers homogeneity relation $F^k_l(h_j^i) h^l_k = F(h_j^i)$ and the concavity we infer for $(b_j^i), (h_j^i) \in \Gamma$ $$F(b_j^i) \leq F(h_j^i) + F^k_l(h_j^i)(b_k^l - h_k^l) = F^k_l(h_j^i) \, b_k^l.$$ From this inequality and again the homogeneity relation we infer $\tilde{F}_{|C} = F_{|C}$. By definition $\tilde{F}$ is concave, homogeneous of degree 1 and well-defined, since $C$ is compact. Furthermore, using some elementary properties of the trace-function and the fact that $F$ is uniformly monotone in $C$, one obtains the uniform ellipticity of $\tilde{F}$, hence there exist positive constants $\lambda$, $\Lambda$, depending on $n$, $F$ and $C$, such that $\forall A, B \in {\mathbb{R}}^{n\times n}$ with $B$ nonnegative definite there holds $$\lambda\, ||B|| \leq \tilde{F}(A + B) - \tilde{F}(A) \leq \Lambda \, ||B||.$$ In the same way as above one can establish that $\tilde{F}$ is uniformly Lipschitz continuous.
Now we can derive the spatial $C^{2,\beta}$-estimates, first we cite the result of Caffarelli, see [@CafCab Theorem 8.1] and the remarks following it:
\[NonlinearCaffarelli\] Let $g \in C^{0, \alpha}(\Omega)$, $0<\alpha < 1$, $G: {{\Omega}}\times {\mathbf{S}}\rightarrow {\mathbb{R}}$ be continuous, concave in the second argument, uniformly elliptic, i.e. there are constants $\mu_1, \mu_2$ such that for all $x\in {{\Omega}}$, $A, B \in {\mathbf{S}}$ with $B$ nonnegative definite there holds $$\mu_1 ||B|| \leq G(x, A + B) - G(x, A) \leq \mu_2 ||B||$$ and furthermore there exists $c >0$, such that for all $x, y \in {{\Omega}}$, $A\in {\mathbf{S}}$ there holds $$\label{NonlinearGHom}
|G(x, A) - G(y, A)| \leq c |x-y|^\alpha \, (||A|| +1).$$ Then for ${{\Omega}}' \subset \subset {{\Omega}}$ there exist constants $0<\beta < \alpha$ and $C > 0$ such that a solution $u$ of $G(\cdot, D^2u(\cdot)) = g(\cdot)$ satisfies $$||u||_{2, \beta, {{\Omega}}'} \leq C \,(||u||_{0, {{\Omega}}} + ||g||_{\alpha, {{\Omega}}} + 1),$$ where $C$ depends on $n, \mu_1, \mu_2, c$ and ${{\Omega}}'$.
\[etaDefined\] Let $\Omega' \subset \subset \Omega$ be an open set and $t \in [{{\epsilon}}, T]$ arbitrary, then there exist constants $\tilde{\beta}$, $0<\tilde{\beta} < \beta$, and $c_2$ such that $$||D^2u(t, \cdot)||_{\tilde{\beta}, {{\Omega}}'} \leq c_2,$$ where $c_2$ is a constant depending on $\lambda, \Lambda, d({{\Omega}}', \partial {{\Omega}})$ and the constants $c_0$ from and $c_1$ from .
By using we can define a smooth function $$\begin{split}
&\eta: {{\Omega}}\times {\mathbb{R}}\times B_1^n(0) \times {\mathbf{S}}\rightarrow {\mathbf{S}}, \\
&\eta = \eta(x, z, p, r) = \left(-\chi^{ik}(x, z, p) r_{kj} + R_j^i(x, z, p)\right),
\end{split}$$ linear in $r$ for fixed $x, z, p$, such that for arbitrary spacelike hypersurfaces $M = $ graph $u_{|{{\Omega}}}$ of class $C^2$ we have for $x \in {{\Omega}}$ $$h_j^i(u(x), x) = [\eta(x, u(x), Du(x), D^2u(x))]_j^i,$$ where the derivatives are partial derivatives. Furthermore for such $u$ we can define the function $$\begin{split}
\bar{\eta}_{u}:& {{\Omega}}\times {\mathbf{S}}\rightarrow {\mathbf{S}},\\
& (x, r) \mapsto \eta(x, u(x), Du(x), r),
\end{split}$$ which is now of class $C^1$.
Applying Lemma \[FExtension\], with $C_1$ and $C_2$ chosen correspondingly to the already obtained a priori estimates, we define $$\begin{split}
G: &{{\Omega}}\times {\mathbf{S}}\times (0, T] \rightarrow {\mathbb{R}},\\
&(x,r,t) \mapsto \Phi\big(\tilde{F}(\bar{\eta}_{u(t)}(x, r))\big).
\end{split}$$ For fixed $t \in [{{\epsilon}}, T]$ and $g(\cdot) := -G(\cdot, D^2u(t, \cdot), t) \in C^{0, \beta}({{\Omega}})$, which is valid in view of Lemma \[HEFirstStep\], we consider $u(t, \cdot)$ to be a solution to the equation $$-G(x, D^2v(x), t) = g(x)\quad , \, x \in {{\Omega}}, \, v\in C^2({{\Omega}}).$$ Now we can apply Theorem \[NonlinearCaffarelli\] to obtain the desired estimates, where we use the uniform ellipticity of $\tilde{F}$ and we note that $-G$ is concave with respect to $r$ (see the definition of $\eta$ and the remark at the beginning of this section). Finally, a short computation using the already obtained $C^2$-estimates yields that is satisfied (even for $\alpha = 1$).
Finally, we obtain:
\[C2betaEstimates\] Fix $\delta$, $T$, such that $0<\delta< T < T^*\leq \infty$. Then for the solution of problem we have uniform estimates $$||u||_{2+\beta, \frac{2+\beta}{2}, \,[\delta, T]\times {\mathcal{S}}_0} \leq c$$ for constants $\beta$, $0 < \beta < 1$, and $c$ depending on the choice of $\delta$, but not on $T$.
In the same way as we obtained a uniformly elliptic equation for $u$ in the last Lemma, we can obtain a uniformly parabolic equation for $u$ and use the estimates from [@AndFN Sections 3.3, 3.4] to obtain the parabolic Hölder-estimates for $Du$ and $D^2u$. Together with and the definition of $f$ we obtain (omitting the tilde in the Hölder exponential) $$||f||_{\frac{\beta}{2}, [\delta, T]} \leq \textnormal{const}.$$ The last estimate to complete the Proposition can then be obtained from the evolution equation of the graph.
We finish this section with the higher order estimates and the existence for all times.
The scalar curvature flow exists for all times $0 < t < \infty$ in the class $H^{m+2+\alpha, \frac{m+2+\alpha}{2}}([0,t] \times {\mathcal{S}}_0)$ and the curvature flow exists for all times in the class $H^{m+\alpha, \frac{m+\alpha}{2}}(Q_t, N)$. Furthermore we have uniform estimates for the scalar curvature flow, i.e. there exists a constant $c>0$, such that $$\label{HEEstimates}
||u||_{m+2+\alpha, \frac{m+2+\alpha}{2}, [0, \infty)\times {\mathcal{S}}_0} \leq c.$$
Going through the proof of [@GerhCP Theorem 2.5.9] reveals that the time dependence of $f$ does not cause any problems, as it already has the right regularity to proceed. Following the arguments in [@GerhCP 2.5.12] and noting that now $\Psi$ has again the same regularity as in that proof due to the definition of $f$, we conclude that [@GerhCP Lemma 2.5.17] is also valid for the volume preserving flows. Hence in view of the a priori estimates from Proposition \[C2betaEstimates\] we infer that the flow exists for all times and has the regularity mentioned above, compare the argumentation in [@GerhCP Remark 2.6.2].
It remains to prove the estimate . With $\beta$ from Proposition \[C2betaEstimates\], we have $u \in H^{m+2+\beta, \frac{m+2+\beta}{2}}([0,\infty) \times {\mathcal{S}}_0)$, see [@GerhSurvey Theorem 6.5]. With this new a priori estimates at hand we can again apply the Theorem to obtain the uniform estimates .
We remark that the estimates we have used so far, apart from Lemma \[FBoundsLemma\], do not rely too much on the particular choice of the global force term. Hence as long as bounds for the global force term can be established, one can alter for example the integrands by functions, which depend on $u$ up to its second derivatives and still obtain long time existence for the flow.
Convergence {#Convergence}
===========
Now we want to show the convergence to a hypersurface of constant $F$-curvature. The first step consists of proving the convergence of the $F$-curvature. Let us first cite a well-known fact.
\[LemmaLipschitz\] Let $\mathcal{S}_0$ be a compact manifold of class $C^1$ and $f \in C^1(J\times \mathcal{S}_0)$, where $J$ is an open interval, then $$\phi(t) = \underset{\mathcal{S}_0}{\sup }\, f(t, \cdot)$$ is Lipschitz continuous and there holds a.e. $$\dot{\phi}(t) = \frac{\partial f}{\partial t}(t, x_t),$$ where $x_t$ is a point in which the supremum is attained.
A corresponding result is also valid if $\phi$ is defined by taking the infimum instead of the supremum.
See Lemma 6.3.2 in [@GerhCP].
Dealing carefully with the equation we can prove at once the exponential convergence of the $F$-curvature. Note that the proof does not rely on any a priori estimates besides the bounds on the curvature function.
\[Fexp\] There exist constants $0 < \delta = \delta(M_0)$ and $c = c(M_0)$, such that $$\underset{x \in M_t}{\sup}|\Phi(F)(x) - f_k(t)| \leq c\, e^{-\delta t}.$$
We remind that $\Phi(F)$ satisfies a parabolic equation of the form $$\label{PhiFlowSimple}
\dot{\Phi} - a^{ij}\Phi_{;ij} + C(\Phi - f_k) = 0$$ with $$C := \Phi' \{F^{ij}h_i^kh_{kj} + F^{ij}\bar{R}_{\alpha\beta\gamma\delta}\nu^\alpha x_i^\beta \nu^\gamma x_j^\delta\}$$ and we note $C \geq c_0 > 0$ and $c_0 = c_0(M_0)$, in view of Lemma \[FBoundsLemma\].
We consider $\Phi$ as a function $$\begin{split}
\Phi: &[0, T^*) \times M \rightarrow {\mathbb{R}}\\
&(t, \xi) \mapsto \Phi(F((u(t, \xi), x^i(t, \xi)))
\end{split}$$ and denote by $\xi^{\inf}(t) \in M_t$ a point where $$\Phi^{\inf}(t) = \Phi(\xi^{\inf}(t)) := \underset{\xi \in M}{\text{inf }} \Phi(t, \xi)$$ and by $\xi^{\sup}(t) \in M_t$ a point where $$\Phi^{\sup}(t) = \Phi(\xi^{\sup}(t)) :=\underset{\xi \in M}{\text{sup }} \Phi(t, \xi).$$ Let $$\eta(t) := \Phi^{\sup}(t) - \Phi^{\inf}(t).$$ We know that $\Phi^{\inf}$ and $\Phi^{\sup}$ are lipschitz continuous considered as functions depending on $t$, hence by the previous Lemma there holds for a.e. $t$: $$\begin{split}
0 &= \dot{\eta} - (\Phi'F^{ij}\Phi_{;ij})(\xi^{\sup}) + (\Phi' F^{ij}\Phi_{;ij})(\xi^{\inf})\\
&+ (\Phi^{\sup} - f_k)C(\xi^{\sup}) - (\Phi^{\inf} - f_k)C(\xi^{\inf}).
\end{split}$$ Considering the points at which the functions are evaluated, one obtains the following inequality $$0 \geq \dot{\eta} + (\Phi^{\sup} - f_k)C(\xi^{\sup}) - (\Phi^{\inf} - f_k)C(\xi^{\inf}).$$ Now since both $\Phi^{\sup} - f_k$ and $f_k - \Phi^{\inf}$ are nonnegative, due to the definition of $f_k$, we conclude $$0 \geq \dot{\eta} + c_0 (\Phi^{\sup} -f_k + f_k - \Phi^{\inf})= \dot{\eta} + c_0 \eta.$$ Hence there holds $$0 \geq \frac{d}{dt}\left(e^{c_0t}\eta\right)$$ for a.e. $t \in [0, T^*)$. Integrating over $t$ shows the exponential decay and proves the lemma.
Now we can infer the convergence of the graphs:
\[graphConv\] The graphs $u = u(t)$ converge exponentially to a continuous function $u_\infty$ on $\mathcal{S}_0$ in the Supremum-Norm, where the factor in the exponential convergence is the same as in Lemma \[Fexp\], i.e. there exists a constant $\bar{c} = \bar{c}(M_0, |u|) > 0$ such that $$\underset{x \in \mathcal{S}_0}{\sup} |u(t, x) - u_\infty(x)| \leq \bar{c}\, e^{-\delta t}.$$
Let $t \in [0,\infty)$ be given and $t' > t$ be arbitrary. Then we have in view of for an arbitrary $x \in \mathcal{S}_0$ and some $c' > 0$: $$|u(t, x) - u(t', x)| \leq \frac{c'}{\delta} e^{-\delta t}.$$
We remind a well-known interpolation Lemma, which will be used to show the exponential convergence of the graphs in $C^{m+2}$.
Let ${{\Omega}}$ be a bounded open subset of ${\mathbb{R}}^n$ and ${{\Omega}}' \subset \subset {{\Omega}}$ be an open subset. Furthermore let $m, l \in {\mathbb{N}}$, $1 \leq l < m$, $\alpha \in {\mathbb{R}}$, $0 < \alpha \leq 1$. Then the following two interpolation inequalities are valid:
(i) There exists $c>0$, where $c=c(n, m, {{\Omega}}')$, such that for all $u \in C^m(\bar{{{\Omega}}})$ there holds $$\label{interpolCm}
||u||_{l, {{\Omega}}'} \leq c \, ||u||_{0, {{\Omega}}}^{\frac{m-l}{m}} \, (||u||_{0, {{\Omega}}}^{\frac{l}{m}} +||D^mu||_{0, {{\Omega}}}^{\frac{l}{m}}).$$
(ii) There exists $c>0$, where $c= c(n, m, \alpha, {{\Omega}}')$, such that for all $u \in C^{m, \alpha}(\bar{{{\Omega}}})$ there holds $$\label{interpolCmalpha}
||u||_{m, {{\Omega}}'} \leq c \, ||u||_{0, {{\Omega}}}^{\frac{\alpha}{m+\alpha}} \,(||u||_{0,{{\Omega}}}^{\frac{m}{m+\alpha}} + [D^mu]_{\alpha, {{\Omega}}}^{\frac{m}{m+\alpha}}).$$
From the preceding Lemmata one can infer the exponential convergence in $C^{m+2}(\mathcal{S}_0)$:
The functions $u(t,\cdot)$ converge exponentially for $t \to \infty$ in $C^{m+2}(\mathcal{S}_0)$ to $u_\infty \in C^{m+2,\alpha}(\mathcal{S}_0)$. $u_\infty$ represents a spacelike hypersurface of class $C^{m+2, \alpha}$ with constant $F$-curvature.
Using the uniform estimates together with Corollary \[graphConv\] and the interpolation inequality we conclude the exponential convergence of $u(t,\cdot)$ in $C^{m+2}({\mathcal{S}}_0)$. Since we have uniform estimates for $\tilde{v}$, the limit hypersurface $M_\infty = $ graph $u_\infty$ is a spacelike hypersurface. Lemma \[Fexp\] shows that the limit hypersurface has constant $F$-curvature, then the elliptic Schauder theory implies $u_\infty \in C^{m+2,\alpha}(\mathcal{S}_0)$.
If we assume the initial hypersurface and the considered curvature function to be smooth, then the above Lemma yields the exponential convergence in the $C^\infty$-topology:
If the initial hypersurface and the curvature function $F$ are smooth, then the graphs converge exponentially in the $C^\infty$-Topology to a hypersurface of constant $F$-curvature.
Stability
=========
In this section we want to prove the strict stability of the limit hypersurface, which means, that for curvature functions of class $(D)$ the first eigenvalue of the linearization is strictly positive.
First, we linearize the operator $F$. For this let $M_0$ be a hypersurface, which satisfies $$\label{FequalsConst}
F_{|M_0} = c,$$ where $c$ is a constant (positive in case $F$ is of class $(K^*)$ and arbitrary for $F=H$). Then there holds, see [@GerhSurvey Lemma 3.9]:
\[Linearization\] Let $M_0$ be of class $C^{m+2,\alpha}$, $m \geq 2$, $0 \leq \alpha \leq 1$, and satisfy . Let $\mathcal{U}$ be a tubular neighbourhood of $M_0$, then the linearization of the operator $F$ expressed in the normal Gaussian coordinate system $(x^\alpha)$ corresponding to $\mathcal{U}$ and evaluated at $M_0$ has the form $$\label{linearizationOperator}
Bu := -F^{ij}u_{ij} + \{F^{ij}h_i^kh_{kj} + F^{ij}\bar{R}_{\alpha\beta\gamma\delta}\nu^\alpha x_i^\beta \nu^\gamma x_j^\delta\}u,$$ where $u$ is a function on $M_0$ and all geometric quantities are those of $M_0$. The derivatives are covariant derivatives with respect to the induced metric of $M_0$. The operator is self-adjoint, if $F^{ij}$ is divergence free.
We remind the definition of stability:
Let $N$ be Lorentzian, $F$ a curvature operator, and $M \subset N$ a compact, spacelike hypersurface, such that $M$ is admissible. Then $M$ is said to be a (strictly) stable solution to the equation , if the quadratic form $$\int_M{F^{ij}u_i u_j} + \int_M{\{F^{ij}h_{ik}h^k_j + F^{ij}\bar{R}_{\alpha\beta\gamma\delta}\nu^\alpha x_i^\beta \nu^\gamma x_j^\delta\}\} u^2}$$ is (positive) non-negative for all $u\in C^2(M)$, $u \not\equiv 0$. If $F$ is of class $(D)$, i.e. $F^{ij}$ is divergence free, then this is equivalent to the fact, that the first eigenvalue $\lambda_1$ of the linearization, which is the operator in , is non-negative.
In view of the assumptions on the ambient manifold $N$, in our case there holds
The limit hypersurface of the flow is strictly stable.
Foliation
=========
In this section we want to derive some results for regions covered by constant $F$-curvature surfaces, but first we are going to show that under suitable assumptions we can provide such a foliation. To show the existence of a region covered by compact, connected, spacelike constant $F$-curvature hypersurfaces (such a hypersurface will be called CFC-surface from now on) we use however the corresponding curvature flow with the volume preserving term substituted by a constant. The corresponding results can be found in [@GerhCP Theorem 4.2.1,Theorem 5.1.1 and Theorem 4.1.1], respectively for $H$, ${{\sigma}}_2$ and $F \in (K^*)$. For the convenience of the reader we state the results from this Theorems:
\[ExistenceCFC\] Let $N$, $F$, $\Gamma$ be as in section \[Introduction\] with $m\geq 2$, $0 < \alpha <1$. If $c > 0$ is a constant and there exists a future and a past curvature barrier for $(F, \Gamma, c)$ of class $C^{m+2,\alpha}$, then there exists a compact, connected, spacelike hypersurface $M$ of class $C^{m+2, \alpha}$ satisfying the equation $$F_{|M} = c,$$ provided there exists a strictly convex function $\chi \in C^2(\bar{{{\Omega}}})$, where ${{\Omega}}$ is the region between the barriers. In the case $F=H$ we do not need the existence of the strictly convex function.
Using this theorem we can show the existence of a foliation in a region enclosed by barriers by following the arguments used to establish a foliation by constant mean curvature surfaces in [@GerhCP Theorem 4.6.3].
\[FoliationThm\] Let $N$, $F$, $\Gamma$ be as in Theorem \[MainTheorem1\] with $m\geq 2$, $0 < \alpha < 1$. Let $c_1 < c_2$ be positive constants and suppose there exists a future curvature barrier for $(F, \Gamma, c_2)$ and a past curvature barrier for $(F, \Gamma, c_1)$, both of class $C^{m+2,\alpha}$, and denote the region between the barriers by $\Omega$. If $F$ is not the mean curvature, then we suppose in addition that there exists a strictly convex function $\chi \in C^2(\bar{{{\Omega}}})$. Let $M_{c_1}$, $M_{c_2}$ be the CFC-surfaces with $F$-curvature equal to $c_1$ respectively $c_2$. Then the region between $M_{c_1}$ and $M_{c_2}$, which will be denoted by $N_0$, can be foliated by CFC-surfaces of class $C^{m+2,\alpha}$ and there exists a time function $x^0$ of class $C^{m-1}$, such that the slices $$M_\tau = \{x^0 = \tau\}, \quad c_1 < \tau < c_2,$$ have $F$-curvature $\tau$.
First we show the existence of the foliation, this is done in the following
\[LemmaFoliation\] Under the assumptions of Theorem \[FoliationThm\], there exist CFC-surfaces $M_\tau$ of class $C^{m+2,\alpha}$ for each $c_1 \leq \tau \leq c_2$ such that $$\label{ExistenceFoliation}
\bar{N_0} = \bigcup_{c_1 \leq \tau \leq c_2} M_\tau.$$ Furthermore the $M_\tau$ can be written as graphs over ${\mathcal{S}}_0$ $$M_\tau = \textnormal{graph } u(\tau, \cdot),$$ such that $u$ is strictly monotone increasing with respect to $\tau$ and continuous in $[c_1, c_2]\times {\mathcal{S}}_0$.
This follows as in [@GerhCP Lemma 4.6.2] by using Theorem \[ExistenceCFC\], the uniqueness of $CFC$-surfaces and the monotonicity of $F$ for level hypersurfaces in a tubular neighbourhood around a fixed $CFC$-surface.
Now we can prove Theorem \[FoliationThm\]:
We have to show that the $F$-curvature parameter can be used as a time function, i.e., $\tau$ should be of class $C^{m-1}$ with non-vanishing gradient.
The regularity of $\tau$ can be shown in an arbitrary coordinate system and it suffices to prove it locally. Let $\tau' \in (c_1, c_2)$ and consider a tubular neighbourhood $\mathcal{U} = (-\delta, \delta) \times M_{\tau'}$ with $\delta > 0$ around $M_{\tau'}$ and the corresponding normal gaussian coordinate system of class $C^{m+1, \alpha}$, see [@GerhAna Theorem 12.5.13]. Then for small ${{\epsilon}}> 0$ we have $$M_\tau \subset \mathcal{U} \quad \forall \, \tau \in (\tau' - {{\epsilon}}, \tau' + {{\epsilon}}),$$ see the proof of the Lemma above, they can be written as graphs over $M_{\tau'}$, $M_\tau = $ graph $u(\tau, \cdot)$ and using the implicit function theorem we will show that $u$ is of class $C^{m-1}$:
Let $\delta > 0$ and $s \in {\mathbb{N}}$, $0\leq s \leq m-2$, then we define the open subset $$C_\delta^s := \{\varphi \in C^{s+2, \alpha}(M_{\tau'}): ||\varphi||_{s+2,\alpha, M_{\tau'}} < \delta\}$$ of the Banach space $C^{s+2, \alpha}(M_{\tau'})$, which is equipped with a norm induced by the induced metric of $M_{\tau'}$. If $\varphi \in C_\delta^s$ and $\delta$ is sufficiently small, then graph $\varphi$ represents a compact, connected, spacelike and admissible hypersurface, hence we can define the operator $$\begin{split}
&G^s: (\tau' - {{\epsilon}}, \tau' + {{\epsilon}}) \times C_\delta^s \rightarrow C^{s, \alpha}(M_{\tau'}), \\
&G^s(\tau, \varphi) = F(\varphi) - \tau,
\end{split}$$ where $F(\varphi)$ denotes the $F$-curvature of graph $\varphi_{|M_{\tau'}}$.
We will show now that $G^s$ is of class $C^{m-s-1}$, since $F$ is of class $C^{m}$. We want to express the operator $F : C_\delta^s \rightarrow C^{s, \alpha}(M_{\tau'})$ as a composition of several mappings, for which we can prove the regularity needed, especially we want to be in a position to use Lemma \[SuperpositionOp\] below, i.e. we want to localize the operator $F$. From now on let $s$ be fixed.
First of all, let $(\tilde{U}_i, \varphi_i)_{1 \leq i \leq k}$, $k\in {\mathbb{N}}$, be a covering of $M_{\tau'}$ by coordinate charts $\varphi_i: \tilde{U}_i \rightarrow \tilde{{{\Omega}}}_i$, $\tilde{{{\Omega}}}_i \subset {\mathbb{R}}^n$ open, such that there exist open, precompact subsets ${{\Omega}}_i \subset \subset \tilde{{{\Omega}}}_i$ satisfying $\bigcup_{i=1}^k \varphi_i^{-1}({{\Omega}}_i) = M_{\tau'}$. Let $\bar{U}_i := \varphi_i^{-1}(\bar{{{\Omega}}}_i)$. Then define the linear and continuous, and hence smooth, mapping $$\begin{split}
\psi: &C^{s+2, \alpha}(M_{\tau'}) \rightarrow \prod_{i=1}^k C^{s+2, \alpha}(\bar{{{\Omega}}}_i),\\
& u \mapsto (u\circ \varphi^{-1}_{1|\bar{{{\Omega}}}_1}, \ldots, u\circ \varphi^{-1}_{k|\bar{{{\Omega}}}_k}).
\end{split}$$
Next, for $1 \leq i \leq k$ we define the linear and continuous, hence again smooth, mappings $$\begin{split}
\gamma^i: &C^{s+2, \alpha}(\bar{{{\Omega}}}_i) \rightarrow C^{s, \alpha}(\bar{{{\Omega}}}_i, {\mathbb{R}}\times {\mathbb{R}}^n \times \mathbf{S})\\
& u \mapsto (u, Du, D^2u),
\end{split}$$ where $\mathbf{S}$ denotes the symmetric $n\times n$-matrices and the derivatives are partial derivatives. Denote by $\gamma$ the map with components $\gamma^i$.
We denote by $\eta^i$, $1\leq i \leq k$, the function $\eta$ from Lemma $\ref{etaDefined}$ defined on the corresponding set $\tilde{{{\Omega}}}_i$, thus it is the function representing the second fundamental form for graphs over $M_{\tau'}$ in the coordinate chart $(\tilde{U}_i, \varphi_i)$. We note that $\eta^i$ is of class $C^{m, \alpha}$, since it can be shown, by going through the proof of the tubular neighbourhood theorem, that the Christoffel-symbols appearing in through the equation $\bar{h}_{ij} = -\bar{\Gamma}^0_{ij}$ are of class $C^{m, \alpha}$ in a tubular neighborhood of a hypersurface of class $C^{m+2, \alpha}$. We restrict $\eta^i$ to the open set $\tilde{{{\Omega}}}_i \times X_i$, on which the $F$-curvature is well defined (preimage of the open cone of definition) and define $$\begin{split}
F^i: &\bar{{{\Omega}}}_i \times X_i \rightarrow {\mathbb{R}},\\
& (x, z, p, r) \mapsto F(\eta^i(x, z, p, r)).
\end{split}$$ Let $B^{s+2}_i := C^{s+2, \alpha}(\bar{{{\Omega}}}_i, X_i)$ and denote by $B^{s+2} \subset \prod_{i=1}^k C^{s+2, \alpha}(\bar{{{\Omega}}}_i, {\mathbb{R}}\times {\mathbb{R}}^n \times {\mathbf{S}})$ the open subset with components belonging to $B^{s+2}_i$. Now we can apply Lemma \[SuperpositionOp\] to obtain that that the induced maps $\tilde{F}^i: B^{s+2}_i \rightarrow C^{s, \alpha}(\bar{{{\Omega}}}_i)$ are of class $C^{m-s-1}$. It remains to put these maps together to obtain the $F$-curvature of graph $u$ defined on $M_{\tau'}$:
Let $(\zeta_i)_{1\leq i \leq k}$ be a partition of unity subordinate to the covering $(U_i)_{1\leq i\leq k}$, and define $$\begin{split}
\Phi: &B^{s+2} \rightarrow C^{s, \alpha}(M_{\tau'}),\\
&(u_1, \ldots, u_k) \mapsto \sum_{i=1}^k{ \tilde{F}^i (u_i \circ \varphi_{i |U_i}) \cdot \zeta_i}.
\end{split}$$ As can be seen by an argumentation as in the previous steps, this map is of class $C^{m-s-1}$ and $F$ as a map from $C_\delta^s$ to $C^{s, \alpha}(M_{\tau'})$ equals $\Phi \circ \gamma \circ \psi$, hence it is also of class $C^{m-s-1}$, completing this part of the proof.
Now Lemma \[Linearization\] implies $$D_2G^s(\tau', 0) \varphi = - F^{ij} \varphi_{ij} + \{F^l_k h_l^m h_m^k + F_k^l \bar{R}_{\alpha\beta\gamma\delta}\nu^\alpha x_l^\beta \nu^\gamma x_m^\delta g^{mk}\} \varphi,$$ where the geometric quantities appearing in this equation correspond to $M_{\tau'}$. Hence the elliptic Schauder theory implies that the operator $$D_2G^s(\tau', 0): C^{s+2, \alpha}(M_{\tau'}) \rightarrow C^{s, \alpha}(M_{\tau'})$$ is an isomorphism and the implicit function theorem implies the existence of $\hat{u}^s \in C^{m-s-1}((\tau'-\gamma^s, \tau' + \gamma^s), C^{s+2, \alpha}(M_{\tau'}))$ for some small $\gamma^s > 0$, such that $G^s(\tau, \hat{u}^s(\tau, \cdot))= 0$. Let $\gamma := \underset{0\leq s \leq m-2}{\min}\, \gamma^s$.
We will show the regularity of $u$ in a coordinate chart $({{\Omega}}, \phi)$ of $M_{\tau'}$, where $\phi$ is of class $C^{m+2, \alpha}$, ${{\Omega}}\subset \subset M_{\tau'}$ is a domain and let ${{\Omega}}' \subset \phi({{\Omega}})$ be a domain with a smooth boundary. Then we can define $$\begin{split}
\bar{u}^s: &(\tau' - \gamma, \tau' + \gamma) \rightarrow C^{s+2, \alpha}(\bar{{{\Omega}}}'),\\
&t \mapsto \hat{u}^s(t) \circ (\phi^{-1})_{|\bar{{{\Omega}}}'},
\end{split}$$ which is then again of class $C^{m-s-1}$.
Furthermore for $0 \leq s \leq m-2$ we define the supplementary function $$\begin{split}
\chi^{s+2}: &\bar{{{\Omega}}}' \rightarrow L(C^{s+2, \alpha}(\bar{{{\Omega}}}'), {\mathbb{R}}),\\
&x \mapsto \left( \chi^{s+2}(x): u\mapsto u(x) \right).
\end{split}$$ Then $\chi^{s+2}$ is of class $C^{s+2, \alpha}$, where for a $n$-dimensional multi-index $\beta$ with $|\beta|\leq s+2$ there holds $D^\beta \chi = \eta^{s+2, \beta}$, which is defined as $$\begin{split}
\eta^{s+2, \beta}:&\bar{{{\Omega}}}' \rightarrow L(C^{s+2, \alpha}(\bar{{{\Omega}}}'), {\mathbb{R}}),\\
&x \mapsto \left( \eta^{s+2, \beta}(x): u \mapsto D^\beta u(x)\right).
\end{split}$$ Finally, we consider the function $$\begin{split}
u: &(\tau'-\gamma, \tau'+\gamma) \times \bar{{{\Omega}}}' \rightarrow {\mathbb{R}},\\
&(\tau, x) \mapsto \chi^{s+2}(x)\bar{u}^s(\tau),
\end{split}$$ which is well defined independently of $s$ in view of the uniqueness of CFC-surfaces. Now let $\beta$ be an $n+1$-dimensional multi-index with $|\beta|\leq m-1$ and denote by $\hat{\beta}$ the last $n$ components of $\beta$. To be precise, at this moment we should also include an order of the elements of $\beta$, which would correspond to the order of the partial derivatives to be taken, however the proof below still holds unchanged for ordered multi-indices. If $\beta_1 > 0$ then define $s:= m - 1 - \beta_1$ and for $\beta_1 =0$ define $s := m-2$. Then $D^\beta u(t, x)$ exists and using the chain rule we see that $D^\beta u(t, x) = D^{\hat{\beta}}\chi^{s+2}(x) \circ D^{\beta_1}\bar{u}^s(t)$ and hence is continuous. We conclude that $u \in C^{m-1}((\tau'-\gamma, \tau'+\gamma) \times M_{\tau'})$.
Next we show that $\tau$ has a non-vanishing gradient: Again in a tubular neighbourhood of $M_{\tau'}$ we define the coordinate transformation $$\Phi(\tau, x^i) = (u(\tau, x^i), x^i).$$ Then there holds $$\det D\Phi = \frac{\partial u}{\partial \tau} = \dot{u}.$$ If we can show that $\dot{u}$ is strictly positive then $\Phi$ is a diffeomorphism of class $C^{m-1}$ and hence $\tau$ has non-vanishing gradient. Now we observe that the CFC-surfaces in $\mathcal{U}$ satisfy the equation $$F(u(\tau, \cdot)) = \tau,$$ where the left hand-side can be expressed via . Differentiating both sides with respect to $\tau$, evaluating for $\tau = \tau'$ and taking into account that $u(\tau', \cdot) = 0$ in this coordinate system, we obtain the equation $$-F^{ij}\dot{u}_{ij} + \{F^l_k h_l^m h_m^k + F_k^l \bar{R}_{\alpha\beta\gamma\delta}\nu^\alpha x_l^\beta \nu^\gamma x_m^\delta g^{mk}\} \dot{u} = 1.$$ Hence in a point, where $\dot{u}$ attains its minimum, we can infer $$\{F^l_k h_l^m h_m^k + F_k^l \bar{R}_{\alpha\beta\gamma\delta}\nu^\alpha x_l^\beta \nu^\gamma x_m^\delta g^{mk}\} \dot{u} \geq 1.$$ Since the expression in the brackets is always positive, for this fact we refer again to the proof of Lemma \[FMonotone\], we conclude that $\dot{u}$ is strictly positive, completing the proof of the Theorem.
By looking at tubular neighbourhoods around $M_{c_1}$ and $M_{c_2}$ we obtain new barriers as in the proof of Lemma \[LemmaFoliation\]. Hence the maximal region which can be foliated by CFC-surfaces of class $C^{m+2, \alpha}$ with positive $F$-curvature is an open subset of $N$ containing $\bar{N}_0$ and the time function in Theorem \[FoliationThm\] exists on an open interval $I = (a_1, a_2)$ with $a_1 \geq 0$ containing $[c_1, c_2]$.
We deliver the Lemma, which has been used in the above Theorem.
\[SuperpositionOp\] Let $K = \bar{{{\Omega}}}$ be a compact subset of ${\mathbb{R}}^n$, where ${{\Omega}}$ is open, $E, F$ be Banach spaces, $X \subset E$ an open set and $m \in {\mathbb{N}}$, $m \geq 2$. Let $G \in C^m(K\times X, F)$, then the map $$\begin{split}
\tilde{G}: & C^{k, \beta}(K, X) \rightarrow C^{k,\beta}(K, F),\\
&u(\cdot) \mapsto G(\cdot, u(\cdot)),
\end{split}$$ is of class $C^{m-k-1}$, where $k \in {\mathbb{N}}$, $0 \leq k < m$, $0 < \beta \leq 1$.
This follows from the proof in [@Amann Theorem VII.6.4] by using the continuity result from [@ChiapNugari Theorem 2.1].
Next, we derive some results concerning the area and volume of hypersurfaces between CFC-surfaces.
Now suppose $\mathcal{C} \subset N$ is a cylinder, which can be foliated by CFC-surfaces $M_\tau$, i.e. $$\mathcal{C} = \underset{\tau \in J}{\bigcup}M_\tau, \quad J= [c_1, c_2),$$ where $0 < c_1 < c_2 \leq b$, then the functions $$\begin{aligned}
&\tau \mapsto |M_\tau|,\\
&\tau \mapsto V_{n+1}(M_\tau),\end{aligned}$$ where the functions are defined on $J$, are strictly monotone decreasing and increasing respectively, where the latter follows from the monotonicity of CFC-surfaces. For the former let $M_{\tau_1}$, $M_{\tau_2} \subset \mathcal{C}$ be two CFC-surfaces, $\tau_2>\tau_1$. Then we choose the time-function from Theorem \[FoliationThm\] and note that in this coordinate system the area is strictly decreasing in view of $$\label{areaDecreasingEq}
\frac{d}{dt} \sqrt{\det (\bar{g}_{ij}(t, \cdot))} = - \bar{H}\sqrt{\det (\bar{g}_{ij})} < 0,$$ where we used Lemma \[FHineq\]. Hence the statement.
Now we can derive the following consequence of Theorem \[MainTheorem1\]
Let $N$, $F$ be as in Theorem \[MainTheorem1\] with $m \geq 2$, $0 < \alpha < 1$. Let $M = $ graph $u$ be a compact, spacelike, connected, admissible hypersurface in $N$ of class $C^{4, \alpha}$ satisfying for some $0 < c_1 < c_2 < \infty$ $$c_1 \leq F_{|M} \leq c_2,$$ and we assume there exist two CFC-surfaces $M_{c_1}$ and $M_{c_2}$ of class $C^{4,\alpha}$ with $F$-curvature $c_1$ respectively $c_2$. Then there holds $$V_{n+1}(M_{c_1}) \leq V_{n+1}(M) \leq V_{n+1}(M_{c_2}),$$ and $$|M_{c_2}| \leq |M| \leq |M_{c_1}|.$$
This follows from Theorem \[MainTheorem1\] and the remark above.
In a certain sense we can prove the converse of the above:
Let $N$, $F$ be as in Theorem \[MainTheorem1\] with $m\geq 3$, $0 < \alpha < 1$. Let $M_\tau = $ graph $u_\tau$ be a CFC-surface of class $C^{m+2,\alpha}$ with positive $F$-curvature $\tau > 0$. Then $M_\tau$ is the limit hypersurface of a non-trivial curvature flow, which preserves $|M_\tau|$ or $V_{n+1}(M_\tau)$.
We consider a tubular neighbourhood $\mathcal{U} = (-\delta, \delta) \times M_{\tau}$ with $\delta > 0$ around $M_{\tau}$ and work in the corresponding normal gaussian coordinate system of class $C^{m+1, \alpha}$. Furthermore, all hypersurfaces below will be considered as graphs over $M_\tau$, hence $M_\tau = $ graph $0$. For $\delta > 0$ let $$C_\delta := \{u \in C^{m+1,\alpha}(M_\tau): ||u||_{m+1, \alpha, M_\tau} < \delta\},$$ an open subset of $C^{m+1,\alpha}(M_\tau)$. Again we choose $\delta> 0$ small enough, such that, for $u \in C_\delta$, graph $u$ represents a compact, connected, spacelike and admissible hypersurface contained in $\mathcal{U}$. Furthermore we can use $M_\tau$ without loss of generality as the reference hypersurface in the definition of the volume, i.e. $V_{n+1}(M_\tau) = 0$. Now define the following functionals: $$\begin{split}
V: & C_\delta \times {\mathbb{R}}\rightarrow {\mathbb{R}},\\
&(u, s) \mapsto V_{n+1}(\textnormal{graph } u) - s
\end{split}$$ and $$\begin{split}
A: &C_\delta \times {\mathbb{R}}\rightarrow {\mathbb{R}},\\
&(u, s) \mapsto |\textnormal{graph } u| - s - |\textnormal{graph } 0|.
\end{split}$$ Both functionals are continuously differentiable, $V$ as well as $A$ vanish at $(0, 0)$ and they satisfy $D_2V = -1$ and $D_2A = -1$. Hence we can apply the implicit function theorem to obtain an open (and, without loss of generality, connected) neighbourhood $U \subset C_\delta$ of $0$ and a function $\varphi \in C^1(U, {\mathbb{R}})$, such that $$V(u, \varphi(u)) = 0 \quad \forall \, u\in U,$$ respectively $$A(u, \varphi(u)) = 0 \quad \forall \, u\in U.$$ Since the volume and the area are strictly monotonically increasing and decreasing respectively in the tubular neighbourhood, see , in every arbitrarily small neighbourhood of $0$ in $C_\delta$ there are compact, spacelike, connected, admissible hypersurfaces with bigger and smaller volume respectively area than $M_\tau$, hence $\varphi^{-1}({\mathbb{R}}_+)$ and $\varphi^{-1}({\mathbb{R}}_-)$ are both nonempty.
We conclude that the set $B := \varphi^{-1}(0) - \{0\}$ is nonempty, for otherwise the connected set $\hat{U}:= U - \{0\}$ is identical to $\varphi^{-1}({\mathbb{R}}_+) \, \dot{\cup} \, \varphi^{-1}({\mathbb{R}}_-)$, which is a contradiction to the connectedness of $\hat{U}$, since the latter two sets are open in view of the continuity of $\varphi$.
Hence we obtain a starting hypersurface of class $C^{m+1,\alpha}$, which, when $\delta$ was chosen small enough, fulfills also the barrier requirements, see the proof of Lemma \[LemmaFoliation\]. Now, since $m\geq 3$, we can apply Theorem \[MainTheorem1\] to complete the proof.
Short time existence {#shorttime}
====================
Short time existence for the flow without a global, time-dependent force term is well known, see for example [@GerhCP Chapter 2.5]. The method employed there is to show first short time existence via the inverse function theorem for a scalar evolution equation (evolution of the graphs) and then using existence results for ordinary differential equations one obtains the desired short time existence for the flow.
We will use a modification of the proof from [@GerhCP] and a fixed point argument as in [@McCoyMixedArea] to prove the short time existence for the flow with a global force term.
The equation has a solution of class $H^{4+\alpha, \frac{4+\alpha}{2}}(\bar{Q}_{{\epsilon}})$, where $Q_{{\epsilon}}= [0, {{\epsilon}}) \times M$ and ${{\epsilon}}$ is a small constant.
Let $M_0 :=$ graph $u_0$, then we will show the existence of a solution $u\in H^{4+\alpha, \frac{4+\alpha}{2}}( \bar{Q}_{{\epsilon}})$ to the equation $$\label{STf}
\begin{split}
&\frac{\partial u}{\partial t} + G(x, u, Du, D^2u) + g(x, u, Du) f(t) \equiv \frac{\partial u}{\partial t} + e^{-\psi}v (\Phi - f) = 0,\\
&u(0) = u_0,
\end{split}$$ on a cylinder $Q_{{\epsilon}}:= [0, {{\epsilon}}) \times \mathcal{S}_0$ for a small ${{\epsilon}}> 0$.
$G$ is defined and elliptic for functions $u$ belonging to an open set $\Lambda \subset C^2(\mathcal{S}_0)$, which corresponds to the hypersurfaces being
admissible
: $$G^{ij}(x, u, Du, D^2u) < 0.$$
Once the existence for the scalar equation is shown, the arguments in [@GerhCP Chapter 2.5] can be applied to yield the short-time existence for the parabolic system .
First of all we note, that there exist ${{\epsilon}}_0, \delta > 0$, such that the modified problem $$\label{STh}
\begin{split}
&\frac{\partial u}{\partial t} + G(x, u, Du, D^2u) + g(x, u, Du) h(t) = 0,\\
&u(0) = u_0,
\end{split}$$ where we have substituted $f$ by a function $h \in C^{1,\frac{\alpha}{2}}([0, {{\epsilon}}_0])$ and $h$ satisfies $$||h - f(0)||_{1, \frac{\alpha}{2}, \bar{Q}_{{{\epsilon}}_0}} \leq \delta,$$ has a unique solution $u \in H^{4+\alpha, \frac{4+\alpha}{2}}(\bar{Q}_{{{\epsilon}}_0})$ with a uniform bound $$||u||_{4+\alpha,\frac{4+\alpha}{2}, \bar{Q}_{{{\epsilon}}_0}} \leq c = c(||u_0||_{4+\alpha}, {{\epsilon}}_0, \delta, f(0)).$$
In view of the standard parabolic estimates, see [@GerhCP Theorem 2.5.9], it is sufficient to show the existence of a solution $u \in H^{2+\beta, \frac{2+\beta}{2}}(\bar{Q}_{{{\epsilon}}_0})$ to for some $0 <\beta <\alpha$ and the uniform bound in the corresponding norm.
The existence and the necessary estimate is shown using the inverse function theorem in a similar manner as in [@GerhCP Chapter 2.5], but using the operator $$\Psi(u, h) = (\dot{u} + G(x, u, Du, D^2u) + g(x, u, Du)h(t), u(0), h),$$ which is well defined in an open subset of $H^{2+\beta, \frac{2+\beta}{2}}(\bar{Q}_{{\epsilon}}) \times C^{1, \frac{\alpha}{2}}([0, {{\epsilon}}])$ with image in $(H^{\beta, \frac{\beta}{2}}(\bar{Q}_{{\epsilon}}) \times H^{2+\beta}(\mathcal{S}_0)) \times C^{1, \frac{\alpha}{2}}([0, {{\epsilon}}])$.
We remark that the uniqueness of the solution to the modified problem follows as in the time-independent case by the parabolic maximum principle.\
To prove short time existence for the problem , define the following closed and convex set: $$M_{{{\epsilon}}, \delta} := \{h \in C^{1,\frac{\alpha}{2}}([0, {{\epsilon}}]): ||h - f(0)||_{1, \frac{\alpha}{2}} \leq \delta\}.$$ For $h \in M_{{{\epsilon}}, \delta}$, $0< {{\epsilon}}< {{\epsilon}}_0$, $\delta$ as above, denote by $u_h$ a solution to and set $$\begin{split}
T: &M_{{{\epsilon}}, \delta} \rightarrow M_{{{\epsilon}},\delta},\\
&h \mapsto \frac{\int_{M_t}{\Phi H_k \,\mathrm{d\mu_t}}}{\int_{M_t}{H_k \,\mathrm{d\mu_t}}},
\end{split}$$ where the quantities on the right hand side are those belonging to the solution $u_h$ to the problem . We will show that in fact $T$ maps $M_{{{\epsilon}},\delta}$ into itself if ${{\epsilon}}$ is small enough and furthermore $T$ is a compact map, hence maps bounded to precompact sets. The existence of a solution to then follows from the Schauder fixed-point theorem.
The essential fact to prove this, is that we have uniform bounds on $u_h$ in $H^{4+\alpha, \frac{4+\alpha}{2}}(\bar{Q}_{{\epsilon}})$. It follows that $Th$ is uniformly bounded in $C^{1, \frac{1+\alpha}{2}}([0, {{\epsilon}}])$, i.e. there exists a constant $c_0$ independent of $h \in M_{{{\epsilon}},\delta}$, such that $$||Th||_{1, \frac{1+\alpha}{2}, [0,{{\epsilon}}]} \leq c_0.$$ This can be shown by differentiating $Th$ once with respect to $t$, applying partial integration on terms of the form $\dot{u}_{ij}$ and then reminding the definition of the parabolic Hölder spaces. The only critical terms are then of the form $\varphi(x, u, Du, D^2u)^{ijkl} u_{ijk} \dot{u}_l$, hence the claimed Hölder exponential.
The boundedness of $Th$ in $C^{1, \frac{1+\alpha}{2}}([0, {{\epsilon}}])$ implies the compactness of $T$ and by a simple argument it also shows, that $T$ maps $M_{{{\epsilon}},\delta}$ into itself for small ${{\epsilon}}$: $$\big|\frac{d}{dt}Th(t) - \frac{d}{dt}Th(t')\big| \leq c_0 |t-t'|^{\frac{1+\alpha}{2}}
\leq c_0 {{\epsilon}}^{\frac{1}{2}} |t-t'|^{\frac{\alpha}{2}} \leq \delta |t-t'|^{\frac{\alpha}{2}}.$$ The $C^0$-norm can be estimated in the same way by noting that $Th(0) = f(0)$ and for the $C^1$-norm we can use the interpolation inequality . This completes the proof of the short time existence.
We conclude this section by showing that the solution is unique, where we remark that this can not be shown as usual by using the maximum principle, in view of the presence of a global term. One rather has to use the idea of uniqueness for weak solutions.
The solution to the scalar flow equation is unique in the class $H^{4+\alpha, \frac{4+\alpha}{2}}$.
Let $u, \tilde{u}$ be two solutions of class $H^{4+\alpha, \frac{4+\alpha}{2}}$ in $Q_{{\epsilon}}= [0,{{\epsilon}}) \times \mathcal{S}_0$ of an equation of the form $$\begin{split}
&\dot{u} + G(x,u,Du, D^2 u) + g(x, u, Du)\frac{\int_{\mathcal{S}_0}{B(x,u,Du, D^2u)\,\mathrm{d{{\sigma}}}}}{\int_{\mathcal{S}_0}{b(x,u,Du, D^2 u)}\,\mathrm{d{{\sigma}}}} = 0,\\
&u(0) = u_0,
\end{split}$$ where for simplicity all functions are supposed to be smooth (the regularity we imposed is also sufficient) and $b > 0$. This equation corresponds to and it suffices to show uniqueness to this equation. Let $$\varphi := u - \tilde{u}.$$ If ${{\epsilon}}$ is sufficiently small, then the convex combination $$u_\tau = \tau u + (1-\tau)\tilde{u}, \quad \tau \in [0,1],$$ belongs to the open set $\Lambda$, see the above proof for the notation, hence $G$ is well defined for the convex combination. By using the main theorem of calculus we deduce that $\varphi$ satisfies the following equation $$\dot{\varphi} = a^{ij}\varphi_{ij} + b^i \varphi_i + c \varphi + d\int_{\mathcal{S}_0}{\left(\tilde{a}^{ij}\varphi_{ij} + \tilde{b}^i\varphi_i + \tilde{c}\varphi\right) \mathrm{d{{\sigma}}}},$$ where all the coefficients have bounded derivatives and $a^{ij}$ is uniformly elliptic with ellipticity constant $c_0$. We multiply this equation by $2\varphi$, then we integrate over $\mathcal{S}_0$ and obtain, after using partial integration, the binomial formula and the Schwartz-inequality, $$\begin{split}
\frac{d}{dt} ||\varphi||_2^2 \equiv \frac{d}{dt} \int_{\mathcal{S}_0}{\varphi^2 \,\mathrm{d{{\sigma}}}} \leq c \,||\varphi||_2^2 + {{\epsilon}}||D\varphi||_2^2 - c_0 ||D\varphi||_2^2,
\end{split}$$ where ${{\epsilon}}>0$ is the constant chosen in the binomial formula yielding the inequality $$a \, b \leq {{\epsilon}}a^2 + \frac{b^2}{4{{\epsilon}}},$$ and $c=c({{\epsilon}}, ||u||_{4+\alpha, \frac{4+\alpha}{2}}, ||\tilde{u}||_{4+\alpha, \frac{4+\alpha}{2}})$. Choosing ${{\epsilon}}< c_0$ we deduce that there holds for $h = h(t) = ||\varphi||_2^2$ $$\begin{split}
&\dot h \leq c\, h,\\
&h(0) = 0.
\end{split}$$ A comparison principle for ordinary differential equations implies $h \equiv 0$. In view of the continuity of $\varphi$, this yields the desired uniqueness.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'We discuss phenomenological tests for the frozen infrared behavior of the running coupling constant and gluon propagators found in some solutions of Schwinger-Dyson equations of the gluonic sector of QCD. We verify that several observables can be used in order to select the different expressions of $\alpha_s$ found in the literature. We test the effect of the nonperturbative coupling in the $\tau$-lepton decay rate into nonstrange hadrons, in the $\rho$ vector meson helicity density matrix that are produced in the $\chi_{c2}\rightarrow \rho\rho$ decay, in the photon to pion transition form factor, and compute the cross sections for elastic proton-proton scattering and exclusive $\rho$ production in deep inelastic scattering. These quantities depend on the infrared behavior of the coupling constant at different levels, we discuss the reasons for this dependence and argue that the existent and future data can be used to test the approximations performed to solve the Schwinger-Dyson equations and they already seems to select one specific infrared behavior of the coupling. 0.5cm PACS:12.38Aw, 12.38Lg, 14.40Aq, 14.70Dj'
address: 'Instituto de Física Teórica, UNESP, Rua Pamplona 145, 01405-900, São Paulo, SP, Brazil'
author:
- 'A. C. Aguilar, A. Mihara and A. A. Natale\'
title: Phenomenological tests for the freezing of the QCD running coupling constant
---
ł Ł ${\left(}
\def$[)]{} §
0.5cm
Introduction
============
The interface between perturbative and nonperturbative QCD has been studied for many years. To know how far we can go with perturbative calculations and how we can match these ones with nonperturbative quantities, obtained through sophisticated theoretical or phenomenological approaches, will probably still require several years of confront between these methods. However there are phenomenological indications that this connection may not be abrupt and the transition from short distance (where quark and gluons are the effective degrees of freedom) to long distance (hadron) physics is indeed a smooth one [@dokshitzer]. Actually it has been suggested that the strong coupling constant freezes at a finite and moderate value [@stevenson], and this behavior could be the reason for the claimed soft transition. The freezing of the QCD running coupling at low energy scales could allow to capture at an inclusive level the nonperturbative QCD effects in a reliable way [@dokshitzer; @brodsky0].
The aspects described above reflect a perspective to attack the short and long-distance QCD interface from the perturbative side. On the other direction we have nonperturbative methods to investigate the infrared QCD behavior. One of these methods, based on the study of gauge-invariant Schwinger-Dyson equations, concluded that an infrared finite coupling constant could be obtained from first principles [@cornwall]. A list of nonperturbative attempts to determine the infrared behavior of the gluon coupling constant and propagator can be found in Ref.[@we], where it is also pointed out that the nonperturbative results for these quantities may differ among themselves due to the intricacies of the nonperturbative methods and to not always controllable approximations.
Recently new theoretical results about the infrared behavior of the gluon propagator and the running coupling constant appeared in the literature. We have a renormalization group analysis implying in an infrared finite coupling [@gies], and also new numerical lattice studies simulating the gluon propagator, all of them consistent with an infrared finite behavior [@lat]. But the most interesting for us are the new solutions for the gluon and ghost Schwinger-Dyson equations that have been obtained with better approximations [@bloch; @alkofer; @smekal; @zwanziger]. The absence of certain angular approximations in the integrals of the Schwinger-Dyson equations (SDE) are some of the improvements in the Refs.[@alkofer; @smekal], which led to a value for the infrared coupling constant at the origin ($\alpha_s(0)$) roughly a factor $O(3)$ below the previous ones [@alkofer0].
Assuming that the coupling constant and the gluon propagator are infrared finite we can divide the Schwinger-Dyson solutions for the gluon propagator in two classes. One where the gluon propagator is identical to zero at the momentum origin [@bloch; @alkofer; @smekal; @zwanziger] and another where the propagator is roughly of order $1/{m_g}^2$[@cornwall], where $m_g$ is the dynamical gluon mass. In Ref.[@we] the phenomenological calculation of the asymptotic pion form factor was used to show that the experimental data seems to prefer the Cornwall’s solution for the coupling and gluon propagator[@cornwall].
In this work we will extend our approach [@we] to others observable quantities, testing the recent nonperturbative results obtained for $\alpha_s$ and for the gluon propagators. These tests span from a purely perturbative calculation to cross sections containing some model dependence. We verify that these quantities are affected by the infrared behavior of the coupling in different amounts. However we can certainly see that the existent data can be used to test and distinguish different nonperturbative calculations of the infrared QCD behavior.
There are several important points to stress. The SDE solutions represent attempts of a very ambitious program aiming to obtain the behavior of the coupling constant at all scales. Of course, these equations contain approximations and there are even questionings about the definition of the coupling in the infrared, but once these facts are assumed and knowing that in Nature there must be only one coupling constant we should be able to compare these results to the data. Some of the tests we propose here are purely perturbative, but they still can say something about the approximations used to obtain $\alpha_s$. Another point is that the whole idea of a running charge is that it is to be used in a skeleton expansion of graphs representing a process, an expansion which automatically subsumes infinitely many graphs, in a scheme emphasized by Brodsky and collaborators [@brodsky1]. But if, contrary to many phenomenological evidences [@dokshitzer; @brodsky0; @brodsky1], the infrared value of the coupling constant were large enough (how large depends on the process), it is hard to see how one can make sense out of inserting such a large value into perturbative expressions. This point is at the heart of the discussions that we shall present in this paper. The SDE solutions are determined forcing its high energy behavior to be identical to the perturbative one, after this is done the infrared behavior is totally dictated by the equations. This procedure is a natural one because at large momenta the coupling constant is perturbative and the QCD determination of the leading S matrix terms is meaningful, although the perturbative quantities depend on an infrared parametrization hidden in the QCD scale ( $\Lambda_{QCD}$).
The solutions that we shall discuss have different values for $\alpha_s(0)$. It could be argued that the value of $\alpha_s(0)$ for one of these SDE solutions is too small to explain chiral symmetry breaking in the usual model with essentially one-gluon exchange [@silva]. It has been known for many years that this sort of model of chiral symmetry breaking doesn’t work, precisely because it does require such large values for $\alpha_s(0)$. In QCD, unlike QED, chiral symmetry breaking is easily explained –indeed, required by– confinement, as numerous authors in the eighties have explained in detail. A value of $\alpha_s (0)$ of order one or larger would be grotesquely out of line with many other phenomena, such as non-relativistic potentials for charmonium [@simonov]. Finally, this is also what comes out when performing an analytic perturbation theory [@shirkov]. Moreover, the fact is that the nonperturbative solutions do not have only different $\alpha_s(0)$ values but they also run differently near the infrared. The different infrared parametrization and running will leave a signal in the comparison with the experimental data.
The distribution of the paper is the following: In Section II we present a comparison between the most recent calculations of the infrared behavior of the QCD running coupling constant. Section III compares the nonperturbative value of $\alpha_s$ with its value measured in $\tau$-lepton decay into nonstrange hadrons. In Section IV we discuss the effects of a frozen coupling constant in the diagonal elements of the $\rho$ vector meson helicity density matrix that are produced in the $\chi_{c2}\rightarrow \rho\rho$ decay. Section V is devoted to a discussion of the $\gamma \rightarrow \pi_{0}$ transition form factor. In Section VI we revisit the calculation of Ref.[@halzen], where the Pomeron model of Landshoff and Nachtmann for elastic proton-proton scattering was used to restrict the value of the dynamical gluon mass, in the light of the new SDE solutions. The same model is used in Section VII to compute the exclusive $\rho$ production in deep inelastic scattering. Section VIII contains our conclusions.
Infrared Behavior of the Running Coupling Constant
==================================================
In this Section we present the results for the running coupling constant obtained recently through the solution of SDE for the gluon and ghost sectors of QCD. As remarked in Ref.[@we] and in our introduction, it is important to stress that the different solutions appear due to the different approximations made to solve the SDE, which, unfortunately, are necessary due to their complicated structure.
The most recent calculations of the $\alpha_s$ infrared behavior do not make use of an approximate angular integration in the SDE, resulting in a value of $\alpha_s(0)$ a factor of $O(3)$ below the former results. This is the case of the $\alpha_s(q^2)$ determined by Fischer and Alkofer which is given by [@alkofer]
$$\label{runalk}
\alpha_{sA} (x)= \frac{\alpha_A(0)}{\ln (e + a_1x^{a2} +b_1x^{b2}) } ,$$
where
0.5in$ \alpha_A (0) = 2.972$,
0.5in$ a_1= 5.292\;\mbox{GeV}^{-2a_2}$,
0.5in$ a_2=2.324$,
0.5in$ b1= 0.034\;\mbox{GeV}^{-2b_2}$,
0.5in$ b2=3.169$.
We also have an ansatz for the running coupling proposed by Bloch. Its expression for $\alpha_s(q^2)$ has the following fit [@bloch]:
$$\begin{aligned}
\label{bloch}
\alpha_{sB}(q^2)&=& \alpha(l\Lambda_{QCD}^2) = \\ \nonumber
&&\frac{1}{c_{0} + l^2}\left[ c_{0}\alpha_0 +
\frac{4\pi}{\beta_0}\left( \frac{1}{\log(l)} -
\frac{1}{l-1}\right) l^2 \right]\end{aligned}$$
where $l=q^2/\Lambda^2_{QCD}$, $c_{0} = 15$, $\alpha_0 = 2.6$, and $\beta_0 = 11 - \frac{2}{3}n_f$, where $n_f$ is the number of flavors.
Equation (1) has been obtained solving the coupled SDE for the gluon and ghost propagators in the Landau gauge. Eq. (2) is an ansatz motivated by earlier results done with the help of the angular approximation. Both are consistent with a gluon propagator that vanishes in the infrared. The difference in the couplings, which is clearly displayed in Fig.(\[running\]), is that Bloch fix the scale of the coupling constant at $\Lambda_{QCD}=300$MeV while Alkofer and Fischer [@alkofer] fix it comparing to the experimental input at $\alpha_s (M_Z)$, unfortunately their calculation when compared to a perturbative expression for coupling constant in the MOM scheme lead to a value $\Lambda_{QCD}=715$MeV which seems to be too large. The difference between the values of $\alpha_s(0)$ is negligible, while the difference at intermediate momenta is going to be transferred to the phenomenological quantities that we will compute.
The other expression for the running coupling constant that we will use in the next sections is the one determined by Cornwall many years ago [@cornwall] \_[sC]{} (q\^2)= , \[acor\] where $M_g(q^2)$ is a dynamical gluon mass given by, M\^2\_g(q\^2) =m\_g\^2 \^[- 12/11]{} \[mdyna\] $\L$($\equiv\L_{QCD}$) is the QCD scale parameter. This solution is the only one that has been obtained in a gauge invariant procedure. The gluon mass scale has to be found phenomenologically. A typical value is [@cornwall; @halzen] $$m_g = 500 \pm 200 \quad {\textnormal MeV}
\label{mg}$$ for $\L = 300$ MeV. The Bloch and Cornwall’s expression at large momenta map perfectly into the perturbative running coupling, as can be seem in Fig.(\[running\]). We will refer to these different results as model A, B and C respectively.
$\tau$–Lepton Decay Rate into Nonstrange Hadrons
================================================
The tests of the running coupling constant behavior that we shall discuss will depend on the exchange of gluons at different levels, i.e. the softer is the exchanged gluon the more we can test the nonpertubative behavior of $\alpha_s$. The physics of the $\tau$-lepton decay rate into nonstrange hadrons is one where QCD can be confronted with experiment to a very high precision. The measurement of $\alpha_s$ in these decays and its comparison with the nonperturbative expressions will correspond to what can be called our most perturbative test.
The normalized $\tau$-lepton decay rate into nonstrange hadrons ($h_{S=0}$) is given by [@korner] $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:rtau}
\left. R(\tau )\right| _{S=0} &=&
\frac{\Gamma (\tau \rightarrow h_{S=0}\nu )}
{\Gamma (\tau \rightarrow l\overline{\nu }\nu )} \nonumber\\
&=&N_{c}\left| V_{ud}\right| ^{2}S_{ew}(1+\delta _{ew}+\delta _{P}+\delta _{NP}),\end{aligned}$$ where $ N_{c} $ is the number of colors, the flavor mixing matrix element is $ \left| V_{ud}\right| ^{2}=0.9511\pm 0.0014 $ and $ S_{ew}=1.0194 $ and $ \delta _{ew}=0.001 $ are electroweak corrections. The nonperturbative corrections are small and consistent with zero, $ \delta _{NP}=-0.003\pm 0.003 $. In particular, these corrections are not directly related to the nonperturbative infrared behavior of $\alpha_s$. The term $ \delta _{P} $ represents the perturbative QCD effects and its value can be calculated if we have $ \left. R(\tau )\right| _{S=0} $. With the experimental result obtained by the ALEPH Collaboration[@aleph], $ \left. R(\tau )\right| ^{expt}_{s=0} $=3.492$ \pm 0.016 $, and the other values above one can estimate the perturbative corrections: $$\label{eq:dpexp}
\delta ^{expt}_{P}=0.203\pm 0.007.$$ On the other hand $ \delta _{P} $ can be calculated in the framework of perturbative QCD and, in the $\overline{\mbox{MS}}$ scheme, is given by the expansion $$\label{eq:dpth}
\delta ^{th}_{P}=\left( \frac{\alpha _{s}}{\pi }\right)
+5.2023\left( \frac{\alpha _{s}}{\pi }\right) ^{2}+26.366\left( \frac{\alpha _{s}}{\pi }\right) ^{3}+\cdots \, ,$$ where $ \alpha _{s} $ is the running coupling constant taken at the scale of the $ \tau $-lepton mass $ M_{\tau }=1.777 $GeV. Substituting Eq.(\[eq:dpexp\]) in the left hand side of Eq.(\[eq:dpth\]) and solving the resulting polynomial equation in $ \alpha _{s} $ one obtain $$\label{eq:alpha_exp}
\alpha ^{expt}_{s}=0.3404\pm 0.0073.$$ Now we can compare the above experimental result with the different values of the nonperturbative running coupling at the $ \tau $-lepton mass scale. Some comments are in order before such comparison is performed. The nonperturbative couplings have been obtained in the case of zero flavors. When we compare the perturbative to the nonperturbative results it should be understood that the introduction of fermions will affect the three models in the same direction (increasing $\alpha_s(0)$) and this effect would be small for a small number of flavors [@cornwall; @we]. Another point is that Eq.(\[eq:dpth\]) has a renormalization scheme dependence, while the nonperturbative solutions have been obtained in one unrelated approach. However the nonperturbative couplings of the three models are obtained forcing the matching with the perturbative running coupling at very large momenta and at leading order there is no problem with scheme dependence, in such a way that the comparison can be made but not with the precision of the experimental result. Using Eqs. (\[runalk\]) to (\[acor\]) (with $m_g =500$ MeV and $\Lambda =300$ MeV) instead of the perturbative running coupling we obtain $$\alpha_{sA}=0.676\; ,\quad \alpha_{sB}=0.354\; ,\quad \alpha_{sC}=0.348.$$ As one could expect only the last two results are compatible with Eq.(\[eq:alpha\_exp\]), and the model A fail at a level much above the one where we could claim that any scheme dependence is important. This shows the importance of the scale used to fix the coupling constant. Note that Alkofer and Fischer [@alkofer] (model A) constrain the coupling comparing its value to the experimental one of $\alpha_s (M_Z)$, which seems to be the most rigorous way of doing it, unfortunately their calculation lead to a value $\Lambda_{QCD}=715$MeV, which is too high when compared to most of the values found in the literature. As the $ \tau $-lepton mass scale is one where we believe that perturbative QCD can already be applied we have to conclude that the SDE solutions of model A does not describe the experimental data at such energies. Model B does it quite well but it was fitted to a smaller $\Lambda_{QCD}$ value. Note that the model A does not fit the data not because it has a large value for $\alpha_s(0)$, which is not so different from the model B, but because the running coupling of model A decreases much more slowly.
As we claimed previously, this test is the most perturbative one in the sense that it does not involve the introduction of hadronic wave functions directly in the calculation. In the next sections we always will need to introduce some extra hadronic information besides the coupling and gluon propagator. It is important to stress that this result does not settle the question about which one is the correct solution of gluonic SDE, it only give hints to which approximations may be or not suitable to be performed when solving these equations.
Effects of a frozen coupling constant in the amplitudes of the $\chi_{c2}\rightarrow \rho\rho$ decay
====================================================================================================
It is known, for a long time, that a dynamical gluon mass can affect quarkonium decays [@cornwall; @PP; @mihara]. In the study of Refs. [@PP; @mihara] it can be noted that the dynamical mass effect is relevant in the study of their hadronic decays mostly due to phase space factors. Therefore not all quarkonium decays are good candidates to probe the infrared behavior of the running coupling constant, because the effects of phase space overwhelms the changes in the running coupling.
It is also known that the exclusive quarkonium production in $p\bar{p}$ or $pp$ interactions and subsequent decay is strongly dependent on the internal structure of the hadrons involved, which are described by their hadronic wave functions. In the inclusive case the important dependence is on the distribution function. Perturbative QCD fixes the asymptotic form of these functions as $q^2 \rightarrow \infty$ and their general evolution, but in any realistic calculation they have to be taken as phenomenological quantities, to be experimentally determined via a set of physical information and then used in other processes.
Even when we are dealing with heavy quarks, and try to propose tests for the interface between perturbative and non-perturbative QCD, we verify that we cannot test the infrared behavior of quarks and gluons vertex and propagators independently of hadronic wave or distribution functions. In this Section we discuss the effects of a frozen coupling constant in the measurement of the $\rho$ vector meson helicity density matrix that are produced in the $\chi_{c2}\rightarrow \rho\rho$ decay. This is a case where the infrared behavior of the coupling is entangled with the behavior of the wave or distribution functions. We advance that in Section V we will discuss a more ordinary case where the wave function is well known, and where it is possible to study the QCD infrared behavior with less uncertainty [@halzen].
Some time ago Anselmino and Murgia [@murgia] considered the $\chi_{c2}\rightarrow \rho\rho$ decay process of polarized charmonium states created in $p\bar{p}$ or $pp$ interactions and have shown how the observation of the polarization of the vector meson, via a measurement of its diagonal helicity density matrix elements, neatly depends on the $\rho$ wave function and helps in discriminating between different kinds of these quantities.
The study of Ref.[@murgia] provide an interesting arena to introduce the effects of a frozen running coupling constant. Our result will show that depending on the form of the wave function we could observe a larger or smaller effect of the freezing in the infrared, showing how the nonperturbative behaviors of wave (or distribution) functions with the ones of the effective coupling can become entangled.
The processes that we consider are the exclusive
$$\label{exclusive}
p\overline{p}\rightarrow \chi_{c2} \rightarrow \rho\rho$$
or the inclusive
$$\label{inclusive}
pp \rightarrow \chi_{c2} + X \rightarrow \rho\rho + X$$
production of a pair of $\rho$ vectors with the subsequent decay
$$\label{decay}
\rho \rightarrow \pi\pi ,$$
and the quantity experimentally observed is the angular distribution of either one of the pions in the helicity rest frame of the decaying $\rho$.
The pion angular distribution depends of the spin state of the $\rho$ via the elements of its helicity density matrix $\rho_{\lambda,\lambda'} (\rho)$:
$$\begin{aligned}
\label{wpi}
W (\Theta,\Phi) &=& \frac{3}{4\pi}
[\rho_{0,0} \cos^2{\Theta} +(\rho_{1,1}- \rho_{1,-1})\sin^2{\Theta}\cos^2{\Phi}
+ (\rho_{1,1}+ \rho_{1,-1})\sin^2{\Theta}\sin^2{\Phi}
\nonumber \\
&&-\sqrt{2} (Re\rho_{1,0}) \sin 2{\Theta}\cos{\Phi} ],\end{aligned}$$
where $\Theta$ and $\Phi$ are, respectively, the polar and azimuthal angles of the pion as it emerges from the decay of the $\rho$, in the $\rho$ helicity rest frame. Eq. (\[wpi\]) can be integrated over $\Theta$ or $\Phi$ generating polar and azimuthal distributions, which can be measured and give information on $\rho_{\lambda,\lambda'} (\rho)$. The details of this procedure (i.e. the vector meson helicity density matrix calculation for massless quarks) can be found in Ref.[@murgia] and references therein.
The helicity density matrix of the $\rho$ meson are [@murgia]
$$\label{densmatr00}
\rho_{\lambda,\lambda'}= 0, \,\,\,\,\, \lambda \neq \lambda', \,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,
\rho_{0,0} = 1 -2 \rho_{1,1}$$
$$\label{densmatrix}
\rho_{1,1}=\rho_{-1,-1} = \frac{1}{2} \frac{1}{1+
3\frac{|\mbox{\~A}_{0,0}|^2}{|\mbox{\~A}_{1,-1}|^2}F(\theta)},$$
where the reduced amplitudes ${\tilde{A}}_{\lambda,\lambda'}$ are given in Eqs. (2.10), (2.11) and (2.14), (2.15) of Ref.[@anselmino] and do not depend on the $\rho$ production angles $\theta$ and $\phi$, but do depend on the wave functions. Eq. (\[densmatrix\]) has the same form both for exclusive and inclusive $\rho$ production, but the dependence on the production angle $\theta$ is different in the two cases
$$\label{angleex}
F^{ex}(\theta)= \frac{\cos^2(\theta)}{1+ \cos^2(\theta)} ,$$
$$\label{anglein}
F^{in}(\theta)=\frac{\sin^4(\theta)}{1+6\cos^2(\theta) +
\cos^4(\theta)}.$$
The ratio of reduced amplitudes $|\mbox{\~A}_{0,0}|^2/|\mbox{\~A}_{1,-1}|^2$ appearing in Eq.(\[densmatrix\]) are computed as a function of the $\rho$ longitudinally $(L,\lambda=0)$ and transversely $(T,\lambda= \pm 1)$ polarized vector mesons wave functions, which are indicated respectively by $\varphi_{L}$ and $\varphi_{T}$, and correspondent decay constants given by $f_L$ and $f_T$. This ratio is equal to [@murgia]
$$\label{ratea}
\frac{|\mbox{\~A}_{0,0}|}{|\mbox{\~A}_{1,-1}|}=
\frac{1}{\sqrt6}\left(\frac{f_L}{f_T}\right)^2
\frac{|I_{0,0}|}{|I_{1,-1}|}$$
where
$$\begin{aligned}
\label{i1-1}
I_{1,-1} = - \frac{1}{32}\int ^{1}_{0}\,
dxdy\varphi_{T}(x,\mbox{\~{Q}}_x^2)\varphi_{T}(y,\mbox{\~{Q}}_y^2)
%\nonumber \\
%\times
\frac{\alpha_s(xyM^2_{\chi})\alpha[(1-x)(1-y)M^2_{\chi}]}{xy(1-x)(1-y)(2xy-x-y)}\end{aligned}$$
$$\begin{aligned}
\label{i00}
I_{0,0} = &-& \frac{1}{32}\int ^{1}_{0}\,
dxdy\varphi_{L}(x,\mbox{\~{Q}}_x^2)\varphi_{L}(y,\mbox{\~{Q}}_y^2)
%\nonumber \\
%&&\times
\frac{\alpha_s(xyM^2_{\chi})\alpha[(1-x)(1-y)M^2_{\chi}]}
{xy(1-x)(1-y)(2xy-x-y)}
%\nonumber \\
%&&\times
\left[ 1+ \frac{(x-y)^2}{2xy -x -y }\right].\end{aligned}$$
In the above equations $M_{\chi}= 3.6 \,\mbox{GeV}$ is the $\chi_{c2}$ mass and $\mbox{\~{Q}}_x= \min(x,1-x)Q$.
To calculate the helicity density matrix $\rho_{1,1}$ we choose two different sets of $\varphi_{L}$ and $\varphi_{T}$: a set of symmetric distribution amplitudes
$$\label{symda}
\varphi_{L}= \varphi_{T}=6x(1-x)$$
and the QCD sum rules amplitudes [@cher]
$$\begin{aligned}
\label{sumrulesl}
\varphi_{L}(x,&\mbox{\~{Q}}_{x}^2&)= 6x(1-x)
%\nonumber \\
%&\times&
\left\{1+\frac{1}{5}C_{2}^{3/2}(2x-1)
\left[\frac{\alpha_s(\mbox{\~Q}^2_x)}{\alpha_s(\mu_{L}^2)}\right]^{2/3}
\right\}\end{aligned}$$
$$\begin{aligned}
\label{sumrulest}
\varphi_{T}(x,\mbox{\~{Q}}_{x}^2)= 6x(1-x)
\left\{\left[\frac{\alpha_s(\mbox{\~Q}^2_x)}{\alpha_s(\mu_{T}^2)}\right]^{4/25}
\right.
%\\ \nonumber
\left. -\frac{1}{6}
C_{2}^{3/2}(2x-1)\left[\frac{\alpha_s(\mbox{\~Q}^2_x)}{\alpha_s(\mu_{T}^2)}\right]^{52/75}
\right\}\end{aligned}$$
where $\mu_{L}^2=0.5 \, (\mbox{GeV}/c)^2$, $\mu_{T}^2=0.25\,
(\mbox{GeV}/c)^2$, and $C_{z}$ denotes Gegembauer polynomials. In both cases we assume $f_L = f_T$.
Our results for the exclusive process (Eq.(\[exclusive\])) are displayed in Fig.(\[exsym\]) and Fig.(\[exrules\]). Fig.(\[exsym\]) shows $\rho_{1,1}$ as a function of the $\rho$-meson production angle $\theta$, computed with the symmetric wave function whereas Fig.(\[exrules\]) was calculated with the QCD sum rule amplitudes. Both figures show curves for different behaviors of the running coupling constant, the one of Eq.(\[bloch\]) obtained by Bloch and the one of Eq.(\[acor\]) obtained by Cornwall with $m_g = 600$ MeV and $\L = 300$ MeV. The calculations for model A are not shown in the figures. The results for this model are similar to the ones of model B with curves located in the opposite direction to the curves of model C.
As claimed by Anselmino and Murgia [@murgia] the measurement of the helicity matrix element $\rho_{1,1}$ of the vector meson in the $\chi_{c2} \rightarrow \rho\rho$ can indeed discriminate differences between wave (or distribution) functions, but the effect of different running couplings is not negligible and one effect can mask the other. Of course, this is not an easy experiment, but is a feasible one. If the measurement is performed with high precision it can provide information about the infrared behavior of the coupling constant.
The curves for the inclusive process (Eq.(\[inclusive\])) are displayed in Fig.(\[insym\]) and Fig.(\[inrules\]). Fig.(\[insym\]) shows $\rho_{1,1}$ as a function of the $\rho$-meson production angle $\theta$, computed with the symmetric distribution amplitude whereas Fig.(\[inrules\]) was calculated with the QCD sum rule amplitudes. The differences in the curves are of the same order as in the exclusive case.
Note that in both cases (exclusive or inclusive) the values of $\rho_{1,1}$ is modified by a factor of $O(2-3)$ when we use the wave functions obtained through QCD sum rules. This is expected because they have a stronger dependence on $\alpha_s(q^2)$. The difference occurs at different angles for the exclusive and inclusive $\chi_{c2}$ production. Actually, it is surprising that in such a delicate experiment, where the effects of the running coupling appear in a ratio like the one described by Eq.(\[ratea\]), there is still a clear signal of the dependence on the infrared value of the coupling constant. In this section we verified how the infrared behavior of the coupling can be masked by the nonperturbative wave functions. In the next sections we will look at processes where the effects of wave or distribution functions are not so pronounced or are better known.
The $\gamma \rightarrow \pi_{0}$ transition form factor
=======================================================
When making predictions within perturbative QCD, we are always confronted with problems like the choice of distribution amplitudes as discussed in the previous section, the choice of renormalization scale $\mu$ and scheme for the coupling constant, etc... However there are calculations that have been discussed extensively in the literature, processes where the measurement is more sensitive only to the asymptotic distribution amplitude of a particular hadron, and where an optimal renormalization scale has been estimated. This was the case of the pion form factor discussed in Ref.[@we], and is the case of the $\gamma \rightarrow \pi_{0}$ transition form factor to be described here.
The photon-to-pion transition form factor $F_{\gamma\pi}(Q^2)$ is measured in single-tagged two-photon $e^+e^- \rightarrow e^+e^- \pi^0$ reactions. The amplitude for this process has the factorized form
$$\label{amppi}
F_{\gamma\pi}(Q^2) = \frac{4}{\sqrt{3}} \int^1_0 \, dx \, \phi_{\pi}(x,Q^2) T^H_{\gamma\pi}(x,Q^2),$$
where the hard scattering amplitude $ T^H_{\gamma\pi}(x,Q^2)$ is given by
$$\label{hardgpi}
T^H_{\gamma\pi}(Q^2) = \frac{1}{(1-x)Q^2} [ 1 + {\cal O}(\alpha_s)].$$
Using an asymptotic form for the pion distribution amplitude $\phi_{\pi}=\sqrt{3} f_\pi x(1-x)$ we obtain [@brodsky]
$$\label{trans}
Q^2F_{\gamma\pi}(Q^2)=
2f_{\pi}\left(1-\frac{5}{3}\frac{\alpha_{V}(Q^\ast)}{\pi}\right)$$
where $Q^\ast = \exp^{-3/2} Q$ is the estimated Brodsky-Lepage-Mackenzie scale for the pion form factor in the scheme discussed in Ref.[@brodsky].
In Fig.(\[transition\]) we compare the photon to pion transition form factor with CLEO data [@cleo]. The curves were computed with different expressions for the infrared behavior of the running coupling constant. We assumed $f_{\pi} \simeq 93 \;\mbox{MeV}$ and $\L = 300$ MeV. Using the running coupling constant given by the expression of Eq.(\[bloch\]) we obtain a fit for the photon-pion transition form factor very far from the experimental data. The result obtained when we use Eq.(\[runalk\]) is not shown and gives an even worse fit. The infrared value of the coupling constant is so large in the case of the coupling constants given by Eqs.(\[bloch\]) and (\[runalk\]), that we are not sure that the perturbative result can be trusted even at such large momentum scale.
The infrared coupling constants related to the class of SDE solutions consistent with an infrared finite propagator that vanishes at origin of momenta, are much stronger than most of the phenomenological estimates of the frozen $\alpha_s(0)$ value that we quoted in Ref.[@we] ($\alpha_s (0) \approx 0.7 \pm 0.3$), and are at the origin of the strange lower curve of Fig.(\[transition\]). Notice that due to the large scale of momenta involved in this process it is not expected that higher order corrections are still important. The data is only compatible with Eq.(\[acor\]), which has a smoother increase towards the infrared region. Perhaps this behavior is actually indicating that the transition to the infrared should be a soft one. Again the result for model A is not shown because it is even worse than the one of model B.
Note that in Fig.(\[transition\]) the curves obtained with the Cornwall’s coupling constant do not show large variation in the full range of uncertainty of the dynamical gluon mass (see Eq.(\[mg\])). It is interesting that its behavior is quite stable in this case as well as for the pion form factor studied in Ref.[@we]. If we had large variations of the infrared coupling constant with the gluon mass scale we could hardly propose any reliable phenomenological test for its freezing value. We stress that the results are obtained for a perturbative scale of momenta and it seems that we have to choose between two possibilities: This process cannot be predicted by perturbative QCD up to a scale of several GeV, or some of the ESD solutions are predicting a too large value of the coupling constant in the infrared and the approximations made to determine these solutions are too crude.
Elastic differential cross section for pp scattering
====================================================
We have verified in Section IV one case where the behavior of the coupling constant in the infrared is entangled with the one of the distribution amplitudes. In Section V it was shown a classic QCD calculation where the asymptotic behavior of the wave function is more important than the infrared one, leading to a cleaner test for the nonperturbative behavior of the coupling constant. Here we will discuss a test for the infrared QCD behavior that makes use of a phenomenological model for diffractive interactions [@halzen]. In this case we will also make use of a hadronic wave function, but the main source of uncertainty is in the fact that we assume a model for elastic scattering containing a series of approximations, which are beyond the scope of a pure QCD calculation.
We will compute the elastic differential cross section for pp scattering within the Landshoff-Nachtmann model (LN) for the Pomeron exchange [@land]. As discussed in Refs.[@halzen; @che], this is a model where the Pomeron is represented by two-gluons exchange, and it is particularly dependent on the infrared properties of the gluon, not only on the coupling constant but also on the behavior of the gluon propagator. In this model one of the gluons carry most of the momentum exchanged in the interaction while the other seems to appear just to form the colorless Pomeron. Therefore besides the coupling constant we will also need the expressions for the gluon propagators obtained through the solutions of the SDE, although this dependence with the nonperturbative behavior of the gluon propagator is important only when the gluon is exchanged at low momentum. The gluon propagator in Landau gauge is written as
$$D_{\mu\nu}(q^2)= \({\delta}_{\mu\nu}
-\frac{q_{\mu}q_{\nu}}{q^2}\)D(q^2),
\label{landau}$$
where the expression for $D(q^2)$ obtained by Cornwall is given by
$$\label{propcorn}
D^{-1}(q^2) = \left[q^2 + M_g ^2(q^2)\right]bg^2\ln\left[\frac{q^2+ 4M^2_{g}}{\Lambda ^2} \right].$$
We will also make use of the running coupling constant obtained by Fischer and Alkofer (model A) and their respective propagator $ D(q^2) = Z(q^2)/q^2$, where $Z(q^2)$, in Landau gauge, is fitted by
$$\label{propgalk}
Z(x)= \left(\frac{\alpha_{sA}(x)}{\alpha_A(\mu)}\right)^{1+ 2\delta}R^2(x),$$
and
$$\label{rpropg}
R(x)= \frac{cx^{\kappa}+ dx^{2\kappa}}{1 + cx^{\kappa}+
dx^{2\kappa} }$$
where the constants appearing in Eq.(\[propgalk\]) and Eq.(\[rpropg\]) are given by
0.5in $\alpha_A (\mu^2) = 0.9676$,
0.5in $\kappa= 0.5953$,
0.5in $\delta=-9/44$,
0.5in $c= 1.8934\;\mbox{GeV}^{-2\kappa}$,
0.5in $d= 4.6944\;\mbox{GeV}^{-4\kappa}$.
In the LN model the elastic differential cross can be obtained from
$$\label{dsigma}
\frac{d\sigma}{dt}= \frac{|A(s,t)|^2}{16\pi s^2}$$
where the amplitude for elastic proton-proton scattering via two-gluon exchange can be written as
$$A(s,t)= is8\alpha_{s}^2\left[T_{1} - T_{2}\right]
\label{ampli}$$
with
$$T_{1}= \int\,d^{2}k
D\(\frac{q}{2}+k\)D\(\frac{q}{2}-k\)|G_{p}(q,0)|^{2} \label{t1}$$
$$\begin{aligned}
T_{2}= \int\,&&d^{2}k D\(\frac{q}{2}+k\)D\(\frac{q}{2}-k\)G_{p}
\(q,k-\frac{q}{2}\)
%\nonumber \\
%&&\times
\left[2G_{p}(q,0)-G_{p}\(q,k-\frac{q}{2}\)\right ]
\label{t2}\end{aligned}$$
where $G_p (q,k)$ is a convolution of proton wave functions
$$G_p(q,k)= \int \, d^2pd\kappa \psi^\ast(\kappa,p)\psi(\kappa,p-k-\kappa q).
\label{gdp}$$
$G_p (q,0)$ is given by the Dirac form factor of the proton
$$F_{1}(t) = G_p(q,0)= \frac{4m^2 - 2.79t}{4m^2
-t}\frac{1}{(1-t/0.71)^2} \label{dirac} .$$
To estimate $G_p (q,k-q/2)$ we assume a proton wave function peaked at $\kappa = 1/3$ and obtain
$$G_p\(q,k-\frac{q}{2}\)=F_{1}\( q^2 + 9\left|k^2-\frac{q^2}{4}\right| \)
\label{conv}$$
Eq.(\[dsigma\]) to Eq.(\[conv\]) can be computed using the couplings and propagators discussed above. We compare the differential elastic cross-section for proton-proton scattering with the experimental data of Breakstone [*et al.*]{} at $\sqrt{s}= 53 \quad {\textnormal GeV}$ [@breakstone]. The results have to be adjusted by a normalization factor $s^{0.168}$ which accounts for the energy dependent part of ${d\sigma}/{dt}$ [@land2]. For large $|t|$ values, double-Pomeron exchange and three-gluon exchange are known to be important; we therefore do not expect to describe the data near and above $-t \simeq 0.5 \quad {\textnormal GeV}^2$ [@land2; @don]
The data of elastic proton-proton scattering is well fitted assuming a dynamical gluon mass of $m_g = 370 \quad {\textnormal MeV}$ for $\L= 300 \quad {\textnormal MeV}$. The calculation has a small variation with the value of $m_g$ and is more sensitive to the ratio $m_g /\L$. Using the coupling and propagator of Alkofer [*et al.*]{} (model A) we obtain a curve that is about one order of magnitude away from the experimental points. Unfortunately we do not have the propagator solution for model B and for this reason we do not show the results in this case, although we can guess that it would produce a curve in Fig.(\[cross-sec\]) between the curves of model A and C.
There is a striking difference between the two classes of SDE solutions that we discussed in the Introduction. In the case of Cornwall’s solution it is the product $g^2 D(q^2)$ that behaves roughly as $1/{m_g}^2$ as $q^2 \rightarrow 0$ and this product has no $g^2$ dependence [@cornwall]. This does not happen for the class of gluon propagators that seems to vanish at origin. As in this case the coupling is not canceled in the ${d\sigma}/{dt}$ calculation and as it is a factor of $O(3)$ larger, it is not difficult to understand the one order of magnitude difference in the result of the cross sections. This specific calculation is model dependent, however it is quite sensitive on the infrared behavior of the theory.
Exclusive $\rho$ Production in Deep Inelastic Scattering
========================================================
Donnachie and Landshoff [@dl1] successfully described the process $ \gamma ^{*}(q)\: p(P)\: \rightarrow \: \rho (r)\: p(P^{\prime} ) $ with a soft Pomeron exchange, and later they [@dl2] considered Pomeron exchange as being the exchange of two gluons as in the previous section. Pursuing that idea Cudell [@cudell] proposed the following expression for the polarized differential cross section for exclusive $\rho$ production: $$\label{eq:dsdt_pol}
\frac{d\sigma _{j}}{dt}=\left( \frac{\alpha _{elm}}{4w^{4}}\left| A_{j}\right| ^{2}\Phi ^{2}\right) \: Z^{2}\:
\left[ 3\: F_{1}(t)\right] ^{2}\: ,\quad j=T,\: L ,$$ where $ \alpha _{elm}\simeq 1/137 $ is the electromagnetic coupling constant and $ w^{2}=(q+P)^{2} $. The factor $\Phi$ is given by $$\label{eq:phi}
\Phi =\sqrt{\frac{f_{\rho }\: m_{\rho }}{24}} ,$$ where $ f_{\rho }\simeq 30 $MeV is the $ \rho $ form factor and $ m_{\rho }\simeq 770 $ MeV is the $ \rho $ mass. $$\label{eq:Z}
Z=\left( \frac{w^{2}}{w_{0}^{2}}\right) ^{0.08+\alpha^{\prime} t}\: ,$$ with $ w^{2}_{0}=1/\alpha^{\prime} \simeq 4 $GeV$ ^{2} $. The Dirac form factor of the proton is $$\label{eq:F1}
F_{1}(t)=\frac{4m^{2}_{p}-2.79t}{4m^{2}_{p}-t}\frac{1}{(1-t/0.71)^{2}},$$ where $ m_{p} $ is the proton mass.
The amplitude is $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:Aj}
&&A_{j}=i\frac{8\sqrt{2}}{3\pi }\: m_{\rho }\: P_{j}\:
%%\\
\int^{0}_{-\infty}
\frac{dk^{2}\; (t-4k^{2})}{(\mu^2_Q - t)(\mu^2_Q - 4k^{2})}
\left[4\pi \alpha _{n} D\left(k^{2}+\frac{t}{4}\right)\right]^{2}, \nonumber\\
&&\quad\quad\mu^2_Q = m^{2}_{\rho}+Q^{2}\;,\quad j = T,\: L \nonumber\end{aligned}$$ where $P_{T}=w^{2}/2 $; $ P_{L}=P_{T}\cdot (m^{2}_{\rho }+Q^{2}+t)/(2m_{\rho }Q) $. In the last term of the integrand we have the frozen coupling constant $ \alpha _{n}=\alpha _{s}(0) $ and the gluon propagator $ D(p^{2}) $.
The total cross section can be obtained through the integral $$\label{eq:sigtotal}
\sigma _{total}(Q^{2})=\int dt\: \left( \frac{d\sigma _{T}}{dt}+\varepsilon \frac{d\sigma _{L}}{dt}\right)
\: ,\quad \varepsilon \approx 0.85.$$
This cross section is dependent not only on the nonperturbative coupling constant but also on the gluon propagator as the calculation of the previous section. We compared the solutions of Alkofer *et al.* (model A) and Cornwall (model C). The reason for not using model B is the same as the one discussed in the previous section. With the running coupling constants (eqs. (\[runalk\]) and (\[acor\])) and their respective propagators (eqs. (\[propgalk\]) and (\[propcorn\])) we obtain the results shown in Fig.(\[fig:rhosigmas\]), where they are compared with the experimental data from EMC[@emc] and LAME[@lame]. As explained in Ref.[@cudell] the model for exclusive $\rho$ production is consistent with experiment only in the range of momenta shown in the figure, at larger values of $Q^{2}$ there are other contributions to the cross section.
Conclusions
===========
In this work we proposed phenomenological tests for the infrared behavior of running coupling constant that have been obtained through the nonperturbative solutions of Schwinger-Dyson equations of the QCD gluonic sector. We are only considering SDE solutions that are infrared finite. Although infrared divergent solutions have not been fully discarded, there are several indications that these QCD Green functions are well behaved in the infrared. Unfortunately due to the complexity of the SDE, approximations are still necessary to obtain these solutions and they lead to different expressions. Phenomenological tests are important because they are able to indicate which are the correct approximations that can be performed to solve SDE, selecting the solution that is compatible with the experimental data.
We studied the effects of a frozen coupling constant in the $\tau$-lepton decay rate into nonstrange hadrons. This is a typically perturbative test and, in particular, it shows the importance of the method used to fix the scale of the running coupling constant, which is different for the couplings shown in Eqs.(\[runalk\]) and (\[bloch\]) (model A and B). The measurement of the $\rho$ vector meson helicity density matrix that are produced in the $\chi_{c2}\rightarrow
\rho\rho$ decay is one interesting experiment to be performed. The measurement of the diagonal matrix element provide information on the infrared behavior of the coupling constant as well as on the distribution amplitude. In this case both behaviors are entangled and a good knowledge on the distribution amplitude is needed in order to select a preferred behavior for the coupling constant. The experiment is not an easy one, but can be performed and will give information complementary to the others that we have discussed.
The effects of the infrared behavior of the coupling constant in the photon-to-pion transition form factor $F_{\gamma\pi}(Q^2)$ is much more interesting. The calculation probes the asymptotic behavior of the pion distribution amplitude and provide a cleaner test for the freezing of the coupling constant. The differences between the existent solutions obtained from SDE for $\alpha_s (q^2)$ are shown clearly in the comparison with the experimental data, which seems to select the coupling constant compatible with dynamical generation of a gluon mass.
The analysis of the differential cross section for proton-proton scattering and the cross section for exclusive $\rho$ production in deep inelastic scattering are also unambiguously selecting one specific behavior for the QCD Green functions in the infrared. In this case we made use of a model of diffractive scattering proposed by Landshoff and Nachtmann and it could be argued that the model has not been obtained from straightforward QCD calculations. However the model has a great success in the explanation of diffractive physics at low energy, and again the comparison with experimental data is consistent with the result obtained from the other phenomenological tests. Diffraction in this model is explained through the exchange of two gluons, where one of the gluons carries most of the momentum and the other is soft. Therefore the model actually probes the infrared region.
It is worth mentioning the influence of gauge invariance and presence of fermions in the solutions for the coupling constants that we have discussed. The Cornwall’s solution was obtained in a gauge invariant procedure, the others were obtained in Landau gauge. We do not expect that gauge invariance introduce a large effect in the result. In general solutions of SDE are relatively stable in respect to changes in the gauge choice, and we should expect that if the solutions minimize the vacuum energy the gauge dependence should disappear. The effect of the number of flavors in Cornwall’s solution[@cornwall] is not so strong, and it appears in the coefficient $\beta_0$ of the coupling constant and in the gluon mass equation increasing the value of the frozen coupling. If a nonzero number of flavors produces any observable effect, this one should act in the same sense for all solutions. Therefore, we do not expect large changes in our results with the inclusion of fermion loops in the SDE solutions.
We conclude pointing out that Schwinger-Dyson equations provide a powerful tool to investigate the QCD infrared behavior. These are complicated equations whose solutions are determined only after some specific approximations leading to different expressions. These expressions can be phenomenologically tested, indicating which are the most reliable approximations. In the tests presented here only one solution, consistent with a dynamically generated mass for the gluon, was shown to be compatible with the experimental data.
Acknowledgments {#acknowledgments .unnumbered}
===============
This research was supported by the Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq) (AAN), by Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP) (ACA,AAN) and by Coordenadoria de Aperfeiçoamento do Pessoal de Ensino Superior (CAPES) (AM).
[99]{}
Yu. L. Dokshitzer and B. R. Webber, Phys. Lett. [**B352**]{} (1995) 451; Yu. L. Dokshitzer, G. Marchesini and B. R. Webber, Nucl. Phys. [**B469**]{} (1996) 93; Yu. L. Dokshitzer, Plenary talk at ICHEP 98, [*Proc. Vancouver 1998, High energy physics, Vol. 1, 305-324*]{}, hep-ph/9812252; P. Hoyer, [*Proc. 6th INT-Jlab Workshop, Newport News, VA, May 1999*]{}, hep-ph/9303262.
A. C. Mattingly and P. M. Stevenson, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**69**]{} (1992) 1320; Phys. Rev. [**D49**]{} (1994) 437.
S. J. Brodsky, hep-ph/0111127; Acta Phys. Polon. [**B32**]{} (2001) 4013, hep-ph/0111340; Fortsch. Phys. [**50**]{} (2002) 503.
J. M. Cornwall, Phys. Rev. [**D26**]{} (1982) 1453.
A. C. Aguilar, A. Mihara and A. A. Natale, Phys. Rev. [**D65**]{} (2002) 054011.
H. Gies, Phys.Rev. [**D66**]{} (2002) 025006.
K. Langfeld, H. Reinhardt and J. Gattnar, Nucl. Phys. [**B621**]{} (2002) 131; hep-lat/0110025; L. Giusti, M. L. Paciello, S. Petrarca, B. Taglienti and N. Tantalo, hep-lat/0110040; A. Cucchieri and D. Zwanziger, hep-lat/0012024; C. Alexandrou, Ph. de Forcrand and E. Follana, hep-lat/0112043; hep-lat/0203006.
J. C. R. Bloch, Phys. Rev. [**D66**]{} (2002) 034032.
C. S. Fischer, R. Alkofer and H. Reinhardt, Phys. Rev. [**D65**]{} (2002) 094008; C. S. Fischer and R. Alkofer, Phys. Lett. [**B536**]{} (2002) 177; R. Alkofer, C. S. Fischer and L. von Smekal, Acta Phys. Slov. [**52**]{} (2002) 191, hep-ph/0205125.
C. Lerche and L. von Smekal, Phys. Rev. [**D65**]{} (2002) 125006.
D. Zwanziger, Phys. Rev. [**D65**]{} (2002) 094039.
R. Alkofer and L. von Smekal, Phys. Rept. (2001, in press), hep-ph/0007355; L. von Smekal, A. Hauck and R. Alkofer, Ann. Phys. [**267**]{} (1998) 1; L. von Smekal, A. Hauck and R. Alkofer, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**79**]{} (1997) 3591.
S. J. Brodsky, E. Gardi, G. Grunberg and J. Rathsman, Phys. Rev. [**D63**]{} (2001) 094017 and references therein.
A. A. Natale and P. S. Rodrigues da Silva, Phys. Lett. [**B392**]{} (1996) 444 ; J. C. Montero, A. A. Natale and P. S. Rodrigues da Silva, Prog. Theor. Phys. [**96**]{} (1996) 1209.
A. M. Badalian and Yu. A. Simonov, Phys. At. Nucl. [**60**]{} (1997) 630; A. M. Badalian and V. L. Morgunov, Phys. Rev. [**D60**]{} (1999) 116008; A. M. Badalian and B. L. G. Bakker, Phys. Rev. [**D62**]{} (2000) 094031.
D. V. Shirkov and I. L. Solovtsov, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**79**]{} (1997) 1209; see also D. V. Shirkov, hep-th/0210013 and references therein.
F. Halzen, G. Krein, and A. A. Natale, Phys. Rev. [**D47**]{} (1993) 295.
J. G. Koerner, F. Krajewski and A. A. Pivovarov, Phys. Rev. **D63** (2000) 036001 and references there in.
ALEPH Collaboration, Z. Phys. **C76** (1997) 15; Eur. Phys. J. **C4** (1998) 409.
G. Parisi and R. Petronzio, Phys. Lett. [**B94**]{} (1980) 51 .
A. Mihara and A. A. Natale, Phys. Lett. [**B482**]{} (2000) 378.
M. Anselmino and F. Murgia, Phys. Rev. [**D53**]{} (1996) 5314.
M. Anselmino and F. Murgia, Phys. Rev. [**D47**]{} (1993) 3977.
V. L. Chernyak and A. R. Zhitnitsky, Phys. Rep. [**112**]{} (1984) 173.
S. J. Brodsky, C. Ryong Ji, A. Pang and D. G. Robertson, Phys. Rev. [**D57**]{} (1998) 245.
J. Gronberg [*et al.*]{} \[Cleo Collaboration\], Phys. Rev. [**D57**]{} (1998) 33.
P. V. Landshoff and O. Nachtmann, Z. Phys. [**C35**]{} (1987) 405.
H. Chehime [*et al.*]{}, Phys. Lett. [**B286**]{} (1992) 397.
A. Breakstone [*et al.*]{}, Nucl. Phys. [**248**]{} (1984) 253.
P. V. Landshoff, in [*Proceedings of the Joint International Lepton-Photon Symposium and Europhysics Conference on High Energy Physics*]{}, Geneva, Switzerland, 1991, edited by S. Hegarty, K. Potter, and E. Quercigh (World Scientific, Singapore, 1992); Report No. CERN-TH-6277/91 (unpublished).
A. Donnachie and P. V. Landshoff, Nucl. Phys. [**B231**]{} (1984) 189.
A. Donnachie and P. Landshoff, Phys. Lett. **B185** (1987) 403.
A. Donnachie and P. Landshoff, Phys. Lett. **B348** (1995) 213.
J. R. Cudell, Nucl. Phys. **B336** (1990) 1.
EMC Collaboration, Phys. Lett. [**B161**]{} (1985) 203.
LAME Collaboration, Phys. Rev. [**D25**]{} (1982) 634.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
author:
- 'C. Pfrommer, V. Springel, T.A. En[ß]{}lin,'
- 'M. Jubelgas'
title: Cosmological structure formation shocks and cosmic rays in hydrodynamical simulations
---
Cosmological shock waves during structure formation not only play a decisive role for the thermalization of gas in virializing structures but also for the acceleration of relativistic cosmic rays (CRs) through diffusive shock acceleration. We discuss a novel numerical treatment of the physics of cosmic rays in combination with a formalism for identifying and measuring the shock strength on-the-fly during a smoothed particle hydrodynamics simulation. In our methodology, the non-thermal CR population is treated self-consistently in order to assess its dynamical impact on the thermal gas as well as other implications on cosmological observables. Using this formalism, we study the history of the thermalization process in high-resolution hydrodynamic simulations of the Lambda cold dark matter model. Collapsed cosmological structures are surrounded by shocks with high Mach numbers up to 1000, but they play only a minor role in the energy balance of thermalization. However, this finding has important consequences for our understanding of the spatial distribution of CRs in the large-scale structure. In high resolution simulations of galaxy clusters, we find a low contribution of the averaged CR pressure, due to the small acceleration efficiency of lower Mach numbers of flow shocks inside halos and the softer adiabatic index of CRs. These effects disfavours CRs when a composite of thermal gas and CRs is adiabatically compressed. However, within cool core regions, the CR pressure reaches equipartition with the thermal pressure leading there to a lower effective adiabatic index and thus to an enhanced compressibility of the central intracluster medium. This effect increases the central density and pressure of the cluster and thus the resulting X-ray emission and the central Sunyaev-Zel’dovich flux decrement. The integrated Sunyaev-Zel’dovich effect, however, is only slightly changed.
Motivation
==========
Cosmological shock waves form abundantly in the course of structure formation, both due to infalling cosmic plasma which accretes onto filaments, sheets and halos, as well as due to supersonic flows associated with merging substructures. Additionally, shock waves in the interstellar and intracluster media can be powered by non-gravitational energy sources, e.g. as a result of supernova explosions. Cosmologically, shocks are important in several respects for the thermal gas as well as for CR populations. (1) Shock waves dissipate gravitational energy associated with hierarchical clustering into thermal energy of the gas contained in dark matter halos, thus supplying the intra-halo medium with entropy and thermal pressure support: where and when is the gas heated to its present temperatures, and which shocks are mainly responsible for it? (2) Shocks also occur around moderately overdense filaments, heating the intragalactic medium. Sheets and filaments are predicted to host a warm-hot intergalactic medium with temperatures in the range $10^5\,\mbox{K}<T<10^7\,\mbox{K}$ whose evolution is primarily driven by shock heating from gravitational perturbations developing into mildly nonlinear, non-equilibrium structures. Thus, the shock-dissipated energy traces the large scale structure and contains information about its dynamical history. (3) Besides thermalization, collisionless shocks are also able to accelerate ions through diffusive shock acceleration. These energetic ions are reflected at magnetic irregularities through magnetic resonances between the gyro-motion and waves in the magnetized plasma and are able to gain energy in moving back and forth through the shock front: what are the cosmological implications of such a CR component, and does this influence the cosmic thermal history? (4) Simulating realistic CR distributions within galaxy clusters will provide detailed predictions for the expected radio synchrotron and $\gamma$-ray emission. What are the observational signatures of this radiation that is predicted to be observed with the upcoming new generation of $\gamma$-ray instruments and radio telescopes?
To date it is unknown how much pressure support is provided by CRs to the thermal plasma of clusters of galaxies. A substantial CR pressure contribution might have a major impact on the properties of the intracluster medium (ICM) and potentially modify thermal cluster observables such as the X-ray emission and the Sunyaev-Zel’dovich (SZ) effect. In contrast, CR protons play a decisive role within the interstellar medium our own Galaxy. CRs and magnetic fields each contribute roughly as much energy and pressure to the galactic ISM as the thermal gas does. CRs trace past energetic events such as supernovae, and they reveal the underlying structure of the baryonic matter distribution through their interactions. CRs behave quite differently compared to the thermal gas. Their equation of state is softer, they are able to propagate over macroscopic distances, and their energy loss time-scales are typically larger than the thermal ones. Therefore, CR populations provide an important reservoir for the energy from supernova explosions or structure formation shock waves, and thereby help to maintain dynamical feedback for periods longer than thermal gas physics alone would permit.
Structure formation shock waves and cosmic rays
===============================================
![Visualization of a non-radiative cosmological simulation at redshift $z=0$ where the cosmic ray (CR) energy injection was only computed while the effect of the CR pressure on the dynamical evolution was not taken into account. The [*top panels*]{} show the overdensity of the gas and the mass weighted temperature of the simulation. The [*bottom panels*]{} show a visualization of the strength of structure formation shocks. The colour hue of the map on the left-hand side encodes the spatial Mach number distribution weighted by the rate of energy dissipation at the shocks. The map on the right-hand side shows the Mach number distribution weighted by the rate of CR energy injection above the momentum threshold of hadronic CR p-p interactions. The brightness of each pixel is determined by the respective weights, i.e. by the energy production density. Most of the energy is dissipated in weak shocks which are situated in the internal regions of groups or clusters, while collapsed cosmological structures are surrounded by strong external shocks (shown in blue). Since strong shocks are more efficient in accelerating CRs, the CR injection rate is more extended than the dissipation rate of thermal energy.[]{data-label="fig:cosmo"}](./figures/dens.eps "fig:"){width="\textwidth"} ![Visualization of a non-radiative cosmological simulation at redshift $z=0$ where the cosmic ray (CR) energy injection was only computed while the effect of the CR pressure on the dynamical evolution was not taken into account. The [*top panels*]{} show the overdensity of the gas and the mass weighted temperature of the simulation. The [*bottom panels*]{} show a visualization of the strength of structure formation shocks. The colour hue of the map on the left-hand side encodes the spatial Mach number distribution weighted by the rate of energy dissipation at the shocks. The map on the right-hand side shows the Mach number distribution weighted by the rate of CR energy injection above the momentum threshold of hadronic CR p-p interactions. The brightness of each pixel is determined by the respective weights, i.e. by the energy production density. Most of the energy is dissipated in weak shocks which are situated in the internal regions of groups or clusters, while collapsed cosmological structures are surrounded by strong external shocks (shown in blue). Since strong shocks are more efficient in accelerating CRs, the CR injection rate is more extended than the dissipation rate of thermal energy.[]{data-label="fig:cosmo"}](./figures/mach.eps "fig:"){width="\textwidth"}
![Visualization of a non-radiative cosmological simulation at redshift $z=0$ where the cosmic ray (CR) energy injection was only computed while the effect of the CR pressure on the dynamical evolution was not taken into account. The [*top panels*]{} show the overdensity of the gas and the mass weighted temperature of the simulation. The [*bottom panels*]{} show a visualization of the strength of structure formation shocks. The colour hue of the map on the left-hand side encodes the spatial Mach number distribution weighted by the rate of energy dissipation at the shocks. The map on the right-hand side shows the Mach number distribution weighted by the rate of CR energy injection above the momentum threshold of hadronic CR p-p interactions. The brightness of each pixel is determined by the respective weights, i.e. by the energy production density. Most of the energy is dissipated in weak shocks which are situated in the internal regions of groups or clusters, while collapsed cosmological structures are surrounded by strong external shocks (shown in blue). Since strong shocks are more efficient in accelerating CRs, the CR injection rate is more extended than the dissipation rate of thermal energy.[]{data-label="fig:cosmo"}](./figures/temp.eps "fig:"){width="\textwidth"} ![Visualization of a non-radiative cosmological simulation at redshift $z=0$ where the cosmic ray (CR) energy injection was only computed while the effect of the CR pressure on the dynamical evolution was not taken into account. The [*top panels*]{} show the overdensity of the gas and the mass weighted temperature of the simulation. The [*bottom panels*]{} show a visualization of the strength of structure formation shocks. The colour hue of the map on the left-hand side encodes the spatial Mach number distribution weighted by the rate of energy dissipation at the shocks. The map on the right-hand side shows the Mach number distribution weighted by the rate of CR energy injection above the momentum threshold of hadronic CR p-p interactions. The brightness of each pixel is determined by the respective weights, i.e. by the energy production density. Most of the energy is dissipated in weak shocks which are situated in the internal regions of groups or clusters, while collapsed cosmological structures are surrounded by strong external shocks (shown in blue). Since strong shocks are more efficient in accelerating CRs, the CR injection rate is more extended than the dissipation rate of thermal energy.[]{data-label="fig:cosmo"}](./figures/mach.CR.eps "fig:"){width="\textwidth"}
![Influence of reionisation (at redshift $z = 10$) on the Mach number statistics of non-radiative cosmological simulations. The figure on the [ *left-hand side*]{} shows the differential Mach number distribution ${\mathrm{d}}^2
{\varepsilon}_{\mathrm}{diss}(a,{{\mathcal M}})/( {\mathrm{d}}\log a\, {\mathrm{d}}\log{{\mathcal M}})$ for our simulation with reionisation while the figure on the [*right-hand side*]{} shows this distribution for the simulation without reionisation. Strong shocks are effectively suppressed due to an increase of the sound velocity after reionisation. []{data-label="fig:distrib"}](./figures/distrib.reion.eps){width="\textwidth"}
We have developed a formalism that is able to measure the shock strength instantaneously during an smoothed particle hydrodynamics (SPH) simulation [@Pfrommer_a]. The method is applicable both to non-relativistic gas, and to plasmas composed of CRs and thermal gas. We apply our methods to study the properties of structure formation shocks in high-resolution hydrodynamic simulations of the Lambda cold dark matter ($\Lambda$CDM) model using an extended version of the distributed-memory parallel TreeSPH code [GADGET]{}-2 [@Springel] which includes self-consistent CR physics ([@Ensslin], [@Jubelgas]). Fig. \[fig:cosmo\] shows the spatial distribution of structure formation shocks in comparison to the density and temperature distribution while Fig. \[fig:distrib\] shows the cosmological Mach number distribution at different redshifts.[^1]
The main results are as follows. (1) Most of the energy is dissipated in weak shocks internal to collapsed structures while collapsed cosmological structures are surrounded by external shocks with much higher Mach numbers, up to ${{\mathcal M}}\sim
1000$. Although these external shocks play a major role locally, they contribute only a small fraction to the global energy balance of thermalization. (2) More energy per logarithmic scale factor and volume is dissipated at later times while the mean Mach number decreases with time. This is because of the higher pre-shock gas densities within non-linear structures, and the significant increase of the mean shock speed as the characteristic halo mass grows with cosmic time. (3) A reionisation epoch at $z_{\mathrm}{reion}=10$ suppresses efficiently strong shocks at $z<z_{\mathrm}{reion}$ due to the associated increase of the sound speed after reionisation. (4) Strong accretion shocks efficiently inject CRs at the cluster boundary. This implies that the dynamical importance of shock-injected CRs is comparatively large in the low-density, peripheral halo regions, but is less important for the weaker flow shocks occurring in central high-density regions of halos.
Cosmic rays in hydrodynamic cluster simulations
===============================================
![The top panels show a visualization of the pressure contained in CRs relative to the total pressure $X_{{\rm CR}}= P_{{\rm CR}}/ (P_{{\rm CR}}+ P_{{\rm th}})$ in a zoomed simulation of an individual galaxy cluster with mass $M = 10^{14}
h^{-1} M_\odot$. The map on the [*left-hand side*]{} shows a non-radiative simulation with CRs accelerated at structure formation shock waves while the map on the [*right-hand side*]{} is from a simulation with dissipative gas physics including cooling, star formation, supernova feedback, and structure formation CRs. The lower panels show the CR-induced difference of the X-ray surface brightness $S_X$ ([*left-hand side*]{}) and the Compton-$y$ parameter ([*right-hand side*]{}) in a radiative simulation with structure formation CRs compared to the corresponding reference simulation without CRs. The relative difference of the integrated X-ray surface brightness/Compton-$y$ parameter is given in the inlay. Within cool core regions, the CR pressure reaches equipartition with the thermal pressure, an effect that increases the compressibility of the central intracluster medium and thus the central density and pressure of the gas. This boosts the X-ray luminosity of the cluster and the central Sunyaev-Zel’dovich decrement while the integrated Sunyaev-Zel’dovich effect remains largely unaffected. []{data-label="fig:XCR"}](./figures/XCR.g676.adiab.CR.z0.zoom.eps "fig:"){width="\textwidth"} ![The top panels show a visualization of the pressure contained in CRs relative to the total pressure $X_{{\rm CR}}= P_{{\rm CR}}/ (P_{{\rm CR}}+ P_{{\rm th}})$ in a zoomed simulation of an individual galaxy cluster with mass $M = 10^{14}
h^{-1} M_\odot$. The map on the [*left-hand side*]{} shows a non-radiative simulation with CRs accelerated at structure formation shock waves while the map on the [*right-hand side*]{} is from a simulation with dissipative gas physics including cooling, star formation, supernova feedback, and structure formation CRs. The lower panels show the CR-induced difference of the X-ray surface brightness $S_X$ ([*left-hand side*]{}) and the Compton-$y$ parameter ([*right-hand side*]{}) in a radiative simulation with structure formation CRs compared to the corresponding reference simulation without CRs. The relative difference of the integrated X-ray surface brightness/Compton-$y$ parameter is given in the inlay. Within cool core regions, the CR pressure reaches equipartition with the thermal pressure, an effect that increases the compressibility of the central intracluster medium and thus the central density and pressure of the gas. This boosts the X-ray luminosity of the cluster and the central Sunyaev-Zel’dovich decrement while the integrated Sunyaev-Zel’dovich effect remains largely unaffected. []{data-label="fig:XCR"}](./figures/SXdiff.g676.c+sf.z0.ShockCR-noCR.5.eps "fig:"){width="\textwidth"}
![The top panels show a visualization of the pressure contained in CRs relative to the total pressure $X_{{\rm CR}}= P_{{\rm CR}}/ (P_{{\rm CR}}+ P_{{\rm th}})$ in a zoomed simulation of an individual galaxy cluster with mass $M = 10^{14}
h^{-1} M_\odot$. The map on the [*left-hand side*]{} shows a non-radiative simulation with CRs accelerated at structure formation shock waves while the map on the [*right-hand side*]{} is from a simulation with dissipative gas physics including cooling, star formation, supernova feedback, and structure formation CRs. The lower panels show the CR-induced difference of the X-ray surface brightness $S_X$ ([*left-hand side*]{}) and the Compton-$y$ parameter ([*right-hand side*]{}) in a radiative simulation with structure formation CRs compared to the corresponding reference simulation without CRs. The relative difference of the integrated X-ray surface brightness/Compton-$y$ parameter is given in the inlay. Within cool core regions, the CR pressure reaches equipartition with the thermal pressure, an effect that increases the compressibility of the central intracluster medium and thus the central density and pressure of the gas. This boosts the X-ray luminosity of the cluster and the central Sunyaev-Zel’dovich decrement while the integrated Sunyaev-Zel’dovich effect remains largely unaffected. []{data-label="fig:XCR"}](./figures/XCR.g676.c+sf.CR.z0.zoom.eps "fig:"){width="\textwidth"} ![The top panels show a visualization of the pressure contained in CRs relative to the total pressure $X_{{\rm CR}}= P_{{\rm CR}}/ (P_{{\rm CR}}+ P_{{\rm th}})$ in a zoomed simulation of an individual galaxy cluster with mass $M = 10^{14}
h^{-1} M_\odot$. The map on the [*left-hand side*]{} shows a non-radiative simulation with CRs accelerated at structure formation shock waves while the map on the [*right-hand side*]{} is from a simulation with dissipative gas physics including cooling, star formation, supernova feedback, and structure formation CRs. The lower panels show the CR-induced difference of the X-ray surface brightness $S_X$ ([*left-hand side*]{}) and the Compton-$y$ parameter ([*right-hand side*]{}) in a radiative simulation with structure formation CRs compared to the corresponding reference simulation without CRs. The relative difference of the integrated X-ray surface brightness/Compton-$y$ parameter is given in the inlay. Within cool core regions, the CR pressure reaches equipartition with the thermal pressure, an effect that increases the compressibility of the central intracluster medium and thus the central density and pressure of the gas. This boosts the X-ray luminosity of the cluster and the central Sunyaev-Zel’dovich decrement while the integrated Sunyaev-Zel’dovich effect remains largely unaffected. []{data-label="fig:XCR"}](./figures/ydiff.g676.c+sf.z0.ShockCR-noCR.eps "fig:"){width="\textwidth"}
To study the impact of CRs on cluster scales, we performed cosmological high-resolution hydrodynamic simulations of a sample of galaxy clusters spanning a large range in mass and dynamical states, with and without CR physics. These clusters have originally been selected from a low-resolution dark-matter-only simulation of a flat $\Lambda$CDM model and then re-simulated using the ’zoomed initial conditions’ technique. We account for CR acceleration at structure formation shocks and consider CR loss processes such as their thermalization by Coulomb interactions and catastrophic losses by hadronic interactions with ambient gas protons (see [@Pfrommer_b] for details). Within clusters, the relative CR pressure $X_{{\rm CR}}= P_{{\rm CR}}/ (P_{{\rm CR}}+
P_{{\rm th}})$ declines towards a low central value of $X_{{\rm CR}}\simeq 10^{-4}$ in non-radiative simulations due to a combination of the following effects: CR acceleration is more efficient at the peripheral strong accretion shocks compared to weak central flow shocks, adiabatic compression of a composite of CRs and thermal gas disfavours the CR pressure relative to the thermal pressure due to the softer equation of state of CRs, and CR loss processes are more important at the dense centres. Interestingly, $X_{{\rm CR}}$ reaches high values at the centre of the parent halo and each galactic substructure in our radiative simulation due to the fast thermal cooling of gas which diminishes thermal pressure support relative to that in CRs. This additional CR pressure support has important consequences for the thermal gas distribution at cluster centres and alters the resulting X-ray emission and the SZ effect significantly (cf. Fig. \[fig:XCR\]).
Conclusions
===========
We studied the properties of cosmological shock waves using a technique that allows us to identify and measure the shock strength on-the-fly during an SPH simulation. Invoking a model for CR acceleration in shock waves, we have carried out the first hydrodynamical simulations that follows the CR physics self-consistently. These simulations show that it is crucial to consider the dynamical back-reaction of a non-thermal cosmic ray (CR) component in order to describe the intracluster medium reliably. The X-ray luminosity from galaxy clusters is boosted predominantly in low-mass cool core clusters due to the large CR pressure contribution in the centre that leads to a higher compressibility. The integrated Sunyaev-Zel’dovich effect is only slightly changed while the central SZ flux decrement is also increased. These CR-induced modifications can imprint themselves in changes of cluster scaling relations or modify their intrinsic scatter and thus change the effective mass threshold of X-ray or SZ surveys. Neglecting such a CR component in reference simulations can introduce biases in the determination of cosmological parameters.
[^1]: Note, that we corrected a missing factor 10 in the normalization of Fig.6 in [@Pfrommer_a].
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
---
SHORT RUNNING TITLE: ADMISSIBILITY IN REGRESSION
[*1. Department of Mathematics and Statistics\
La Trobe University\
Bundoora Victoria 3086\
Australia* ]{}
[*2. Future Farming Systems Research\
Department of Primary Industries\
600 Sneydes Road\
Werribee 3030 Victoria\
Australia* ]{}
[*3. Department of Statistics\
University of Vienna\
Universitätsstr. 5/3, A-1010 Vienna\
Austria*]{}
[**Summary**]{}
Consider a linear regression model with independent and identically normally distributed random errors. Suppose that the parameter of interest is a specified linear combination of the regression parameters. We prove that the usual confidence interval for this parameter is admissible within a broad class of confidence intervals.
admissibility; compromise decision theory; confidence interval; decision theory.
$^*$ Author to whom correspondence should be addressed. Department of Mathematics and Statistics, La Trobe University, Victoria 3086, Australia. Tel.: +61 3 9479 2594, fax: +61 3 9479 2466, [e-mail:]{} [email protected]
Consider the linear regression model $Y = X \beta + \varepsilon$, where $Y$ is a random $n$-vector of responses, $X$ is a known $n \times p$ matrix with linearly independent columns, $\beta$ is an unknown parameter $p$-vector and $\varepsilon \sim N(0, \sigma^2 I_n)$ where $\sigma^2$ is an unknown positive parameter. Let $\hat \beta$ denote the least squares estimator of $\beta$. Also, define $\hat \sigma^2 = (Y - X \hat \beta)^T (Y - X \hat \beta)/(n-p)$.
Suppose that the parameter of interest is $\theta = a^T \beta$ where $a$ is a given $p$-vector ($a \ne 0$). We seek a $1-\alpha$ confidence interval for $\theta$. Define the quantile $t(m)$ by the requirement that $P \big(-t(m) \le T \le t(m) \big) = 1-\alpha$ for $T \sim t_m$. Let $\hat \Theta$ denote $a^T \hat \beta$, i.e. the least squares estimator of $\theta$. Also let $v_{11}$ denote the variance of $\hat \Theta$ divided by $\sigma^2$. The usual $1-\alpha$ confidence interval for $\theta$ is $$I = \big [\hat \Theta - t(m) \sqrt{v_{11}} \hat \sigma, \,
\hat \Theta + t(m) \sqrt{v_{11}} \hat \sigma \big]$$ where $m=n-p$. Is this confidence interval admissible? The admissibility of a confidence interval is a much more difficult concept than the admissibility of a point estimator, since confidence intervals must satisfy a coverage probability constraint. Also, admissibility of confidence intervals can be defined in either weak or strong forms (Joshi, 1969, 1982).
Kabaila & Giri (2009, Section 3) describe a broad class ${\cal D}$ of confidence intervals that includes $I$. The main result of the present paper, presented in Section 3, is that $I$ is strongly admissible within the class ${\cal D}$. An attractive feature of the proof of this result is that, although lengthy, this proof is quite straightforward and elementary. Section 2 provides a brief description of this class ${\cal D}$. For completeness, in Section 4 we describe a strong admissibility result, that follows from the results of Joshi (1969), for the usual $1-\alpha$ confidence interval for $\theta$ in the somewhat artificial situation that the error variance $\sigma^2$ is assumed to be known.
Define the parameter $\tau = c^T \beta - t$ where the vector $c$ and the number $t$ are given and $a$ and $c$ are linearly independent. Let $\hat \tau$ denote $c^T \hat \beta - t$ i.e. the least squares estimator of $\tau$. Define the matrix $V$ to be the covariance matrix of $(\hat \Theta, \hat \tau)$ divided by $\sigma^2$. Let $v_{ij}$ denote the $(i,j)$ th element of $V$. We use the notation $[a \pm b]$ for the interval $[a-b, a+b]$ ($b > 0$). Define the following confidence interval for $\theta$ $$\begin{aligned}
\label{J(b,s)}
J(b, s) = \bigg [ \hat \Theta -
\sqrt{v_{11}} \hat \sigma \, b\bigg(\frac{\hat{\tau}}{\hat \sigma \sqrt{v_{22}}}\bigg) \, \pm \,
\sqrt{v_{11}} \hat \sigma \, s\bigg(\frac{|\hat{\tau}|}{\hat \sigma \sqrt{v_{22}}}\bigg)
\bigg ]\end{aligned}$$ where the functions $b$ and $s$ are required to satisfy the following restrictions. The function $b: \mathbb{R} \rightarrow \mathbb{R}$ is an odd function and $s: [0, \infty)
\rightarrow (0, \infty)$. Both $b$ and $s$ are bounded. These functions are also continuous except, possibly, at a finite number of values. Also, $b(x)=0$ for all $|x| \ge d$ and $s(x)=t(m)$ for all $x \ge d$ where $d$ is a given positive number. Let ${\cal F}(d)$ denote the class of pairs of functions $(b,s)$ that satisfy these restrictions, for given $d$ ($d>0$).
Define ${\cal D}$ to be the class of all confidence intervals for $\theta$ of the form , where $c$, $t$, $d$, $b$ and $s$ satisfy the stated restrictions. Each member of this class is specified by $(c,t, d, b,s)$. Apart from the usual $1-\alpha$ confidence interval $I$ for $\theta$, the class ${\cal D}$ of confidence intervals for $\theta$ includes the following:
1. Suppose that we carry out a preliminary hypothesis test of the null hypothesis $\tau = 0$ against the alternative hypothesis $\tau \ne 0$. Also suppose that we construct a confidence interval for $\theta$ with nominal coverage $1-\alpha$ based on the assumption that the selected model had been given to us [*a priori*]{} (as the true model). The resulting confidence interval, called the naive $1-\alpha$ confidence interval, belongs to the class ${\cal D}$ (Kabaila & Giri, 2009, Section 2).
2. Confidence intervals for $\theta$ that are constructed to utilize (in the particular manner described by Kabaila & Giri, 2009) uncertain prior information that $\tau=0$.
Let $K$ denote the usual $1-\alpha$ confidence interval for $\theta$ based on the assumption that $\tau = 0$. The naive $1-\alpha$ confidence interval, described in (a), may be expressed in the following form: $$\label{mixture}
h \left(\frac{|\hat \tau|}{\hat \sigma \sqrt{v_{22}}} \right ) I +
\left ( 1 - h \left(\frac{|\hat \tau|}{\hat \sigma \sqrt{v_{22}}} \right ) \right) K$$ where $h: [0, \infty) \rightarrow [0,1]$ is the unit step function defined by $h(x) = 0$ for all $x \in [0,q]$ and $h(x) = 1$ for all $x > q$. Now suppose that we replace $h$ by a continuous increasing function satisfying $h(0)=0$ and $h(x) \rightarrow 1$ as $x \rightarrow \infty$ (a similar construction is extensively used in the context of point estimation by Saleh, 2006). The confidence interval is also a member of the class ${\cal D}$.
As noted in Section 2, each member of the class ${\cal D}$ is specified by $(c,t,d,b,s)$. The following result states that the usual $1-\alpha$ confidence interval for $\theta$ is strongly admissible within the class ${\cal D}$.
There does not exist $(c,t,d,b,s) \in {\cal D}$ such that the following three conditions hold: $$\label{exp_len_cond}
\hspace{-2.6cm}(a) \qquad E_{\beta,\sigma^2} \big ( \text{length of } J(b,s) \big ) \le E_{\beta,\sigma^2} \big ( \text{length of } I \big )
\quad \text{for all } (\beta,\sigma^2).$$ $$\label{cov_pr_cond}
\hspace{-4.6cm}(b) \qquad P_{\beta,\sigma^2} \big ( \theta \in J(b,s) \big ) \ge P_{\beta,\sigma^2} \big ( \theta \in I \big )
\quad \text{for all } (\beta,\sigma^2).$$ $(c)$ Strict inequality holds in either or for at least one $(\beta,\sigma^2)$.
The proof of this result is presented in Appendix A.
An illustration of this result is provided by Figure 3 of Kabaila & Giri (2009). Define $\gamma = \tau/(\sigma \sqrt{v_{22}})$. Also define $$e(\gamma;s) = \frac{\text{expected length of $
J(b, s)$}}
{\text{expected length of $I$}}.$$ We call this the scaled expected length of $J(b,s)$. Theorem 1 tells us that for any confidence interval $J(b,s)$, with minimum coverage probability $1-\alpha$, it cannot be the case that $e(\gamma;s) \le 1$ for all $\gamma$, with strict inequality for at least one $\gamma$. This fact is illustrated by the bottom panel of Figure 3 of Kabaila & Giri (2009).
Define the class $\widetilde {\cal D}$ to be the subset of ${\cal D}$ in which both $b$ and $s$ are continuous functions. Strong admissibility of the confidence interval $I$ within the class ${\cal D}$ implies weak admissibility of this confidence interval within the class $\widetilde {\cal D}$, as the following result shows. Since $(\hat \beta, \hat \sigma^2)$ is a sufficient statistic for $(\beta, \sigma)$, we reduce the data to $(\hat \beta, \hat \sigma^2)$.
There does not exist $(c,t,d,b,s) \in \widetilde {\cal D}$ such that the following three conditions hold: $$\label{len_cond}
\hspace{-4.4cm}(a^{\prime}) \qquad \big ( \text{length of } J(b,s) \big ) \le \big ( \text{length of } I \big )
\quad \text{for all } (\hat \beta,\hat \sigma^2).$$ $$\label{cov_pr_cond_repeat}
\hspace{-4.6cm}(b^{\prime}) \qquad P_{\beta,\sigma^2} \big ( \theta \in J(b,s) \big ) \ge P_{\beta,\sigma^2} \big ( \theta \in I \big )
\quad \text{for all } (\beta,\sigma^2).$$ $(c^{\prime})$ Strict inequality holds in either or for at least one $(\beta,\sigma^2)$.
This corollary is proved in Appendix B.
In this section, we suppose that $\sigma^2$ is known. Without loss of generality, we assume that $\sigma^2=1$. As before, let $\hat \beta$ denote the least squares estimator of $\beta$. Since $\hat \beta$ is a sufficient statistic for $\beta$, we reduce the data to $\hat \beta$. Assume that the parameter of interest is $\theta = \beta_1 / \sqrt{\text{Var}(\hat \beta_1)}$. Thus the least squares estimator of $\theta$ is $\hat \Theta = \hat \beta_1 / \sqrt{\text{Var}(\hat \beta_1)}$. Define $$\hat \Delta
= \left[\begin{matrix} \hat \beta_2 - \ell_2 \hat \beta_1 \\ \vdots \\ \hat \beta_p - \ell_p \hat \beta_1 \end{matrix} \right]$$ where $\ell_2, \ldots, \ell_p$ have been chosen such that $\text{Cov}(\hat \beta_j - \ell_j \hat \beta_1, \hat \beta_1)=0$ for $j = 2, \ldots, p$. Now define $$\delta
= \left[\begin{matrix} \beta_2 - \ell_2 \beta_1 \\ \vdots \\ \beta_p - \ell_p \beta_1 \end{matrix} \right].$$ Note that $(\hat \Theta, \hat \Delta)$ is obtained by a one-to-one transformation from $\hat \beta$. So, we reduce the data to $(\hat \Theta, \hat \Delta )$. Note that $\hat \Theta$ and $\hat \Delta $ are independent, with $\hat \Theta \sim N(\theta, 1)$ and $\hat \Delta $ with a multivariate normal distribution with mean $\delta$ and known covariance matrix. Define the number $z$ by the requirement that $P(-z \le Z \le z) = 1- \alpha$ for $Z \sim N(0,1)$. Let $I = \big [ \hat \Theta - z, \hat \Theta + z \big]$. Define $$\varphi(\hat \theta, \theta) =
\begin{cases}
1 &\text{if } \theta \in \big [ \hat \theta - z, \hat \theta + z \big ] \\
0 &\text{otherwise}
\end{cases}$$ This is the probability that $\theta$ is included in the confidence interval $I$, when $\hat \theta$ is the observed value of $\hat \Theta$. The length of the confidence interval $I$ is $\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \varphi(\hat \theta, \theta) \, d\theta = 2z$. Let $p_{\theta}(\cdot)$ denote the probability density function of $\hat \Theta$ for given $\theta$. The coverage probability of $I$ is $\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \varphi(\hat \theta, \theta) \, p_{\theta}(\hat \theta) \, d\hat \theta = 1-\alpha$.
Now let ${\cal C}(\hat \Theta, \hat \Delta)$ denote a confidence set for $\theta$. Define $$\varphi_{\delta}(\hat \theta, \theta) = P_{\theta, \delta} \big (\theta \in {\cal C}(\hat \theta, \hat \Delta) \big),$$ where $\hat \theta$ denotes the observed value of $\hat \Theta$. For each given $\delta \in \mathbb{R}^{p-1}$, the expected Lebesgue measure of ${\cal C}(\hat \Theta, \hat \Delta )$ is $E_{\theta, \delta} \Big (\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \varphi_{\delta}(\hat \Theta, \theta) \, d\theta \Big )$. For each given $\delta \in \mathbb{R}^{p-1}$, the coverage probability of ${\cal C}(\hat \Theta, \hat \Delta )$ is $\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \varphi_{\delta}(\hat \theta, \theta) \, p_{\theta}(\hat \theta) \, d\hat \theta$. Theorem 5.1 of Joshi (1969) implies the following strong admissibility result. Suppose that $\varphi_{\delta}(\hat \theta, \theta)$ satisfies the following conditions
1. $E_{\theta, \delta} \Big (\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \varphi_{\delta}(\hat \theta, \theta) \, d\theta \Big )
\le E_{\theta, \delta} \Big (\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \varphi(\hat \theta, \theta) \, d\theta \Big )$ for all $\theta \in \mathbb{R}$.
2. $\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \varphi_{\delta}(\hat \theta, \theta) \, p_{\theta}(\hat \theta) \, d\hat \theta
\ge \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \varphi(\hat \theta, \theta) \, p_{\theta}(\hat \theta) \, d\hat \theta$ for all $\theta \in \mathbb{R}$.
Then $\varphi_{\delta}(\hat \theta, \theta) = \varphi(\hat \theta, \theta)$ for almost all $(\hat \theta, \theta) \in \mathbb{R}^2$. This result is true for each $\delta \in \mathbb{R}^{p-1}$. Using standard arguemnts, this entails that $I \setminus {\cal C}(\hat{\Theta}, \hat{\Delta})$ and ${\cal C}(\hat{\Theta}, \hat{\Delta})\setminus I$ are Lebesgue-null sets, for (Lebesgue-) almost all values of $(\hat{\Theta}, \hat{\Delta})$.
Suppose that $c$ is a given vector (such that $c$ and $a$ are linearly independent), $t$ is a given number and $d$ is a given positive number. The proof of Theorem 1 now proceeds as follows. We present a few definitions and a lemma. We then apply this lemma to prove this theorem.
Define $W = \hat \sigma/\sigma$. Note that $W$ has the same distribution as $\sqrt{Q/m}$ where $Q
\sim \chi^2_m$. Let $f_W$ denote the probability density function of $W$. Also let $\phi$ denote the $N(0,1)$ probability density function. Now define $$R_1(b,s;\gamma) = \frac{\text{expected length of $
J(b, s)$}}
{\text{expected length of $I$}} - 1.$$ It follows from (7) of Kabaila & Giri (2009) that $$\label{R1}
R_1(b,s;\gamma) = \frac{1} {t(m) \, E(W)}
\int^{\infty}_0 \int^{d}_{- d} \left (s(|x|) - t(m) \right )
\phi(w x -\gamma) \, dx \, w^2 \, f_W(w) \, dw.$$ Thus, for each $(b,s) \in {\cal F}(d)$, $R_1(b,s;\gamma)$ is a continuous function of $\gamma$.
Also define $R_2(b,s;\gamma) = P \big(\theta \notin J(b,s) \big) - \alpha$. We make the following definitions, also used by Kabaila & Giri (2009). Define $\rho = v_{12}/\sqrt{v_{11} v_{22}}$ and $\Psi(x, y; \mu, v) = P(x \le Z \le y)$, for $Z \sim N(\mu,v)$. Now define the functions $$\begin{aligned}
k^{\dag}(h,w, \gamma, \rho) &= \Psi \big( -t(m) w, t(m) w;
\rho(h-\gamma), 1-\rho^2 \big ) \\
k(h,w,\gamma, \rho) &= \Psi \big(b(h/w) w - s(|h|/w) w, b(h/w) w + s(|h|/w) w; \rho(h-\gamma),1-\rho^2 \big ).\end{aligned}$$ It follows from (6) of Kabaila & Giri (2009), that $$\label{R2}
R_2(b,s; \gamma) = -\int_0^{\infty} \int_{-d}^{d} \big( k(wx,w, \gamma, \rho) - k^{\dag}(wx,w, \gamma, \rho) \big)
\, \phi(wx-\gamma)\, dx \, w \, f_W(w) \, dw .$$ Thus, for each $(b,s) \in {\cal F}(d)$, $R_2(b,s;\gamma)$ is a continuous function of $\gamma$.
Now $E(W^2)=1$ and so $$\int_0^{\infty} w^2 \, f_W(w) \, dw = 1.$$ It follows from that $$\label{int_R1}
\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} R_1(b,s;\gamma) \, d\gamma = \frac{2} {t(m) \, E(W)}
\int^{d}_0 \big (s(x) - t(m) \big ) \, dx.$$ Thus $\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} R_1(b,s;\gamma)\, d\gamma$ exists for all $(b,s) \in {\cal F}(d)$.
Since $k(wx,w, \gamma, \rho)$ and $k^{\dag}(wx,w, \gamma, \rho)$ are probabilities, $$|R_2(b,s;\gamma)| \le \int_0^{\infty} \int_{-d}^d \phi(wx-\gamma) dx \, w f_W(w) \, dw,$$ so that $$\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} |R_2(b,s;\gamma)| \, d \gamma \le 2 d \int_0^{\infty} w f_W(w) \, dw = 2 d E(W) < \infty.$$ Thus $\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} R_2(b,s;\gamma)\, d\gamma$ exists for all $(b,s) \in {\cal F}(d)$.
Thus, we may define $$g(b,s;\lambda) = \lambda \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} R_1(b,s;\gamma)\, d\gamma + (1-\lambda) \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} R_2(b,s;\gamma)\, d\gamma,$$ for each $(b,s) \in {\cal F}(d)$, where $0 < \lambda < 1$. Kempthorne (1983, 1987, 1988) presents results on what he calls compromise decision theory. Initially, these results were applied only to the solution of some problems of point estimation. Kabaila & Tuck (2008) develop new results in compromise decision theory and apply these to a problem of interval estimation. The following lemma, which will be used in the proof of Theorem 1, is in the style of these compromise decision theory results.
Suppose that $c$ is a given vector (such that $c$ and $a$ are linearly independent), $t$ is a given number and $d$ is a given positive number. Also suppose that $\lambda$ is given and that $(b^*,s^*)$ minimizes $g(b,s;\lambda)$ with respect to $(b,s) \in {\cal F}(d)$. Then there does not exist $(b,s) \in {\cal F}(d)$ such that
1. $R_1(b,s;\gamma) \le R_1(b^*,s^*;\gamma)$ for all $\gamma$.
2. $R_2(b,s;\gamma) \le R_2(b^*,s^*;\gamma)$ for all $\gamma$.
3. Strict inequality holds in either (a) or (b) for at least one $\gamma$.
Suppose that $c$ is a given vector (such that $c$ and $a$ are linearly independent), $t$ is a given number and $d$ is a given positive number. The proof is by contradiction. Suppose that there exist $(b,s) \in {\cal F}(d)$ such that $(a)$, $(b)$ and $(c)$ hold. Now, $$\begin{aligned}
g(b^*, s^*;\lambda) - g(b, s;\lambda) &=
\lambda \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \big (R_1(b^*, s^*;\gamma) - R_1(b, s;\gamma) \big )\, d\gamma \\
&\phantom{123}+
(1-\lambda) \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \big (R_2(b^*, s^*;\gamma) - R_2(b,s;\gamma) \big )\, d\gamma\end{aligned}$$ By hypothesis, one of the following 2 cases holds.
$(a)$ and $(b)$ hold and $R_1(b^*, s^*;\gamma) - R_1(b, s;\gamma) > 0$ for at least one $\gamma$. Since $R_1(b^*, s^*;\gamma) - R_1(b, s;\gamma)$ is a continuous function of $\gamma$, $$\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \big (R_1(b^*, s^*;\gamma) - R_1(b, s;\gamma) \big )\, d\gamma > 0.$$ Thus $g(b^*, s^*;\lambda) > g(b, s;\lambda)$ and we have established a contradiction.
$(a)$ and $(b)$ hold and $R_2(b^*, s^*;\gamma) - R_2(b, s;\gamma) > 0$ for at least one $\gamma$. Since $R_2(b^*, s^*;\gamma) - R_2(b, s;\gamma)$ is a continuous function of $\gamma$, $$\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \big (R_2(b^*, s^*;\gamma) - R_2(b, s;\gamma) \big )\, d\gamma > 0.$$ Thus $g(b^*, s^*;\lambda) > g(b, s;\lambda)$ and we have established a contradiction.
Lemma 1 follows from the fact that this argument holds for every given vector $c$ (such that $c$ and $a$ are linearly independent), every given number $t$ and every given positive number $d$.
We will first find the $(b^*,s^*)$ that minimizes $g(b,s;\lambda)$ with respect to $(b,s) \in {\cal F}(d)$, for given $\lambda$. We will then choose $\lambda$ such that $J(b^*, s^*) = I$, the usual $1-\alpha$ confidence interval for $\theta$. Theorem 1 is then a consequence of Lemma 1.
By changing the variable of integration in the inner integral in , it can be shown that $R_2(b,s; \gamma)$ is equal to $$\begin{aligned}
-\int_0^{\infty} \int_0^{d} \Big ( &\big( k(wx,w, \gamma, \rho) - k^{\dag}(wx,w, \gamma, \rho) \big)
\, \phi(wx-\gamma) + \\
&\big( k(-wx,w, \gamma, \rho) - k^{\dag}(-wx,w, \gamma, \rho) \big)
\, \phi(wx+\gamma) \Big) \, dx \, w \, f_W(w) \, dw\end{aligned}$$ Using this expression and the restriction that $b$ is an odd function, we find that $\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} R_2(b,s; \gamma) \, d \gamma$ is equal to $$\begin{aligned}
-\int_0^d \int_0^{\infty} \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \Big (
&\Psi \big(b(x)w-s(x)w, b(x)w + s(x)w; \rho y, 1-\rho^2 \big) \\
&-\Psi \big(-t(m)w, t(m)w; \rho y, 1-\rho^2 \big) \\
&+\Psi \big(-b(x)w-s(x)w, -b(x)w + s(x)w; -\rho y, 1-\rho^2 \big) \\
&-\Psi \big(-t(m)w, t(m)w; -\rho y, 1-\rho^2 \big) \Big)
\, \phi(y) \, dy \,w \, f_W(w) \, dw \, dx .\end{aligned}$$ Hence, to within an additive constant that does not depend on $(b,s)$, $\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} R_2(b,s; \gamma) \, d \gamma$ is equal to $$\begin{aligned}
-\int_0^d \int_0^{\infty} &\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \Big (
\Psi \big(b(x)w-s(x)w, b(x)w + s(x)w; \rho y, 1-\rho^2 \big) \\
&+\Psi \big(-b(x)w-s(x)w, -b(x)w + s(x)w; -\rho y, 1-\rho^2 \big)
\Big)
\, \phi(y) \, dy \,w \, f_W(w) \, dw \, dx .\end{aligned}$$ Thus, to within an additive constant that does not depend on $(b,s)$, $$g(b,s;\lambda) = \int_0^d q(b,s;x) \, dx,$$ where $q(b,s;x)$ is equal to $$\begin{aligned}
&\frac{2 \lambda} {t(m) \, E(W)}
s(x) \\
&-(1-\lambda) \int_0^{\infty} \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \big (\Psi(b(x)w-s(x)w, b(x)w + s(x)w; \rho y, 1-\rho^2) \\
&\phantom{1234567}+\Psi(-b(x)w-s(x)w, -b(x)w + s(x)w; -\rho y, 1-\rho^2)
\big)
\, \phi(y) \, dy \,w \, f_W(w) \, dw.\end{aligned}$$ Note that $x$ enters into the expression for $q(b,s;x)$ only through $b(x)$ and $s(x)$. To minimize $g(b,s;\lambda)$ with respect to $(b,s) \in {\cal F}(d)$, it is therefore sufficient to minimize $q(b,s;x)$ with respect to $(b(x),s(x))$ for each $x \in [0,d]$. The situation here is similar to the computation of Bayes rules, see e.g. Casella & Berger (2002, pp. 352–353). Therefore, to minimize $g(b,s;\lambda)$ with respect to $(b,s) \in {\cal F}(d)$, we simply minimize $$\begin{aligned}
\tilde q(b,s) = &\frac{2 \lambda} {t(m) \, E(W)}
s \\
&-(1-\lambda) \int_0^{\infty} \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \big (\Psi(bw-sw, bw + sw; \rho y, 1-\rho^2) \\
&\phantom{1234567890}+\Psi(-bw-sw, -bw + sw; -\rho y, 1-\rho^2)
\big)
\, \phi(y) \, dy \,w \, f_W(w) \, dw\end{aligned}$$ with respect to $(b,s) \in \mathbb{R} \times (0,\infty)$, to obtain $(b^{\prime}, s^{\prime})$ and then set $b(x) = b^{\prime}$ and $s(x) = s^{\prime}$ for all $x \in [0,d]$.
Let the random variables $A$ and $B$ have the following distribution $$\left[\begin{matrix} A\\ B \end{matrix}
\right] \sim N \left ( \left[\begin{matrix} 0 \\ 0 \end{matrix}
\right], \left[\begin{matrix} 1 \quad \rho\\ \rho \quad 1 \end{matrix}
\right] \right ).$$ Note that the distribution of $A$, conditional on $B=y$, is $N(\rho y, 1-\rho^2)$. Thus $$\Psi(bw - sw, bw + sw; \rho y, 1-\rho^2) = P \big(bw - sw \le A \le bw + sw \, \big| \, B=y \big)$$ Hence $$\begin{aligned}
\label{first_to_maximize}
&\int_0^{\infty} \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \Psi(bw-sw, bw + sw; \rho y, 1-\rho^2)
\, \phi(y) \, dy \,w \, f_W(w) \, dw \notag \\
&=\int_0^{\infty} P (bw - sw \le A \le bw + sw ) \,w \, f_W(w) \, dw .\end{aligned}$$ Let $\Phi$ denote the $N(0,1)$ cumulative distribution function. For every fixed $w>0$ and $s>0$, $$P (bw - sw \le A \le bw + sw ) = \Phi(bw + sw) - \Phi(bw - sw)$$ is maximized by setting $b=0$. Thus, for each fixed $s>0$, is maximized with respect to $b \in \mathbb{R}$ by setting $b=0$.
Now let the random variables $\tilde A$ and $\tilde B$ have the following distribution $$\left[\begin{matrix} \tilde A\\ \tilde B \end{matrix}
\right] \sim N \left ( \left[\begin{matrix} 0 \\ 0 \end{matrix}
\right], \left[\begin{matrix} 1 \quad -\rho\\ -\rho \quad 1 \end{matrix}
\right] \right ).$$ Note that the distribution of $\tilde A$, conditional on $\tilde B=y$, is $N(-\rho y, 1-\rho^2)$. Thus $$\Psi(-bw - sw, -bw + sw; -\rho y, 1-\rho^2) = P \big(-bw - sw \le \tilde A \le -bw + sw \, \big| \, \tilde B=y \big)$$ Hence $$\begin{aligned}
\label{second_to_maximize}
&\int_0^{\infty} \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \Psi(-bw-sw, -bw + sw; -\rho y, 1-\rho^2)
\, \phi(y) \, dy \,w \, f_W(w) \, dw \notag \\
&=\int_0^{\infty} P (-bw - sw \le \tilde A \le -bw + sw ) \,w \, f_W(w) \, dw .\end{aligned}$$ For every fixed $w>0$ and $s>0$, $$P \big(-bw - sw \le \tilde A \le -bw + sw \big) = \Phi(-bw + sw) - \Phi(-bw - sw)$$ is maximized by setting $b=0$. Thus, for each fixed $s>0$, is maximized with respect to $b \in \mathbb{R}$ by setting $b=0$.
Therefore, $\tilde q(b,s)$ is, for each fixed $s > 0$, minimized with respect to $b$ by setting $b=0$. Thus $b^{\prime}=0$ and so $b^*(x) = 0$ for all $x \in \mathbb{R}$. Hence, to find $s^{\prime}$ we need to minimize $$\frac{\lambda}{t(m) E(W)} s - (1-\lambda) \int_0^{\infty} \big ( 2 \Phi(sw) - 1 \big) \, w f_W(w) \, dw$$ with respect to $s > 0$. Therefore, to find $s^{\prime}$ we may minimize $$r(s) = \ell(\lambda) \, s - 2 \int_0^{\infty} \Phi(sw) \, w f_W(w) \, dw$$ with respect to $s > 0$, where $$\ell(\lambda) = \frac{\lambda}{(1-\lambda) t(m) E(W)}.$$ Note that $\ell(\lambda)$ is an increasing function of $\lambda$, such that $\ell(\lambda) \downarrow 0$ as $\lambda \downarrow 0$ and $\ell(\lambda) \uparrow \infty$ as $\lambda \uparrow 1$. Choose $\lambda = \lambda^*$, where $$\ell(\lambda^*) = 2 \int_0^{\infty} \phi \big( t(m) w \big) \, w^2 \, f_W(w) \, dw.$$ Note that $0 < \ell(\lambda^*) < \sqrt{2 / \pi}$. Now $$\frac{d r(s)}{ds} = \ell(\lambda^*) - 2 \int_0^{\infty} \phi(sw) \, w^2 f_W(w) \, dw .$$ Since $\int_0^{\infty} \phi(sw) \, w^2 f_W(w) \, dw$ is a decreasing function of $s > 0$, $dr(s)/ds$ is an increasing function of $s > 0$. Also, for $s=0$, $\int_0^{\infty} \phi(sw) \, w^2 f_W(w) \, dw = 1/\sqrt{2 \pi}$. Thus, to minimize $r(s)$ with respect to $s > 0$, we need to solve $$\ell(\lambda^*) - 2 \int_0^{\infty} \phi(sw) \, w^2 \, f_W(w) \, dw = 0$$ for $s > 0$. Obviously, this solution in $s = t(m)$. Thus $s^*(x) = t(m)$ for all $x \ge 0$. In other words, $J(b^*, s^*) = I$. By Lemma 1, there does not exist $(b,s) \in {\cal F}(d)$ such that $$\label{exp_len_cond_repeat}
\hspace{-2.6cm}(a) \qquad E_{\beta,\sigma^2} \big ( \text{length of } J(b,s) \big ) \le E_{\beta,\sigma^2} \big ( \text{length of } I \big )
\quad \text{for all } (\beta,\sigma^2).$$ $$\label{cov_pr_cond_repeat}
\hspace{-4.6cm}(b) \qquad P_{\beta,\sigma^2} \big ( \theta \in J(b,s) \big ) \ge P_{\beta,\sigma^2} \big ( \theta \in I \big )
\quad \text{for all } (\beta,\sigma^2).$$ $(c)$ Strict inequality holds in either or for at least one $(\beta,\sigma^2)$.
Theorem 1 follows from the fact that this argument holds for every given vector $c$ (such that $c$ and $a$ are linearly independent), every given number $t$ and every given positive number $d$.
The proof of Corollary 1 is by contradiction. Suppose that $c$ is a given vector (such that $c$ and $a$ are linearly independent), $t$ is a given number and $d$ is a given positive number. Also suppose that there exists $(b,s) \in {\cal F}(d)$ such that both $b$ and $s$ are continuous and $(a^{\prime})$, $(b^{\prime})$ and $(c^{\prime})$, in the statement of Corollary 1, hold. Now $(a^{\prime})$ implies that $$E_{\beta,\sigma^2} \big ( \text{length of } J(b,s) \big ) \le E_{\beta,\sigma^2} \big ( \text{length of } I \big )
\quad \text{for all } (\beta,\sigma^2),$$ so that $(a)$ holds. By hypothesis, one of the following two cases holds.
$\big ( \text{length of } J(b,s) \big ) < \big ( \text{length of } I \big )
\quad \text{for at least one } (\hat \beta,\hat \sigma^2)$. Now $$\big ( \text{length of } J(b,s) \big ) =
2 \sqrt{v_{11}} \hat \sigma \, s \left ( \frac{|\hat \tau|}{\hat \sigma \sqrt{v_{22}}} \right ),$$ which is a continuous function of $(\hat \beta,\hat \sigma^2)$. Hence $\big ( \text{length of } I \big ) - ( \text{length of } J(b,s) \big )$ is a continuous function of $(\hat \beta,\hat \sigma^2)$. Thus $$E_{\beta,\sigma^2} \big ( \text{length of } J(b,s) \big ) < E_{\beta,\sigma^2} \big ( \text{length of } I \big )
\quad \text{for at least one } (\beta,\sigma^2).$$ Thus there exists $(b,s) \in {\cal F}(d)$ such that $(a)$, $(b)$ and $(c)$, in the statement of Theorem 1, hold. We have established a contradiction.
There is strict inequality in $(b^{\prime})$ for at least one $(\beta,\sigma^2)$. Thus there exists $(b,s) \in {\cal F}(d)$ such that $(a)$, $(b)$ and $(c)$, in the statement of Theorem 1, hold. We have established a contradiction.
Corollary 1 follows from the fact that this argument holds for every given vector $c$ (such that $c$ and $a$ are linearly independent), every given number $t$ and every given positive number $d$.
(2002). [*Statistical Inference*]{}, 2nd ed.. Pacific Grove, CA: Duxbury.
(1969). Admissibility of the usual confidence sets for the mean of a univariate or bivariate normal population. [*Annals of Mathematical Statistics*]{}, [**40**]{}, 1042–1067.
(1982). Admissibility. On pp.25–29 of Vol. 1 of [*Encyclopedia of Statistical Sciences*]{}, editors-in-chief, Samuel Kotz, Norman L. Johnson ; associate editor, Campbell B. Read. New York: John Wiley.
(2009). Confidence intervals in regression utilizing prior information. [*Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference*]{}, [**139**]{}, 3419–3429.
(2008). Confidence intervals utilizing prior information in the Behrens-Fisher problem. [*Australian & New Zealand Journal of Statistics*]{} [**50**]{}, 309–328.
(1983). Minimax-Bayes compromise estimators. In [*1983 Business and Economic Statistics Proceedings of the American Statistical Association*]{}, Washington DC, pp.568–573.
(1987). Numerical specification of discrete least favourable prior distributions. SIAM [*Journal on Scientific and Statistical Computing*]{} [**8**]{}, 171–184.
(1988). Controlling risks under different loss functions: the compromise decision problem. [*Ann. Statist.*]{} [**16**]{}, 1594–1608.
\(2006) Theory of Preliminary Test and Stein-Type Estimation with Applications. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: |
The first part of this article is a brief survey of the properties of so-called almost interior points in ordered Banach spaces. Those vectors can be seen as a generalization of “functions which are strictly positive almost everywhere” on $L^p$-spaces and of “quasi-interior points” in Banach lattices.
In the second part we study the long–term behaviour of strongly positive operator semigroups on ordered Banach spaces; these are semigroups which, in a sense, map every non-zero positive vector to an almost interior point. Using the Jacobs–de Leeuw–Glicksberg decomposition together with the theory presented in the first part of the paper we deduce sufficiency criteria for such semigroups to converge (strongly or in operator norm) as time tends to infinity. This generalises known results for semigroups on Banach lattices as well as on normally ordered Banach spaces with unit.
address:
- 'Jochen Glück, Institut für Angewandte Analysis, Universität Ulm, 89069 Ulm, Germany'
- 'Martin R. Weber, Institut für Analysis, Technische Universität Dresden, 01062 Dresden, Germany'
author:
- Jochen Glück
- 'Martin R. Weber'
title: 'Almost Interior Points in Ordered Banach Spaces and the Long–Term Behaviour of Strongly Positive Operator Semigroups'
---
Introduction
============
By an *operator semigroup* – more precisely a *one-parameter operator semigroup* – we mean a family $(T_t)_{t \in J}$ of bounded linear operators on a Banach space $X$, which satisfies the assumption $T_0 = \operatorname{id}$ and $T_{t+s} =T_t T_s$ for all $t,s \in J$; here, $J$ is either the set ${\mathbb{N}}_0 := \{0,1,2,\dots\}$ (in this case the dynamical system is modelled in discrete time) or the set $[0,\infty)$ (then the dynamical system is modelled in continuous time). In the case of continuous time it is often sensible to impose some kind of continuity assumption on the mapping $t \mapsto T_t$ which leads, for instance, to the theory of so-called $C_0$-semigroups. Our two main results (Theorems \[thm:strong-convergence\] and \[thm:uniform-convergence\]) are true for both cases $J = {\mathbb{N}}_0$ and $J = [0,\infty)$; in the latter case, we do not need the assumption that the semigroup be strongly continuous in either of those theorems. However, strong continuity can sometimes be helpful to check an important assumption of Theorem \[thm:strong-convergence\], compare Corollary \[cor:perturbed-semigroup\]. It happens quite frequently that a Banach space $X$ carries an additional order structure which renders it a so-called *ordered Banach space* (for precise definitions see Section \[section:ordered-banach-spaces-and-strong-positivity\]).
A bounded linear operator $T$ on an ordered Banach space $X$ is called *positive* if $T$ leaves the cone of positive vectors in $X$ invariant, and an operator semigroup $(T_t)_{t\in J}$ on such a space is called *positive* if it respects the order structure on $X$, i.e. if for each $t$ the operator $T_t$ maps positive vectors to positive vectors.
It is a classical insight in analysis that positivity of an operator semigroup $(T_t)_{t \in J}$ has far reaching consequences for its long-time behaviour; more precisely, when combined with other appropriate assumptions positivity is often a powerful tool to prove that $T_t$ converges (strongly or with respect to the operator norm) as time $t$ tends to $\infty$.
Strong positivity assumptions and almost interior points
--------------------------------------------------------
One way to obtain convergence of a semigroup is to assume that it improves, in a sense, the positivity of vectors it is applied to. This idea occurs, for instance, in [@Krein1950 Theorem 6.3], [@Makarow2000] and [@Gerlach2013 Theorem 4.3]. Our paper uses the same approach, but in a very general setting.
To make this notion of “positivity improving semigroups” or “strongly positive semigroups” precise one needs to distinguish several grades of positivity within an ordered Banach space $X$. If $X$ is, for instance, an $L^p$-space for some $p \in [1,\infty)$ over a $\sigma$-finite measure space, we might consider a function $0 \le f \in L^p$ (i.e. $f(\omega)\geq 0$ for almost all $\omega$) to be “strongly positive” if $f(\omega) > 0$ for almost all $\omega$.
Similarly, in the space of continuous real-valued functions over a given compact Hausdorff space $Q$, a function $f \ge 0$ could be considered “strongly positive” if $f(\omega) > 0$ for each $\omega \in Q$ which, by the compactness of $Q$, is equivalent to the existence of a number $\varepsilon > 0$ such that $f(\omega) \ge \varepsilon$ for all $\omega \in Q$. In the theory of ordered Banach spaces properties of this kind can be generalised to the notion of an *almost interior point* of the positive cone, which is a vector $f$ in the positive cone such that $\langle \varphi, f\rangle > 0$ for every non-zero positive functional $\varphi$. This class of vectors is particularly well-studied on Banach lattices where it coincides with the class of *quasi-interior points*; we refer for instance to [@Schaefer1974 Section II.6] for a detailed study of quasi-interior points.
In ordered Banach spaces, almost interior points have also been studied on many occasions, but a survey paper or even a book chapter which discusses them in detail seems to be missing. In particular, a very useful theorem of Abdelaziz and Alekhno about the existence of positive vectors which are *not* almost interior points seems to be widely unknown. Thus, we use Section \[section:ordered-banach-spaces-and-strong-positivity\] to give a survey about almost interior points in ordered Banach spaces. Our treatment is far from being comprehensive, but we think it can serve as a useful source of reference for those who want to find the basic properties of almost interior points together with some non-trivial but essential theorems and a variety of references in one place. The rest of the paper, i.e. Sections \[section:jdlg\] to \[section:uniform-convergence-of-positive-semigroups\] are dedicated to convergence results of operator semigroups which are “strongly positive” or “positivity improving” in the sense that the orbit of each non-zero positive vector under such a semigroup contains an almost interior point. Our main results are Theorems \[thm:strong-convergence\] and \[thm:uniform-convergence\].
Other approaches to the long term behaviour of positive semigroups
------------------------------------------------------------------
It is important to distinguish our approach from others in the literature which do not rely on strong positivity of the semigroup but, instead, on structural assumptions on the positive cone and on stronger regularity assumptions on the semigroups. Many results of this type are proved in the setting of Banach lattices and, in this context, convergence can for instance be proved by mainly spectral theoretic methods (see e.g. [@Arendt1986 Chapter C-IV], [@Lotz1986 Theorem 4], [@Keicher2006 Corollary 3.8], [@Gerlach2013 Theorem 4.2] and [@Mischler2016]) or by employing the structure of certain classes of positive operators (see e.g. [@Greiner1982 Corollary 3.11], [@Gerlach2017; @GerlachConvPOS]).
Related results are also available on more general ordered Banach sopaces, as long as the cone satisfies appropriate geometric assumptions; see for instance, [@Abdelaziz1975 Proposition 5 and Theorem 6], [@Veitsblit1985; @Veitsblit1985a], [@Bartoszek1992 Corollary 2.3] and [@GlueckDISS Part II]
Besides, a somewhat special role is played by $L^1$-spaces and, more generally, by spaces whose norm is *additive* on the positive cone (meaning that ${\left\lVert u+v\right\rVert}_1 = {\left\lVert u\right\rVert}_1 + {\left\lVert v\right\rVert}_1$ for all $u,v
\ge 0$). Such cones are said to [*admit plastering*]{} or to be [*well-based*]{}. Details about these spaces can, for instance, be found in [@Krasnoselskii1960], [@Wulich2017 Chapter VII] and [@Jameson1970 Sections 3.8 and 3.9].
For positive operator semigroups on ordered Banach spaces with additive norm very special methods for the analysis of their long-term behaviour are available. These are, for instance, stochastic approaches on $L^1$-spaces (see e.g. [@Pichor2000 Theorems 1 and 2], [@Kulik2015 Theorems 1 and 2]) and, on more general spaces, results relying on so-called *lower bounds methods* (see e.g. [@Lasota1982 Theorem 2], [@Ding2003 Theorem 1.1], [@GerlachLB Theorem 1.1 and Corollary 3.6], [@GlueckWolffLB Section 4]) and results results relying on Dobrushin’s ergodicity coefficient (see e.g. [@ErkursunOezcan2018] and the references therein).
Although our approach in this paper does not yield special results on spaces with additive norms, we find it worthwhile pointing out that those spaces are closely related, by means of duality, to spaces with *order units* which are discussed in Section \[section:ordered-banach-spaces-and-strong-positivity\] as special cases of almost interior points.
Preliminaries {#preliminaries .unnumbered}
-------------
Throughout we use the following notations and conventions: we set ${\mathbb{N}}:= \{1,2,\dots\}$ and ${\mathbb{N}}_0 := {\mathbb{N}}\cup \{0\}$. If $X, Y$ are Banach spaces, then $X'$ denotes the *dual space* of $X$ and ${\mathcal{L}}(X;Y)$ denotes the space of bounded linear operators from $X$ to $Y$, which is equipped with the operator norm. We set ${\mathcal{L}}(X):={\mathcal{L}}(X;X)$. For $x \in X$ and $x' \in X'$, the operator $x' \otimes x \in {\mathcal{L}}(X)$ is defined by $(x' \otimes x) z = \langle x', z\rangle x$ for all $z \in X$. Unless otherwise noted, the underlying scalar field of all occurring Banach spaces is assumed to be real.
Let $(T_t)_{t\in J}$ be a semigroup of operators in ${\mathcal{L}}(X)$ and $T\in {\mathcal{L}}(X)$. We will say that $(T_t)_{t\in J}$
1. *strongly converges* to the operator $T$ if ${\left\lVert T_tx-Tx\right\rVert}\to 0$ for any $x\in X$,
2. *uniformly converges* to the operator $T$ if ${\left\lVert T_t -T\right\rVert}\to 0$,
3. *converges* to the operator $T$ with respect to the weak operator topology if $|\langle T_tx-Tx, x'\rangle | \to 0$ for any $x\in X,\; x'\in X'$,
in all cases, as $t$ tends to infinity.
Further notation is introduced when needed; in particular, Section \[section:ordered-banach-spaces-and-strong-positivity\] recalls the most important notions from the theory of ordered Banach spaces.
Ordered Banach spaces and almost interior points {#section:ordered-banach-spaces-and-strong-positivity}
================================================
Ordered Banach spaces and duality
---------------------------------
By an *ordered Banach space* we mean a pair $(X,X_+)$ where $X$ is a real Banach space (whose norm we suppress in the notation $(X,X_+)$) and $X_+$ is a non-empty closed subset of $X$ such that $\alpha X_+ + \beta X_+ \subseteq X_+$ for all scalars $\alpha,\beta \ge 0$ and such that $X_+ \cap (-X_+) = \{0\}$. The set $X_+$ is called the *positive cone* in $X$, and a vector $x \in X$ is called *positive* if it is an element of $X_+$. In order to keep the notation as simple as possible we often simply call $X$ an ordered Banach space and thereby suppress $X_+$ in the notation. Although many notions and results that we mention in the following remain valid in the more general setting of *ordered normed spaces* or in the setting of *ordered vector spaces*, we restrict ourselves to ordered Banach spaces here since our main results all fit into this setting.
Let $X$ be an ordered Banach space. As is well-known, the positive cone $X_+$ induces a partial order $\le$ on $X$ which is given by $x \le y$ if and only if $y-x \in X_+$. A vector $x \in X$ is called *positive* if $x \in X_+$ (equivalently, $x \ge 0$). Moreover, we use the notation $x < y$ for $x, y\in X$ to indicate that $x \le y$ but $x \not= y$. For $x,z \in X$ we call the set $[x,z] := \{y \in X: \; x \le y \le z\}$ the *order interval* between $x$ and $y$.
The cone $X_+$ in the ordered Banach space $X$ is called *total* or *spatial* if $X_+ - X_+$ is dense in $X$, and the cone is called *generating* if $X_+ - X_+ = X$. The cone $X_+$ is called *normal* if every ordered interval in $X$ is norm bounded.
As explained in the introduction, a bounded linear operator $T: X\to Y$ between two ordered Banach space $X$ and $Y$ is called *positive* if $TX_+ \subseteq Y_+$, and a semigroup $(T_t)_{t \in J}$ on an ordered Banach space $X$ (where $J = {\mathbb{N}}_0$ or $J = [0,\infty)$) is called *positive* if the operator $T_t$ is positive for every time $t \in J$. We also note that an operator semigroup $(T_t)_{t \in J}$ on a Banach space $X$ is called *bounded* if $\sup_{t \in J} {\left\lVert T_t\right\rVert} < \infty$.
Let $X'$ be the dual space of an ordered Banach space $X$. We set $$X'_+ := \{x' \in X': \; \langle x', x \rangle \ge 0 \text{ for all } x \in X_+\}.$$ The elements of $X'_+$ are called the *positive functionals* on $X$; we write $x' \ge 0$ to indicate that a functional $x'$ is positive. The set $X'_+$ is a closed convex subset of $X'$ which is invariant under multiplication by positive scalars. We have $X'_+ \cap (- X'_+) = \{0\}$ if and only if the cone $X_+$ in $X$ is total. In this case $X'_+$ renders the dual space $X'$ also an ordered Banach space, and $X'_+$ is called the *dual cone* of $X_+$.
For separation of two subsets in a normed space we use the following version of the Hahn-Banach theorem also known as the theorem of Eidelheit (see [@Ei36], [@Wulich2017 Theorem II.2.3]).
\[separation theorem\] Let $A$ and $B$ be non-empty convex subsets in a normed space $X$ over ${\mathbb{R}}$. Assume that $A$ is open and $A\cap B=\emptyset$. Then there exists a functional $x' \in X'$ and a real number $\gamma$ such that $\langle x', a \rangle < \gamma \le \langle x', b\rangle$ for all $a \in A$ and all $b \in B$.
We always have the following characterisation of positive elements in $X$, no matter whether $X_+$ is total or not:
\[prop:positive-vectors-by-duality\] Let $X$ be an ordered Banach space and let ${\textcolor{blue}{x_0}} \in X$. Then $x_0 \in X_+$ if and only if $\langle x',x_0\rangle \ge 0$ for all $x' \in X'_+$.
The implication “$\Rightarrow$” is obvious. For the proof of the converse implication “$\Leftarrow$” assume $x_0\notin X_+$. There exists an open convex neighborhood $A$ of $x_0$ such that $A\cap X_+=\emptyset$, and by applying the Eidelheit theorem to the sets $A$ and $B=X_+$ we find a functional $x' \in X'$ and a real number $\alpha$ such that $$\begin{aligned}
\langle x', x_0 \rangle < \alpha \leq \langle x',x \rangle \qquad \text{for all } x \in X_+.
\end{aligned}$$ Since $0 \in X_+$, we conclude that $\alpha \le 0$, so $\langle x',x_0\rangle < 0$. It only remains to show that $x'$ is positive. Let $x \in X_+$. For every $n \in {\mathbb{N}}$ we have $nx \in X_+$, so $n \langle x',x \rangle \ge \alpha$. Dividing by $n$ and letting $n \to \infty$, we can see that $\langle x',x\rangle \ge 0$, so $x'\ge 0$.
\[cor:positive-functional-which-does-not-vanish-on-given-vector\] Let $X$ be an ordered Banach space and let $x$ be a non-zero vector in $X$. Then there exists a positive functional $x' \in X'_+$ such that $\langle x', x \rangle \not= 0$.
If $\langle x',x\rangle = 0$ for all $x' \in X'_+$, then it follows from Proposition \[prop:positive-vectors-by-duality\] that $x \ge 0$ and $-x \ge 0$, so $x = 0$.
Almost interior points and related concepts
-------------------------------------------
The following definitions of several types of special points in ordered Banach spaces are essential for our further investigations.
For a vector $u\geq 0$ in an ordered Banach space $X$ the set $$\begin{aligned}
X_u = \{y \in X: \, \exists \lambda \in [0,\infty) \text{ such that } \pm y \le \lambda u\}
\end{aligned}$$ is a vector subspace which is called the *subspace* (in $X$) *of bounded elements with respect to $u$* or the *principal ideal generated by $u$*. It is clear that $X_u=\bigcup_{\lambda \in [0,\infty)} [-\lambda u,\lambda u]$.
\[def:versions-of-interior-points\] Let $X$ be an ordered Banach space.
1. A functional $x' \in X'$ is called *strictly positive* if $\langle x',x\rangle > 0$ for every $0 < x \in X$.
2. A vector $x \in X$ is called an *almost interior point[^1] of $X_+$* if $\langle x',x\rangle > 0$ for every non-zero positive functional $x' \in X'$.
3. A vector $x \in X$ is called an *order unit* if for each $y\in X$ there exists a real number $\varepsilon>0$ such that $x\geq \varepsilon y$.
4. A vector $x\in X$ is called a *quasi-interior point of $X_+$* if $x\geq 0$ and the set $ X_x$ is dense in $X$.
5. A vector $x \in X$ is called an *interior point* of $X_+$ if it is contained in the topological interior ${\rm int}(X_+)$ of $X_+$.
We note that almost interior points of $X_+$ and order units always belong to $X_+$, and that every strictly positive functional is positive. If for some $u$ the subspace $X_u$ coincides with $X$ then $u$ is an order unit, see Proposition \[prop:characterisation-of-order-units\]. A vector $x\in X$ is an almost interior point of $X_+$ if (and only if) $x'\in X'_+$ and $\langle x',x\rangle=0$ implies $x'=0$. Moreover, every quasi-interior point $x$ of $X_+$ is an almost interior point of $X_+$. Indeed, let $x \in X_+$ be a quasi-interior point and let $x' \in X'_+$ such that $\langle x',x\rangle = 0$. Then $\langle x',y\rangle = 0$ for all $y \in [0,x]$ and therefore, $\langle x',z\rangle = 0$ for all $z \in [-x,x]$, since each such $z$ can be written as $$\begin{aligned}
z = \frac{x+z}{2} - \frac{x-z}{2} \in [0,x] - [0,x].\end{aligned}$$ Hence, $x'$ vanishes on the dense subset $X_x$ and thus on the entire space $X$, so $x' = 0$.
One might ask whether, conversely, every almost interior point of $X_+$ is also a quasi-interior point of $X_+$. Schaefer remarks in [@Schaefer1960 p.136, assertion (K)] that this is not true, in general; he attributes this observation to Klee. Another counterexample can be found in [@Krasnoselskii1989 Section 3.6]. However, in both counterexamples the positive cone is only total, but not generating. Thus, the following questions seem still to be open:
\[openproblem:almost-vs-quasi-interior-points\] Let $(X,X_+)$ be an ordered Banach space with generating cone.
1. Is every almost interior point of $X_+$ also a quasi-interior point of $X_+$?
2. In case that the answer to question (a) is negative, does it become positive if we assume, in addition, that the positive cone is normal?
Corollary \[cor:almost-interior-points-and-interior-points\] below shows that the answer to question (a) above is affirmative in case that the positive cone $X_+$ has non-empty topological interior, i.e. ${\rm int}(X_+)\neq \emptyset$. Moreover, it is well-known (and not difficult to show by means of a quotient space argument) that the answer to question (a) is affirmative in case that $(X,X_+)$ is a Banach lattice (see e.g. [@Schaefer1974 Theorem II.6.3] for details).
The following characterisation of almost interior points also gives an interesting perspective on the relation between almost interior and quasi-interior points; it can be found in [@Bakhtin1968 Theorem 1.2]: a point $x\in X_+$ is almost interior if and only if $\overline{X_++\{{\mathbb{R}}x\}}=X$, i.e. if and only if the union of the “semi-bounded” intervals $\{y \in X: \, y \ge -\lambda x\}$ for $\lambda \in [0,\infty)$ is dense in $X$.
From an operator theoretic perspective, almost interior points seem to be much more accessible than quasi-interior points; since the former are also the more general concept, we focus on almost interior points throughout the article.
The set of all almost interior points supplemented by the zero vector is a cone (more precisely, a subcone of $X_+$) in $X$. If the set of almost interior points is not empty then it is dense in $X_+$. Indeed, if $u$ is an almost interior point and $x\in X_+$ then $x+\varepsilon u$ is an almost interior point for all $\varepsilon > 0$.
The existence of almost interior points plays a remarkable role in solving some questions on the extension of linear functionals to positive ones, see Theorem \[thm:extending-functionals-via-almost-interior-points\]. Let us recall the following sufficient criteria for the existence of quasi-interior (and, according to what was mentioned just before, also almost interior) points and strictly positive functionals; see [@Bakhtin1968], [@Krein1950] and [@Wulich2017 Kapitel II]. For the convenience of the reader we include the proofs, where in (b) we prove even the existence of a quasi-interior point - a little more than in the original paper [@Bakhtin1968].
\[existence-theorem\] Let $X$ be an ordered Banach space and assume that $X$ is separable.
1. There exists a strictly positive functional in $X'$.
2. If the positive cone $X_+$ is total, then there exists a quasi-interior point of $X_+$.
We may assume that $X \not= \{0\}$.
\(a) Let $B'$ denote the closed unit ball in $X'$ and endow $B'$ with the weak${}^*$-topology. The separability of $X$ implies that $B'$ is metrizable and separable. Hence, the subset $B' \cap X'_+$ of $B'$ is also separable with respect to the weak${}^*$-topology. Let $(x_n')_{n \in {\mathbb{N}}}$ be a weak${}^*$-dense sequence in $B' \cap X'_+$. Define $$\begin{aligned}
x' := \sum_{n \in {\mathbb{N}}} \frac{1}{2^n}x'_n.
\end{aligned}$$ Then $x'$ is a positive functional on $X$. We are going to show that $x'$ is strictly positive. To this end, let $x \in X_+$ be such that $\langle x',x\rangle = 0$. Since $x$ is positive, this implies that $\langle x_n', x\rangle = 0$ for all $n \in {\mathbb{N}}$, thus $\langle x',x\rangle = 0$ for all $x' \in B' \cap X'_+$ and hence, even $\langle x',x\rangle = 0$ for all $x' \in X'_+$. According to Corollary \[cor:positive-functional-which-does-not-vanish-on-given-vector\] this implies that $x = 0$, so $x'$ is indeed strictly positive.
(b)[^2] Since $X$ is separable as a metric space, so is its subset $X_+ \setminus \{0\}$. Hence, there exists a sequence $(x_n)_{n \in {\mathbb{N}}}, \, x_n>0$ which is dense in $X_+$. We define $$\begin{aligned}
x := \sum_{n \in {\mathbb{N}}} \frac{1}{2^n{\left\lVert x_n\right\rVert}}x_n.
\end{aligned}$$ Let $X_x$ be as defined at the beginning of Subsection 2.2. We first prove that the closure $\overline{X_x}$ of $X_x$ contains the positive cone $X_+$; to this end, let $y \in X_+$ and let $\varepsilon > 0$. Then there exists an index $k \in {\mathbb{N}}$ such that ${\left\lVert x_k - y\right\rVert} < \varepsilon$. On the other hand we have $$\begin{aligned}
0 \le x_k \le {\left\lVert x_k\right\rVert}2^k \sum_{n \in {\mathbb{N}}} \frac{x_n}{{\left\lVert x_n\right\rVert} 2^n} = {\left\lVert x_k\right\rVert}2^k\, x,
\end{aligned}$$ so $x_k \in \left[0,{\left\lVert x_k\right\rVert}2^kx\right] \subseteq \left[-{\left\lVert x_k\right\rVert}2^kx, {\left\lVert x_k\right\rVert}2^kx\right] \subseteq X_x$. This proves that $y \in \overline{X_x}$ and thus $X_+ \subseteq \overline{X_x}$. Since $X_x$ is readily seen to be a vector subspace of $X$, so is its closure. We conclude that $X_+ - X_+ \subseteq \overline{X_x}$ and hence, due to the totality of $X_+$ one has $X = \overline{X_+ - X_+} \subseteq \overline{X_x} \subseteq X$. Therefore, $x$ is indeed a quasi-interior point of $X_+$.
The following geometric characterisation of almost interior points is very useful. Let $C$ be a closed convex set in a real Banach space $X$. A vector $c \in C$ is called a *support point* of $C$ if there exists a non-zero functional $x' \in X'$ such that $\langle x',c \rangle \ge \langle x',x\rangle$ for all $x \in C$ (i.e. $x'$ attains its maximum on $C$ at the point $c$), see [@Bishop1963]. Using this terminology, we can characterise those positive vectors in an ordered Banach space which are *not* almost interior points of the positive cone:
\[prop:almost-interior-points-via-support-functionals\] Let $X$ be an ordered Banach space and let $x \in X_+$. The following assertions are equivalent:
1. $x$ is not an almost interior point of $X_+$.
2. $x$ is a support point of $X_+$.
“(i) $\Rightarrow$ (ii)” If $x$ is not an almost interior point of $X_+$, then we can find a non-zero positive functional $x' \in X'$ such that $\langle x',x\rangle = 0$. Hence the functional $-x'$ satisfies $$\begin{aligned}
\langle -x',y\rangle \le 0 = \langle -x',x\rangle
\end{aligned}$$ for all $y \in X_+$. So, $x$ is a support point of $X_+$.
“(ii) $\Rightarrow$ (i)” If $x$ is a support point of $X_+$, then there exists a non-zero functional $x' \in X'$ such that $\langle x',x\rangle \ge \langle x',y\rangle$ for all $y \in X_+$. Note that this implies $\langle x',x\rangle \ge 0$ since $0 \in X_+$. Moreover, for any $y \in X_+$ and $n\in {\mathbb{N}}$ we also have $ny \in X_+$ and thus $$\begin{aligned}
\frac{1}{n} \langle x',x\rangle \ge \langle x',y\rangle,
\end{aligned}$$ for all $n\in {\mathbb{N}}$. Hence, $0\geq\langle x',y \rangle$. As $x$ is itself an element of $X_+$, we conclude that $0 \le \langle x',x\rangle \le 0$. So $\langle x',x\rangle = 0$. Thus, $-x'$ is a positive non-zero functional which maps $x$ to $0$. So $x$ is not an almost interior point of $X_+$.
Let $C$ be a closed convex set in a Banach space $X$ and suppose that $C$ has non-empty interior ${\rm int}(C)$. Then it is not difficult to see that $C$ coincides with the closure of its interior. Thus, it is an easy consequence of the Hahn–Banach separation theorem that a vector $x \in C$ is a support point of $C$ if and only if it is contained in the topological boundary of $C$. Thus, we obtain the subsequent corollary as a consequence of Proposition \[prop:almost-interior-points-via-support-functionals\].
\[cor:almost-interior-points-and-interior-points\] Let $X$ be an ordered Banach space and assume that the positive cone $X_+$ has non-empty interior. Then the following assertions are equivalent for each vector $x \in X_+$:
1. $x$ is an almost interior point of $X_+$.
2. $x$ is a quasi-interior point of $X_+$.
3. $x$ is an interior point of $X_+$.
“(iii) $\Rightarrow$ (ii)” Let $y \in X$. Due to assertion (iii) the positive cone contains an open neighbourhood of $x$, so there exists a number $\delta > 0$ such that $x - \delta y$ and $x + \delta y$ are both contained in $X_+$. This shows that $y \le x/\delta$ and $y \ge - x/\delta$, so $y$ is contained in the order interval $[-\frac{1}{\delta}x, \frac{1}{\delta}x]$. Thus it is proved that $X_x = X$; in particular, $x$ is a quasi-interior point of $X$.
“(ii) $\Rightarrow$ (i)” As shown after Definition \[def:versions-of-interior-points\], every quasi-interior point of $X_+$ is also an almost interior point of $X_+$.
“(i) $\Rightarrow$ (iii)” If $x$ is not contained in ${\rm int}(X_+)$, then it is contained in the boundary of $X_+$. Hence, by what has been said right before the corollary, $x$ is a support point of $X_+$ and therefore, Proposition \[prop:almost-interior-points-via-support-functionals\] implies that $x$ is not an almost interior point of $X_+$.
The positive cone of an ordered Banach space can contain an almost interior point only if the cone is total:
\[prop:almost-interior-points-imply-total-cone\] Let $X$ be an ordered Banach space and assume that there exists an almost interior point $x$ of $X_+$. Then the positive cone $X_+$ is total.
Let $F$ denote the closure of $X_+ - X_+$ and assume that $F \not= X$. Since $F$ is a closed vector subspace of $X$ which is not equal to $X$, by means of the separation Theorem \[separation theorem\], there exists a non-zero functional $x' \in X'$ which vanishes on $F$; in particular, $x'$ vanishes on $X_+$. Hence, $x'$ is a non-zero positive functional, but $\langle x', x\rangle = 0$ for each $x \in X_+$. This shows that no vector $x \in X_+$ is an almost interior point of $X_+$.
A deep result of Bishop and Phelps [@Bishop1963 Theorem 1] says that, if $C$ is a closed convex set in a real Banach space $X$, then its support points are dense in its boundary. This is not difficult to show in case that $C$ has non-empty interior (in fact, in this case the set of support points of $C$ coincides with the boundary of $C$), but it is also true for sets with empty interior. Moreover, we point out that this theorem does not assume the set $C$ to be bounded (in contrast to a, presumably better known, result of the same authors which asserts that the so-called *support functionals* of $C$ are dense in the dual space $X'$ in case that $C$ is bounded [@Bishop1963 Corollary 4]). If we combine the result of Bishop and Phelps with Proposition \[prop:almost-interior-points-via-support-functionals\], we obtain the following result on the existence of almost interior points and strictly positive functionals. This will be important in the proof of our main result in Theorem \[thm:strong-convergence\].
\[thm:existence-of-non-almost-interior-points\] Let $X$ be an ordered Banach space of dimension at least $2$ and assume that $X_+ \not= \{0\}$. Then there exist a non-zero point $x \in X_+$ which is not an almost interior point of $X_+$ and a non-zero functional $x' \in X'_+$ which is not strictly positive.
By the result of Bishop and Phelps quoted right before this theorem, the set of support points of $X_+$ is dense in the boundary of $X_+$. As $\dim X \ge 2$ and as the cone $X_+$ is neither equal to $\{0\}$ nor to $X$, it follows that $X_+$ has a non-zero boundary point $y$. Hence, due to the density of the support points of $X_+$ in the boundary of $X_+$, there exists a support point $x$ of $X_+$ with ${\left\lVert x-y\right\rVert} \leq \frac{1}{2}{\left\lVert y\right\rVert}$, so $x \not= 0$. According to Proposition \[prop:almost-interior-points-via-support-functionals\], $x$ is not an almost interior point of $X_+$.
On the other hand, if every non-zero positive functional in $X'$ was strictly positive, then every non-zero vector in $X_+$ would be an almost interior point of $X_+$. Hence, there exists a non-zero positive functional in $X'$ which is not strictly positive.
The result in Theorem \[thm:existence-of-non-almost-interior-points\] has a somewhat curious history: in [@Schaefer1971 Remark (iii) on p.270] Schaefer discusses the relation of the assertion of Theorem \[thm:existence-of-non-almost-interior-points\] to a spectral theoretic question; the discussion implies that Schaefer considered the question whether the assertion of Theorem \[thm:existence-of-non-almost-interior-points\] is true or not to be open. A few years later, Abdelaziz used the argument presented in the proof of Theorem \[thm:existence-of-non-almost-interior-points\] above in the paper [@Abdelaziz1975]. Yet, he did not seem to be aware of the open problem of Schaefer, which was solved by his argument and moreover, the assertion of Theorem \[thm:existence-of-non-almost-interior-points\] is not easy to find in [@Abdelaziz1975] for two reasons: (i) the result is only contained implicitly in the proof of [@Abdelaziz1975 Theorem 4] and (ii) this theorem is only stated for the special case of ordered Banach spaces which have a normal and generating cone and which admit, in addition, the Riesz-decomposition property – however, the very part of the proof of [@Abdelaziz1975 Theorem 4] which we are referring to works perfectly fine for arbitrary ordered Banach spaces. The first explicit statement of Theorem \[thm:existence-of-non-almost-interior-points\] in the literature which we are aware of is much younger and due to Alekhno [@Alekhno2013 Theorem 6]. He referred to the mentioned open problem of Schaefer, but apparently he was not aware of Abdelaziz’ argument. Alekhno’s proof employs the so-called *drop theorem* which originally goes back to Danes [@Danes1972] (see also [@Brezis1976 Corollary 7] for a rather abstract approach to this result) and which can be seen as a non-linear version of the theorem of Bishop and Phelps that we used in the above proof.
Before we conclude this section with a few examples, we recall a further characterisation of interior points of a positive cone which is, in contrast to Corollary \[cor:almost-interior-points-and-interior-points\], applicable even without the assumption that the cone has non-empty interior. This characterisation is often helpful to identify interior elements of the cone (if any of them exist) in applications.
\[prop:characterisation-of-order-units\] Let $X$ be an ordered Banach space and let $u \in X$. The following assertions are equivalent:
1. The vector $u$ is an order unit of $X$.
2. The positive cone $X_+$ is generating and for every $x \in X_+$ there exists a real number $\varepsilon > 0$ such that $u \ge \varepsilon x$.
3. The vector $u$ is positive and the principal ideal $X_u$ is equal to $X$.
4. There exists a real number $\varepsilon > 0$ such that $u \ge x$ for all vectors $x \in X$ of norm ${\left\lVert x\right\rVert} \le \varepsilon$.
5. The vector $u$ is an interior point of $X_+$.
We show “(i) $\Rightarrow$ (ii) $\Rightarrow$ (iv) $\Rightarrow$ (v) $\Rightarrow$ (iv) $\Rightarrow$ (i)” and “(ii) $\Rightarrow$ (iii) $\Rightarrow$ (i)”.
“(i) $\Rightarrow$ (ii)” Let $u$ be an order unit. Then the second part of assertion (ii) is obviously true. In order to prove that $X_+$ is generating, let $x \in X$. Since $u$ is an order unit we have $\frac{1}{\varepsilon} u \ge x$ for some $\varepsilon > 0$. As $x = \frac{1}{\varepsilon} u - (\frac{1}{\varepsilon}u - x)$, the vector $x$ is the difference of two positive vectors.
“(ii) $\Rightarrow$ (iv)” We first show that there exists a real number $\hat \varepsilon > 0$ such that $u \ge x$ for all $x \in X_+$ of norm at most $\hat \varepsilon$. Assume the contrary. For each integer $n \in {\mathbb{N}}$ we can then find a vector $x_n \in X_+$ which has norm at most $\frac{1}{n^3}$ and satisfies $u \not\ge x_n$. Define $$\begin{aligned}
x := \sum_{n \in {\mathbb{N}}} nx_n,
\end{aligned}$$ where the series converges absolutely in $X$. Note that the vector $x$ is positive and that $\frac{1}{n}x$ dominates $x_n$ for each index $n$. Hence, $u \not\ge \frac{1}{n} x$ for any $n \in {\mathbb{N}}$. This contradicts (ii). Thus, there exists a real number $\hat \varepsilon > 0$ with the property claimed above.\
Now we use that a closed generating cone in an ordered Banach space is always *non-flatted*, i.e. we find a number $M > 0$ such that each vector $x \in X$ can be written as $x = x_1 - x_2$ for two positive vectors $x_1,x_2$ of norm at most $M{\left\lVert x\right\rVert}$ (see for instance [@Aliprantis2007 Theorem 2.37] or [@Batty1984 Proposition 1.1.2]). We set $\varepsilon := \frac{\hat \varepsilon}{M}$. Let $x \in X$ be a vector of norm ${\left\lVert x\right\rVert} \le \varepsilon$. We decompose $x$ as $x = x_1 - x_2$, where $x_1$ and $x_2$ are positive vectors whose norms satisfy ${\left\lVert x_1\right\rVert}, {\left\lVert x_2\right\rVert} \le M {\left\lVert x\right\rVert} \le M \varepsilon = \hat \varepsilon$. Then $x \le x_1 \le u$ by what we have shown above.
“(iv) $\Rightarrow$ (v)” Let $\varepsilon > 0$ be as in (iv) and let $y \in X$ be a vector which satisfies ${\left\lVert u-y\right\rVert} \le \varepsilon$. Then $u - y \le u$ by assertion (iv), so $y \ge 0$. This shows that the (closed) ball with center $u$ and radius $\varepsilon$ is contained in $X_+$, so $u$ is an interior point of $X_+$.
“(v) $\Rightarrow$ (iv)” If $u$ is an interior point of $X_+$, then there exists a number $\varepsilon > 0$ such that the closed ball with center $u$ and radius $\varepsilon$ is contained in $X_+$. Now, let $x \in X$ be a vector of norm at most $\varepsilon$. Then ${\left\lVert u - (u-x)\right\rVert} = {\left\lVert x\right\rVert} \le \varepsilon$ shows that $u-x$ lies in the closed ball centered at $u$ with radius $\varepsilon$, so $u-x$ is positive and thus, $x \le u$.
“(iv) $\Rightarrow$ (i)” This implication is obvious.
“(ii) $\Rightarrow$ (iii)” Clearly, (ii) implies that $u \ge 0$ and that $X_+ \subseteq X_u$. As the positive cone is generating, we conclude that even $X \subseteq X_u$.
“(iii) $\Rightarrow$ (i)” This implication is obvious.
Examples
--------
In this subsection we give a few examples to illustrate the concepts discussed above.
\[ex:Lp-spaces\] Let $p \in [1,\infty)$ and let $(\Omega,\mu)$ be a $\sigma$-finite measure space; we endow the Banach space $L^p(\Omega,\mu)$ with its canonical order. Then a vector $f \in L^p(\Omega,\mu)$ is an almost interior point of $L^p(\Omega,\mu)_+$ if and only if $f$ is a quasi-interior point of $L^p(\Omega,\mu)_+$ (as $L^p(\Omega,\mu)$ is a Banach lattice) and so, if and only if $f(\omega) > 0$ for almost all $\omega \in \Omega$. The positive cone in $L^p(\Omega,\mu)$ is generating, but it has empty interior unless $L^p(\Omega,\mu)$ is finite dimensional.
On the other hand, the positive cone in $L^\infty(\Omega,\mu)$ always has non-empty interior. A vector $f \in L^\infty(\Omega,\mu)$ is an interior point of the positive cone (equivalently: an almost or quasi-interior point, see Corollary \[cor:almost-interior-points-and-interior-points\]) if and only if $f(\omega) \ge \varepsilon$ for a number $\varepsilon > 0$ and for almost all $\omega \in \Omega$.
1. Let $T$ be an uncountable set and let $p \in [1,\infty)$. If we endow the space $\ell^p(T)$ with its pointwise order (which renders it a Banach lattice), then it is not difficult to see that the positive cone does not contain any almost interior points at all (see for instance [@Wulich2017 Section II.8])
2. A slightly more exotic example of a Banach lattice without almost interior points is the following: let $C_b({\mathbb{R}})$ denote the space of all bounded and continuous real-valued functions on ${\mathbb{R}}$ and endow the space $$\begin{aligned}
X := C_b({\mathbb{R}}) \cap L^2({\mathbb{R}})
\end{aligned}$$ with the pointwise order and the norm given by ${\left\lVert f\right\rVert} := {\left\lVert f\right\rVert}_\infty + {\left\lVert f\right\rVert}_2$ for all $f \in X$, where ${\left\lVert f\right\rVert}_\infty$ denotes the [sup]{}-norm in $C_b({\mathbb{R}})$. Then $X$ is a Banach lattice.
We show that the positive cone $X_+$ does not contain any almost interior point. Fix $f \in X_+$. Then there exists a sequence $(\omega_n)_{n \in {\mathbb{N}}}$ in ${\mathbb{R}}$ such that $\lvert\omega_n\rvert \to \infty$ and $f(\omega_n) \to 0$ as $n \to \infty$. Moreover, we can find a function $g \in X$ which takes the value $1$ at each point $\omega_n$.
Now, let ${\mathcal{U}}$ be a free ultra-filter on ${\mathbb{N}}$ and define a functional $\varphi \in X'$ by $\langle \varphi, h\rangle := \lim_{n \to {\mathcal{U}}} h(\omega_n)$ for each $h \in X$. Then $\varphi$ is a positive functional, and it is not zero since it maps $g$ to the number $1$. However, $\langle \varphi, f\rangle = 0$, which shows that $f$ is not an almost interior point of $X_+$.
\[ex:spaces-of-continuous-functions\] Let $Q$ be a locally compact Hausdorff space and let $C_0(Q)$ denote the space of all real-valued continuous functions on $Q$ that vanish at infinity (endowed with the supremum norm). A function $f \in C_0(Q)$ is an almost interior point (equivalently: a quasi-interior point) of the positive cone if and only if $f(\omega) > 0$ for all $\omega \in Q$.
The positive cone in $C_0(Q)$ is always generating (as $C_0(Q)$ is a Banach lattice); it has non-empty interior if and only if $Q$ is compact, and in this case, a function $f$ is an (almost) interior point of the positive cone if and only if $f(\omega) > 0$ for all $\omega \in Q$ if and only if $f(\omega) \ge \varepsilon$ for some $\varepsilon > 0$ and all $\omega \in Q$.
The following example requires some more detailed knowledge on $C^*$-algebras and is adressed to readers which are interested in this special field.
\[ex:c-star-algebras\] Let ${\mathcal{A}}$ be a non-zero $C^*$-algebra. Recall that ${\mathcal{A}}$ is called *unital* if it contains an element $\eins_{\mathcal{A}}$ which is neutral with repect to multiplication. We will tacitly use some facts of the spectral theory in (unital and non-unital) $C^*$-algebras and refer to the standard literature (see for instance [@Murphy1990]) for more information.
The self-adjoint part ${\mathcal{A}}_{{\operatorname{sa}}}:=\{a\in {\mathcal{A}}\colon a^*=a\}$ is a real Banach space, and it becomes an ordered Banach space if we endow it with its usual cone ${\mathcal{A}}_{{\operatorname{sa}}}^+ := \{a \in {\mathcal{A}}_{{\operatorname{sa}}}: \, \sigma(a) \subseteq [0,\infty)\}$, where $\sigma(a)$ denotes the *spectrum* of $a$. The ordered Banach space $({\mathcal{A}}_{{\operatorname{sa}}}, {\mathcal{A}}_{{\operatorname{sa}}}^+)$ is not lattice ordered unless ${\mathcal{A}}$ is commutative (this is a classical result of Sherman [@Sherman1951 Theorems 1 and 2], see [@GlueckCStar] for a new approach to this result based on the spectral theory of positive operators).
Now we describe the almost interior and interior points of ${\mathcal{A}}_{{\operatorname{sa}}}^+$:
1. *An element $a \in {\mathcal{A}}_{{\operatorname{sa}}}^+$ is an almost interior point of ${\mathcal{A}}_{{\operatorname{sa}}}^+$ if and only if it is a quasi-interior point of ${\mathcal{A}}_{{\operatorname{sa}}}^+$ if and only if the set $a{\mathcal{A}}a$ is dense in ${\mathcal{A}}$.*
The fact that $a$ is an almost interior point if and only if $a{\mathcal{A}}a$ is dense in ${\mathcal{A}}$ follows from the theory of hereditary $C^*$-algebras; see [@Murphy1990 Exercise 5(c) on p.108 and Remark 5.3.1] for details and see for instance [@Murphy1990 Section 3.2] for more information on hereditary $C^*$-algebras. It remains to show that every almost interior point is quasi-interior[^3], so let $a$ be an almost interior point of ${\mathcal{A}}_{{\operatorname{sa}}}^+$. For each $n \in {\mathbb{N}}$ define two continuous and bounded functions $g_n,f_n: [0,\infty) \to [0,\infty)$ by $$\begin{aligned}
g_n(t) = \min\{nt^{1/2}, t^{-1/2}\}
\quad \text{and} \quad f_n(t) = t^{1/2}g_n(t) = \min\{nt, 1\}
\end{aligned}$$ for $t \in [0,\infty)$. Note that all functions $f_n$ and $g_n$ vanish at $0$, so $f_n(a)$ and $g_n(a)$ are elements of ${\mathcal{A}}$, even if ${\mathcal{A}}$ is not unital. For $t> 0$ the values $f_n(t)$ increase to $1$ as $n \to
\infty$, so it follows from [@Pedersen1979 proof of Proposition 3.10.5] that $(u_n) := (f_n(a))$ is an approximate unit in ${\mathcal{A}}$. For each $x \in {\mathcal{A}}_{{\operatorname{sa}}}$ this implies that $u_n x u_n \to x$ as $n \to \infty$ (since $u_n x u_n - x = (u_n x -
x)u_n +x u_n - x$ and since $(u_n)$ is norm bounded). On the other hand, each element $u_n x u_n$ is contained in the principal ideal generated by $a$ within ${\mathcal{A}}_{{\operatorname{sa}}}$. Indeed, we have $$\begin{aligned}
u_n x u_n = a^{1/2} g_n(a) x g_n(a)
a^{1/2} \le {\left\lVert g_n(a) x g_n(a)\right\rVert} a \le {\left\lVert g_n\right\rVert}_\infty^2 {\left\lVert x\right\rVert} a \end{aligned}$$ and, by replacing $x$ with $-x$, also $u_n x u_n \ge - {\left\lVert g_n\right\rVert}_\infty^2
{\left\lVert x\right\rVert} a$. This proves that $a$ is a quasi-interior point of ${\mathcal{A}}_{{\operatorname{sa}}}^+$.
2. *An element $a \in {\mathcal{A}}_{{\operatorname{sa}}}^+$ is an interior point of ${\mathcal{A}}_{{\operatorname{sa}}}^+$ if and only if $0$ is not contained in the spectrum of $a$. In particular, ${\mathcal{A}}_{{\operatorname{sa}}}^+$ has interior points if and only if ${\mathcal{A}}$ is unital.*
Let $a \in {\mathcal{A}}_{{\operatorname{sa}}}^+$. If $\sigma(a)$ does not contain the number $0$, then ${\mathcal{A}}$ is unital and we can thus use the Neumann series to prove that $a$ is an interior point of ${\mathcal{A}}_{{\operatorname{sa}}}^+$.
Assume conversely that $a$ is an interior point of ${\mathcal{A}}_{{\operatorname{sa}}}^+$. We first prove that ${\mathcal{A}}$ is unital. As is well-known, the norm is additive on the positive cone of the dual space $({\mathcal{A}}_{{\operatorname{sa}}})'$, so it follows that there exists a functional $\eins$ in the bidual of ${\mathcal{A}}_{{\operatorname{sa}}}$ such that $\langle \eins, \tau \rangle = {\left\lVert \tau\right\rVert}$ for each $0 \le \tau \in
({\mathcal{A}}_{{\operatorname{sa}}})'$. Since the unit ball of a Banach space is always weakly${}^*$-dense in the unit ball of the bidual space, it follows that $a$ is also an interior point of the cone in $({\mathcal{A}}_{{\operatorname{sa}}})''$; hence, $a
\ge \delta \eins$ for some $\delta > 0$ by Proposition \[prop:characterisation-of-order-units\].
Consequently, $\langle \tau, a \rangle \ge \delta$ for each state $\tau$ on $A$, which shows that $0$ is not in the weak${}^*$ closure of all states on ${\mathcal{A}}$. As shown in [@Bratteli1979 p. 60], this implies that ${\mathcal{A}}$ is unital. According to Proposition \[prop:characterisation-of-order-units\], the element $a$ dominates a strictly positive multiple of $\eins_{\mathcal{A}}$, so $0$ is not in the spectrum of $a$.
\[ex:c-star-algebra-of-compact-operators\] Now consider the following special case of Example \[ex:c-star-algebras\]: let $H$ be a complex Hilbert space and denote by ${\mathcal{K}}(H)$ the $C^*$-algebra of all compact operators on $H$. Then ${\mathcal{K}}(H)$ is not unital, so the positive cone in ${\mathcal{K}}(H)_{{\operatorname{sa}}}^+$ has empty interior. Moreover, an operator $A \in {\mathcal{K}}(H)_{{\operatorname{sa}}}^+$ is an almost interior point of the positive cone if and only if $A$ has dense range and also if and only if $A$ is injective; for the first equivalence we refer to [@Murphy1990 Exercise 5(b) on p.108] and the second equivalence follows, for instance, from the spectral theorem for compact self-adjoint operators.
Let $k \in {\mathbb{N}}_0$ and let $\Omega \subseteq {\mathbb{R}}^d$ be a non-empty, bounded and open subset and let $C^k(\overline{\Omega})$ denote the space of all real-valued functions on the closure $\overline{\Omega}$ of $\Omega$ which are $k$-times differentiable on $\Omega$ and whose partial derivatives up to order $k$ can be continuously extended to the closure $\overline{\Omega}$. As usual, we endow the space $C^k(\overline{\Omega})$ with the norm given by ${\left\lVert f\right\rVert} := \sum_{\alpha} {\left\lVert f^{(\alpha)}\right\rVert}_{\infty}$, where the sum runs over all multi-indices $\alpha \in {\mathbb{N}}^d$ of length at most $k$ and where $f^{(\alpha)}$ denotes the $\alpha$-th derivative of $f$.
Moreover, we endow $C^k(\overline{\Omega})$ with the cone $C^k_+(\overline{\Omega})$ consisting of all functions $f$ which satisfy $f(\omega) \ge 0$ for all $\omega \in \overline{\Omega}$. Then $C^k(\overline{\Omega})$ is an ordered Banach space with a generating cone, but the cone is not normal unless $k = 0$. Moreover, the cone has non-empty interior and this interior consists of all functions $f$ which satisfy $f(\omega) > 0$ for all $\omega \in \overline{\Omega}$. According to Corollary \[cor:almost-interior-points-and-interior-points\] the almost interior points coincide with the interior points of $C^k_+(\overline{\Omega})$.
Note that the space $C^k(\overline{\Omega})$ is not a vector lattice unless $k = 0$.
\[ex:sobolev-spaces\] Let $k \in {\mathbb{N}}_0$, let $p \in [1,\infty)$ and let $W^{k,p}({\mathbb{R}}^d)$ be the Sobolev space on ${\mathbb{R}}^d$ consisting of real-valued functions whose distributional derivatives of order at most $k$ are all contained in $L^p({\mathbb{R}}^d)$ (endowed with the usual Sobolev norm). Moreover, endow this space with the cone $W^{k,p}_+({\mathbb{R}}^d)$ consisting of all functions $f$ which satisfy $f(\omega) \ge 0$ for almost all $\omega \in {\mathbb{R}}^d$. Then $W^{k,p}({\mathbb{R}}^d)$ is an ordered Banach space.
The space $W^{k,p}({\mathbb{R}}^d)$ has a normal cone if and only if $k = 0$; it is lattice ordered if and only if $k \in \{0,1\}$ (the implication “$\Rightarrow$” can be shown as in [@Arendt2009 Example 2.3(d)] for Sobolev spaces on bounded subsets of ${\mathbb{R}}^d$). The authors of the recent paper [@Ponce2018] showed that the positive cone in $W^{k,p}({\mathbb{R}}^d)$ is generating by establishing that the cone is even non-flatted.
We do not know whether the space $W^{k,p}({\mathbb{R}}^d)$ has almost interior or even quasi-interior points.
\[ex:extension-of-linear-functionals\] Almost interior points are related to the possibility of extending a positive functional defined on a subspace of an ordered Banach space to the entire space. We illustrate this by the following example which is taken from [@Bakhtin1968].
Endow $\ell^2 := \ell^2({\mathbb{N}})$ with the usual coordinate-wise order and consider the positive elements $$\begin{aligned}
x_0 & = (1, \tfrac{1}{2^2},\tfrac{1}{3},\tfrac{1}{4^2},\dots,\tfrac{1}{2n-1},\tfrac{1}{(2n)^2},\dots) \\
\text{and} \qquad y_0 & = (1, \tfrac{1}{2}, \tfrac{1}{3^2},\tfrac{1}{4},\dots, \tfrac{1}{(2n-1)^2},\tfrac{1}{2n},\dots)
\end{aligned}$$ in $\ell^2$. It is easy to see that $y_0-\lambda x_0\notin X_+$ for all $\lambda>0$. Let $Y$ denote the $2$-dimensional vector subspace of $\ell^2$ spanned by $x_0$ and $y_0$ and set $Y_+=X_+\cap Y$. Then $(Y,Y_+)$ is an ordered Banach space and the functional $y' \in Y'$ given by $$\begin{aligned}
\langle y', \alpha x_0 + \beta y_0 \rangle := \alpha
\end{aligned}$$ for all $\alpha,\beta \in {\mathbb{R}}$ is positive since $y_0-\lambda x_0\notin X_+$ for all $\lambda>0$.
The functional $y'$ cannot be extended to a positive linear functional $x' \in (\ell^2)'$ since such a functional $x'$ would have to map the quasi-interior (and thus almost interior) point $y_0$ of $\ell^2_+$ to $0$.
The simple observation underlying the above example can be upgraded to a theorem which characterises whether a linear functional can be extended from a subspace to a positive functional on the entire space. As Example \[ex:extension-of-linear-functionals\], this result also goes back to Bakhtin [@Bakhtin1968 Theorem 1.6] and [@BakhtinGont1968]; here we include a version of this result which is a bit more general, although it relies on a similar proof.
\[thm:extending-functionals-via-almost-interior-points\] Let $(X,X_+)$ be an ordered Banach space and let $Y \subseteq X$ be a vector subspace which contains at least one almost interior point $y_0$ of $X_+$. For every linear mapping $y': Y \to {\mathbb{R}}$ the following assertions are equivalent:
1. There exists a positive functional $x' \in X' \setminus \{0\}$ which extends $y'$.
2. The set $X_+ + \ker y'$ is not dense in $X$ and we have $\langle y',y_0\rangle > 0$.
3. The set $X_+ + \ker y'$ is not dense in $X$ and we have $\langle y',y\rangle > 0$ for every vector $y \in Y$ which is an almost interior point of $X_+$.
Before the proof a few remarks are in order. We stress that the vector subspace $Y$ is not assumed to be closed in $X$. Also note that we did not assume $y'$ to be bounded with respect to any norm, while the functional $x'$ in assertion (i) is bounded. Moreover, $y'$ is not a priori assumed to be positive in the sense that it maps $X_+ \cap Y$ into $[0,\infty)$; nevertheless, assertion (i) implies that $y$ has this property automatically if any of the equivalent assertions (i)–(iii) holds.
The implication “(i) $\Rightarrow$ (iii)” is straightforward to prove. Indeed, assume to the contrary that $X_+ + \ker y'$ is dense in $X$. Then for the positive extension $x'$ of $y'$ we have $\langle x',x\rangle\geq 0$ for all $x\in \overline{X_++\ker y'}=X$. Therefore, $x'=0$, which is impossible. For an arbitrary almost interior point $y\in Y$ one has $0<\langle x',y\rangle =\langle y,y\rangle$.
The implication “(iii) $\Rightarrow$ (ii)” is obvious. To prove “(ii) $\Rightarrow$ (i)” assume that (ii) is true. We first note that $Y = \ker y' \oplus {\mathbb{R}}y_0$ since $y'$ does not vanish at $y_0$.
Now, let $K$ denote the closure of $X_+ + \ker y'$. Then $K$ is a closed convex subset of $X$ different from $X$. Hence, by the Hahn–Banach theorem there exists a non-zero functional $\tilde x' \in X'$ and a real number $\alpha$ such that $\langle \tilde x',x\rangle \ge \alpha$ for all $x \in K$. Since $K$ is invariant under multiplication by positive scalars, we obtain $\langle \tilde x', x \rangle \ge \frac{\alpha}{n}$ for all $x \in K$ and all $n \in {\mathbb{N}}$, so actually $\langle \tilde x',x\rangle \ge 0$ for all $x \in K$.
As $K$ contains $X_+$ we conclude that $\tilde x'$ is positive. Moreover, $\tilde x'$ vanishes on $\ker y'$, for if $y \in \ker y'$ then $\pm y \in K$ and thus $\langle \tilde x',y\rangle = 0$.
We conclude the proof by setting $x':= \frac{\langle y',y_0\rangle}{\langle \tilde x',y_0\rangle} \tilde x'$. Observe that the denominator in this term is not zero since $y_0$ is an almost interior point of $X_+$. The functional $x' \in X'$ is positive, it vanishes on $\ker y'$ and it coincides with $y'$ at the point $y_0$. Since $Y = \ker y' \oplus {\mathbb{R}}y_0$ this implies that the restriction of $x'$ to $Y$ coincides with $y'$.
Positive operators and almost interior points
---------------------------------------------
In this subsection we briefly discuss how almost interior points behave under the action of certain positive operators. Those kind of results will be very useful in the proof of our main result in Section \[section:strong-convergence-of-positive-semigroups\].
\[prop:almost-interior-points-by-functional-condition\] Let $X,Y$ be ordered Banach spaces such that $X_+$ contains an almost interior point. For every positive operator $T \in {\mathcal{L}}(X;Y)$ the following assertions are equivalent:
1. There is $x \in X_+$ such that $Tx$ is an almost interior point of $Y_+$.
2. $\ker T' \cap Y'_+ = \{0\}$.
3. $T$ maps almost interior points of $X_+$ to almost interior points of $Y_+$.
“(iii) $\Rightarrow$ (i)” This implication is clear.\
“(i) $\Rightarrow$ (ii)” For each $y' \in \ker T' \cap Y'_+$ we have $\langle y',Tx\rangle = \langle T'y,x\rangle = 0$; since $Tx$ is an almost interior point of $Y_+$, it follows that $y' = 0$.\
“(ii) $\Rightarrow$ (iii)” Let $x\in X_+$ be an almost interior point of $X_+$ and let $y' \in Y'$ be a non-zero positive functional. According to (ii) the functional $T'y'$ is not zero, so $\langle y', Tx\rangle = \langle T'y',
x\rangle > 0$. This shows that $Tx$ is an almost interior point of $Y_+$.
Let $X$ be an ordered Banach space and let $P \in {\mathcal{L}}(X)$ be a positive projection. Denote the range space of $P$ by $PX$, i.e. $PX:=\{Px\colon x\in X\}$. Then the cone $(PX)_+ := X_+ \cap PX$ coincides with the set $P(X_+)$ and the space $(PX, (PX)_+)$ is an ordered Banach space in its own right (whose order coincides with the order inherited from $(X,X_+)$).
\[cor:almost-interior-points-by-dense-range\] Let $X, Y$ be ordered Banach spaces and let $x\in X$ be an almost interior point of $X_+$.
1. If $T \in {\mathcal{L}}(X,Y)$ is a positive operator with dense range, then $Tx$ is an almost interior point of $Y_+$.
2. If $P \in {\mathcal{L}}(X)$ is a positive projection, then $Px$ is an almost interior point of the positive cone $(PX)_+$ of the ordered Banach space $PX$.
\(a) Since $T$ has dense range, its dual operator $T'$ is injective, so the assertion follows from implication “(ii) $\Rightarrow$ (iii)” in Proposition \[prop:almost-interior-points-by-functional-condition\].\
(b) This is a special case of (a).
\[cor:almost-interior-points-for-semigroups\] Let $X$ be an ordered Banach space with a positive cone $X_+ \not= \{0\}$, let $J = {\mathbb{N}}_0$ or $J = [0,\infty)$ and let ${\mathcal{T}}= (T_t)_{t \in J}$ be a positive operator semigroup on $X$. Let $x$ be a non-zero positive vector in $X$ and let $t_0$ be a non-zero time in $J$ such that $T_{t_0}x$ is an almost interior point of $X_+$.
Then each $T_s$, $s \in J$ maps almost interior points to almost interior points. In particular, $T_tx$ is an almost interior point for every $t \ge t_0$
For $0 \le s \le t_0$ the operator $T_s$ maps $T_{t_0-s}x$ to the almost interior point $T_{t_0}x$; hence, $T_s$ maps almost interior points to almost interior points according to Proposition \[prop:almost-interior-points-by-functional-condition\]. The semigroup law implies that the same remains true for $s \ge t_0$, and it thus follows, again by the semigroup law, that $T_tx$ is an almost interior point for all $t \ge t_0$.
Almost interior points play also an essential role in the spectral theory of positive operators. During the last decades this theory has undergone a considerable development. It would probably provide sufficient material and research problems for an article on its own, so we do not discuss it here in detail. Instead, for getting a first impression we refer the reader to the classical puplications [@Krasnoselskii1989; @Stecenko1966; @ZabrKrasStec1967].
Operator Semigroups and the Jacobs–de Leeuw–Glicksberg decomposition {#section:jdlg}
====================================================================
In this section we recall a version of the famous Jacobs–de Leeuw–Glicksberg decomposition of operator semigroups. This result can be found in various different versions in the literature and is very helpful if one wants to prove convergence results for semigroups under compactness assumptions on its orbits. In Theorem \[thm:jdlg\] we show a version of the theorem which is particularly well-adapted for our application in Section \[section:strong-convergence-of-positive-semigroups\]. We use the following concept which is taken from [@Emelyanov2001 p.2636]:
Let $J = {\mathbb{N}}_0$ or $J = [0,\infty)$. An operator semigroup ${\mathcal{T}}= (T_t)_{t \in J}$ is called *strongly asymptotically compact* if for each $x
\in X$ and each sequence $(t_n)_{n \in {\mathbb{N}}} \subseteq J$ that converges to $\infty$, the sequence $(T_{t_n}x)_{n \in {\mathbb{N}}}$ in $X$ has a convergent subsequence.
If for a semigroup ${\mathcal{T}}= (T_t)_{t \in J}$ the orbit $\{T_t x:
\, t \in J\}$ is relatively compact in $X$ for each $x\in X$, then the semigroup is strongly asymptotically compact. Moreover, if $J = {\mathbb{N}}_0$ or if $J =
[0,\infty)$ and ${\mathcal{T}}$ is a $C_0$-semigroup, then it is easy to see that relative compactness of all orbits is equivalent to strong asymptotic compactness of the semigroup. However, if $J = [0,\infty)$ and the semigroup is not strongly continuous, then strong asymptotic compactness is a more general notion than relative compactness of the orbits (since strong asymptotic compactness allows the semigroup to behave quite wildly for small times). For characterizations of strong asymptotic compactness we refer to [@Glueck2019 Proposition 2.5]. In the same paper, it is also explained why this property is closely related to the long term behaviour of operator semigroups. In the present article, we need the following result which is our adapted version of the Jacobs–de Leeuw–Glicksberg Theorem and turns out to be a consequence of [@Glueck2019 Theorem 2.2].
\[thm:jdlg\] Let $J = {\mathbb{N}}_0$ or $J = [0,\infty)$ and let ${\mathcal{T}}= (T_t)_{t \in J}$ be a bounded and positive operator semigroup on an ordered Banach space $X$. Assume that ${\mathcal{T}}$ is strongly asymptotically compact.
Then there exist a positive projection $P \in {\mathcal{L}}(X)$ and a subgroup ${\mathcal{G}}$ of the invertible operators in ${\mathcal{L}}(P X)$ with the following properties:
1. The projection $P$ commutes with the operator $T_t$ for each $t \in J$, i.e. both the range and the kernel of $P$ are left invariant by the semigroup ${\mathcal{T}}$.
2. For every $x \in \ker P$ the vector $T_tx$ converges to $0$ with respect to the norm on $X$ as $t \to \infty$.
3. The group ${\mathcal{G}}$ is strongly compact and contains only positive operators.
4. The restriction of each operator $T_t$, $t \in J$, to $P X$ is contained in ${\mathcal{G}}$.
Define ${\mathcal{T}}_\infty := \bigcap_{s \in
J} \overline{\{T_t: \, s \le t \in J\}}$, where the closure is taken in the strong operator topology. According to [@Glueck2019 Proposition 2.5(i) and (vi)] the assumptions on our semigroup imply that ${\mathcal{T}}_\infty$ is non-empty and strongly compact. Hence we can apply [@Glueck2019 Theorem 2.2] which yields a projection $P \in
{\mathcal{T}}_\infty$ (denoted by $P_\infty$ in [@Glueck2019 Theorem 2.2]) and a group ${\mathcal{G}}$, given as the strong closure of $\{T_t|_{PX},: \, t
\in J\}$ in ${\mathcal{L}}(PX)$, with the desired properties. Note that the positivity of $P$ follows from $P \in {\mathcal{T}}_\infty$, and the positivity of the elements of ${\mathcal{G}}$ follows from the positivity of the operators $T_t|_{P X}$.
In the above theorem we employed the concept of the *semigroup at infinity* ${\mathcal{T}}_\infty$ which was recently studied in [@Glueck2019]. More classical approaches apply the Jacobs–de Leeuw–Glicksberg theory directly to the strong closure of $\{T_t:\, t
\in J\}$, which requires the stronger assumption that all orbits of the semigroup be relatively compact. For further information about the Jacob-de Leeuw-Glicksberg decomposition of operator semigroups we refer to [@Krengel1985 Section 2.4], [@Eisner2015 Chapter 16] and, within the context of $C_0$-semigroups, to [@Engel2000 Section V.2].
Strong Convergence of Positive Semigroups {#section:strong-convergence-of-positive-semigroups}
=========================================
Let us start right away with the main result of this section:
\[thm:strong-convergence\] Let $X$ be an ordered Banach space with positive cone $X_+ \not= \{0\}$, let $J = {\mathbb{N}}_0$ or $J = [0,\infty)$ and let ${\mathcal{T}}= (T_t)_{t \in J}$ be a positive operator semigroup on $X$. Suppose that the following two assumptions are satisfied:
1. For each vector $0 \not= x \in X_+$ there exists a time $t_x \in J$ such that $T_{t_x} x$ is an almost interior point of $X_+$.
2. The semigroup ${\mathcal{T}}$ is bounded and strongly asymptotically compact.
Then $T_t$ converges strongly as $t \to \infty$. If the limit operator $Q := \lim_{t \to \infty} T_t$ is not zero, then it is of the form $Q = y' \otimes y$. Here, $y$ is an almost interior point of $X_+$ and a fixed point of ${\mathcal{T}}$, and $y' \in X'$ is a strictly positive functional and a fixed point of the adjoint semigroup ${\mathcal{T}}' := (T_t')_{t\in J}$ (consisting of the dual operators $T_t'$).
Before we prove Theorem \[thm:strong-convergence\] let us point out that the theorem imposes no special conditions on the positive cone $X_+$ except for the assumption that it be non-zero. In particular, $X_+$ is not assumed to be normal nor is it assumed to be generating. However, we should note that the assumptions of the theorem clearly imply the existence of an almost interior point of $X_+$, so the assumptions can only be satisfied if the positive cone $X_+$ is at least total (see Proposition \[prop:almost-interior-points-imply-total-cone\]).
We mention here that under much stronger conditions (the cone $X_+$ is supposed to be normal and to have non-empty interior) the theorem was proved by Makarow and Weber in [@Makarow2000 Theorems 1 and 4], see also [@Wulich2017 p. 207].
Due to assumption (b) we can apply Theorem \[thm:jdlg\]; let $P$ and ${\mathcal{G}}$ be as in this theorem. If $P = 0$ there is nothing to show, so we may assume that $PX \not= \{0\}$. It follows from assumption (a) and Proposition \[prop:almost-interior-points-imply-total-cone\] that $X_+$ is total in $X$. Hence, $(PX)_+$ is total in $PX$ and in particular, $(PX)_+ \not= 0$.
We now show that
1. $PX_+ \setminus \{0\}$ consists of almost-interior points of $X_+$,
2. $PX$ is $1$-dimensional,
3. ${\mathcal{T}}$ acts as the identity on $PX$,
4. $T_t \to P$ strongly and
5. $P$ is of the claimed form.
To this end, let $0 \not= x \in (PX)_+$. By Corollary \[cor:almost-interior-points-by-dense-range\](b), $T_{t_x}x$ is an almost interior point not only of $X_+$ but also of $(PX)_+$. We note that $G T_{t_x}|_{PX} = P$ for some $G \in {\mathcal{G}}$ since $T_{t_x}$ is an element of ${\mathcal{G}}$, and the latter set is a subgroup of the invertible operators on $PX$. In particular, $G$ maps $T_{2t_x}x$ to the almost interior point $T_{t_x}x$ of $X_+$, so Proposition \[prop:almost-interior-points-by-functional-condition\] shows that $G$ maps almost interior points of $(PX)_+$ to almost interior points of $X_+$. Consequently, $x = GT_{t_x}x$ is an almost interior point of $X_+$, which shows (1).
By employing (1) and again Corollary \[cor:almost-interior-points-by-dense-range\](b) we see that every point in $PX_+ \setminus \{0\}$ is also an almost interior point of $(PX)_+$, so (2) follows from Theorem \[thm:existence-of-non-almost-interior-points\]. To show (3), let $0 < y \in PX$ be an element that spans $PX$. Then $P$ is of the form $P = y' \otimes y$ for some $y' \in X' \setminus \{0\}$, where $\langle y',y\rangle = 1$. As $y$ and $P$ are positive, so is $y'$. For each $G \in {\mathcal{G}}$ we have $Gy = \langle y',Gy\rangle y$, so the mapping $$\begin{aligned}
{\mathcal{G}}\ni G \mapsto \langle y', Gy\rangle \in (0,\infty)\end{aligned}$$ is a (strongly continuous) group homomorphism; as ${\mathcal{G}}$ is strongly compact, its image is a compact subgroup of the multiplicative group $(0,\infty)$, i.e. the image is equal to $\{1\}$. Hence, $Gy = y$ for all $G \in {\mathcal{G}}$, which shows (3).
As $T_t$ converges strongly to $0$ on $\ker P$ (see Theorem \[thm:jdlg\](b)), (4) follows from (3).
It remains to show (5), and we have already seen in (3) that $y$ is a fixed point of ${\mathcal{T}}$ and in (1) that $y$ is a quasi-interior point of $X_+$. To see that $y'$ is a fixed point of the dual operator semigroup ${\mathcal{T}}'$ observe that, for each $t \in J$ and each $x \in X$, $$\begin{aligned}
\langle T_t'y',x\rangle y = \langle y', T_tx\rangle y = PT_tx = T_tPx = Px
= \langle y', x\rangle y,\end{aligned}$$ where we have used $P=y' \otimes y$ for the second and the last equality. So $\langle T_t'y',x\rangle = \langle y',x\rangle$ and hence, $T_t'y' = y'$. Finally, to see that $y'$ is strictly positive, note that for $x \in X_+ \setminus \{0\}$ $$\begin{aligned}
\langle y', x\rangle = \langle T_{t_x}'y',x\rangle = \langle y', T_{t_x}x\rangle > 0
\end{aligned}$$ since $T_{t_x}x$ is an almost interior point of $X_+$. We have thus shown the theorem with $Q:= P$.
The following corollary illustrates that the assumption (a) of the theorem is sometimes satisfied as a consequence of a perturbation. The corollary assumes knowledge of the basic theory of $C_0$-semigroups (see e.g. [@Engel2000] for a comprehensive treatment of this theory). We use the notation $(e^{tA})_{t \in [0,\infty)}$ for a $C_0$-semigroup with generator $A$.
\[cor:perturbed-semigroup\] Let $X$ be an ordered Banach space and let $(e^{tA})_{t \in [0,\infty)}$ be a positive and contractive[^4] $C_0$-semigroup on $X$ whose generator $A: X \supseteq D(A) \to X$ has compact resolvent. Let $B \in {\mathcal{L}}(X)$ be a positive operator such that $Bx$ is an almost interior point of $X_+$ for each $0\neq x \in X_+$ and let $c \ge {\left\lVert B\right\rVert}$. Then $A+B-cI$ generates a positive $C_0$-semigroup $(e^{(t(A+B-cI)})_{t \in [0,\infty)}$ which converges strongly as $t \to \infty$.
Note that the assertion of the corollary is trivial if $c > {\left\lVert B\right\rVert}$, i.e. the interesting case is $c = {\left\lVert B\right\rVert}$.
First note that $A+B-cI$ and $A+B$ generate $C_0$-semigroups by standard perturbation theory (see e.g. [@Engel2000 Theorem III.1.3]). We have $$\begin{aligned}
e^{t(A+B-cI)} = e^{-ct}e^{t(A+B)}\;\text{ for all } t \ge 0.
\end{aligned}$$ It follows from the Dyson–Phillips series representation of perturbed $C_0$-semigroups (see e.g. [@Engel2000 Theorem III.1.10]) that $e^{t(A+B)}$ is positive for each $t \ge 0$ and hence, so is $e^{t(A+B-cI)}$.
We now check that both assumptions (a) and (b) of Theorem \[thm:strong-convergence\] are satisfied. To see (a), we again use the Dyson–Phillips series for $e^{t(A+B)}$ which shows that $$\begin{aligned}
e^{t(A+B)} \ge \int_0^t e^{(t-s)A}Be^{sA} {\;\mathrm{d}}s\end{aligned}$$ for all $t \in [0,\infty)$, where the integral is to be understood in the strong sense. Now, let $0\neq x \in X_+$. By strong continuity we can choose a time $t_x > 0$ such that $e^{t_xA}x \not= 0$. For each $0\neq x' \in X'_+$, the continuous mapping $$\begin{aligned}
[0,t_x] \ni s \mapsto \langle x', e^{(t_x-s)A}Be^{sA}x\rangle \in [0,\infty)
\end{aligned}$$ is not zero at $s = t_x$ since $Be^{t_xA}x$ is an almost interior point of $X_+$. Hence, $$\begin{aligned}
\langle x',e^{t_x(A+B)}x\rangle \ge \int_0^{t_x} \langle x',
e^{(t_x-s)A}Be^{sA}x\rangle {\;\mathrm{d}}s > 0,\end{aligned}$$ which shows that $e^{t_x(A+B)}x$ is an almost interior point of $X_+$. Consequently, so is $e^{t_x(A+B-cI)}x$.
To show that assumption (b) of Theorem \[thm:strong-convergence\] is satisfied, first note that $A+B-cI$ has compact resolvent as its domain coincides with the domain of $A$. Since $A$ is dissipative[^5] and since $c \ge {\left\lVert B\right\rVert}$, it follows that $A+B-cI$ is also dissipative, so the semigroup $(e^{t(A+B-cI)})_{t \in [0,\infty)}$ is contractive (this is a simple special case of the Lumer–Phillips theorem, see for instance [@Engel2000 Theorem II.3.15]). But boundedness of a $C_0$-semigroup together with compactness of the resolvent implies that all orbits of the semigroup are relatively compact (see for instance [@Engel2000 Corollary V.2.15(i)]).
Thus, Theorem \[thm:strong-convergence\] is applicable and implies the assertion.
Uniform Convergence of Positive Semigroups {#section:uniform-convergence-of-positive-semigroups}
==========================================
The main theorem of this section is Theorem \[thm:uniform-convergence\] below. It is a version of Theorem \[thm:strong-convergence\], but yields – due to stronger assumptions – convergence with respect to the operator norm.
Let $T \in {\mathcal{L}}(X)$ for a Banach space $X$. The operator $T$ is called *power bounded* if $\sup_{n \in {\mathbb{N}}_0} {\left\lVert T^n\right\rVert} < \infty$, and $T$ is called *quasi-compact* if there exists an integer $m \in {\mathbb{N}}$ and a compact linear operator $K$ on $X$ such that ${\left\lVert T^m - K\right\rVert} < 1$. In the following proposition we list a number of properties of quasi-compact operators which we are going to use in the sequel; these properties are certainly not new, but we collect them here in concise way for later reference. For a real or complex Banach space $X$ we let ${\mathcal{K}}(X) \subseteq {\mathcal{L}}(X)$ denote the closed ideal of all compact linear operators on $X$. The quotient Banach algebra ${\mathcal{L}}(X) / {\mathcal{K}}(X)$, endowed with the usual quotient norm ${\left\lVert [T]\right\rVert}:= \inf\{{\left\lVert T-K\right\rVert}\colon K\in {\mathcal{K}}(X)\}$ for the equivalence class $[T]=T+{\mathcal{K}}(X)$ of the operator $T$, is called the *Calkin algebra* over $X$. The latter is very useful in the following proposition.
\[prop:quasi-compact-operators\] Let $X$ be a Banach space and let $T \in {\mathcal{L}}(X)$.
1. Let $[T]$ denote the equivalence class of $T$ in the Calkin algebra ${\mathcal{L}}(X)/{\mathcal{K}}(X)$. The operator $T$ is quasi-compact if and only if $\,[T]^n \to 0$ with respect to the quotient norm on ${\mathcal{L}}(X)/{\mathcal{K}}(X)$ as $n \to \infty$.
2. Let $T$ be quasi-compact and suppose that $S \in {\mathcal{L}}(X)$ is power bounded and commutes with $T$. Then $TS$ is quasi-compact, too.
3. Let $k \in {\mathbb{N}}$. Then $T$ is quasi-compact if and only if $T^k$ is quasi-compact.
4. Let $J = {\mathbb{N}}_0$ or $J = [0,\infty)$ and let $(T_t)_{t \in J}$ be an operator semigroup on $X$. If $T_{t_0}$ is quasi-compact for one time $t_0 \in J$, then $T_t$ is quasi-compact for each time $t \in J \setminus \{0\}$.
\(a) By definition, $T$ is quasi-compact if and only if there exists $m \in {\mathbb{N}}_0$ such that ${\left\lVert [T]^m\right\rVert} ={\left\lVert [T^m]\right\rVert} < 1$, which is in turn equivalent to ${\left\lVert [T]^n\right\rVert} \to 0$ as $n \to \infty$.
\(b) As $S$ is power bounded, we have $M := \sup_{n \in {\mathbb{N}}_0} {\left\lVert S^n\right\rVert} < \infty$. Moreover, $$\begin{aligned}
{\left\lVert [TS]^n\right\rVert} = {\left\lVert [T^n][S^n]\right\rVert} \le {\left\lVert [T]^n\right\rVert} {\left\lVert [S]^n\right\rVert} \le {\left\lVert [T]^n\right\rVert} M \to 0 \quad \text{for } n \to \infty;
\end{aligned}$$ for the first equality we used that $S$ commutes with $T$. It follows from (a) that $TS$ is quasi-compact.
\(c) The implication “$\Leftarrow$” follows right from the definition of quasi-compactness, and the converse implication “$\Rightarrow$” follows from (a) since $[T^k]^n = [T]^{kn}$ for all $k,n \in {\mathbb{N}}$.
\(d) Let $t \in J \setminus \{0\}$ and choose $n \in {\mathbb{N}}$ such that $nt \ge t_0$. The operator $T_t^n = T_{nt} = T_{t_0}T_{nt - t_0}$ is quasi-compact according to (b), so it follows from (c) that $T_t$ is quasi-compact, too.
A second ingredient for the proof of Theorem \[thm:uniform-convergence\] is the next proposition about the orbits of quasi-compact operators. Again, this is far from being new (for instance, the proposition can easily be derived from the spectral representation of quasi-compact operators in [@Krengel1985 Theorem 2.8 on page 91]), but for the convenience of the reader, and also to be more self-contained, we include an elementary proof.
\[prop:consequences-of-quasi-compactness\] Let $X$ be a Banach space, let $T \in {\mathcal{L}}(X)$ and assume that $T$ is quasi-compact.
1. If $T$ is power-bounded, then the orbit $\{T^nx: \, n \in{\mathbb{N}}_0\}$ is relatively compact in $X$ for each $x \in X$.
2. If $T^n$ converges strongly to an operator $P \in {\mathcal{L}}(X)$ as $n \to \infty$, then $T^n$ even converges with respect to the operator norm to $P$ as $n \to \infty$.
For the proof of assertion (b) we need the following elementary observation: if a sequence of operators $(T_n)_{n \in {\mathbb{N}}_0} \subseteq {\mathcal{L}}(X)$ on a Banach space $X$ converges strongly to an operator $S \in {\mathcal{L}}(X)$ and if $C \subseteq X$ is a relatively compact set, then the convergence of $T_n$ to $S$ is uniform on $C$, meaning that $\sup_{x \in C} {\left\lVert T_nx - Sx\right\rVert} \to 0$ as $n \to \infty$.
Each of the assumptions (a) and (b) implies that $T$ is power-bounded. Set $M := \sup_{n \in {\mathbb{N}}_0} {\left\lVert T^n\right\rVert} < \infty$.
\(a) Fix a vector $x \in X$, say of norm $1$. In view of the norm-completeness of $X$ it suffices to show that the orbit $\{T^nx: \, n \in{\mathbb{N}}_0\}$ is totally bounded, so let $\varepsilon > 0$. As $T$ is quasi-compact, it follows from Proposition \[prop:quasi-compact-operators\](a) that there exists an integer $m \in {\mathbb{N}}$ and a compact operator $K \in {\mathcal{L}}(X)$ such that ${\left\lVert T^m - K\right\rVert} \le \varepsilon$. For each integer $n \ge m$ we have $$\begin{aligned}
T^nx = (T^m-K)T^{n-m}x + KT^{n-m}x,
\end{aligned}$$ where the first sumand $(T^m-K)T^{n-m}x$ has norm at most $\varepsilon M$, and the second sumand $KT^{n-m}x$ is contained in the relatively compact set $M K(\overline{B})$, where $\overline{B}$ denotes the closed unit ball in $X$. Since the set $M K(\overline{B})$ can be covered by finitely many balls of radius $\varepsilon$, it follows that the set $\{T^nx: \, n \ge m\}$, and hence also the entire orbit $\{T^nx: \, n \in {\mathbb{N}}\}$, can be covered by finitely many balls of radius $\varepsilon(M+1)$. This proves that the orbit is totally bounded and thus relatively compact.
\(b) It suffices to prove that $(T^n)_{n \in {\mathbb{N}}_0}$ is a Cauchy sequence with respect to the operator norm, so let $\varepsilon > 0$. As above, we can find an integer $m \in {\mathbb{N}}$ and a compact operator $K \in {\mathcal{L}}(X)$ such that ${\left\lVert T^m - K\right\rVert} \le \varepsilon$. Since the sequence $(T^n)_{n \in {\mathbb{N}}_0}$ converges strongly to $P$, it follows from the compactness of $K$ that $T^nK$ converges to $PK$ with respect to the operator norm as $n \to \infty$. In particular, $(T^nK)_{n \in {\mathbb{N}}_0}$ is a Cauchy sequence, so we can find $n_0 \in {\mathbb{N}}$ such that ${\left\lVert T^{n_1}K - T^{n_2}K\right\rVert} \le \varepsilon$ for all $n_1,n_2 \ge n_0$. For $n_1,n_2 \ge n_0 + m$ we conclude that $$\begin{aligned}
{\left\lVert T^{n_1}- T^{n_2}\right\rVert} \leq {\left\lVert (T^{n_1-m} - T^{n_2-m})(T^m-K)\right\rVert} + {\left\lVert (T^{n_1-m} - T^{n_2-m}) K\right\rVert} & \\
\le 2M\varepsilon & + \varepsilon,
\end{aligned}$$ which shows that $(T^n)_{n \in {\mathbb{N}}_0}$ is indeed a Cauchy sequence.
With a few more arguments one can show that in Proposition \[prop:consequences-of-quasi-compactness\](b) it is actually sufficient to assume that $T^n$ converges to $P$ with respect to the *weak* operator topology as $n \to \infty$. However, since this is not needed for the proof of our main result, we do not discuss this in detail.
Now we can prove the main result of this section.
\[thm:uniform-convergence\] Let $X$ be an ordered Banach space with positive cone $X_+ \not= \{0\}$, let $J = {\mathbb{N}}_0$ or $J = [0,\infty)$ and let ${\mathcal{T}}= (T_t)_{t \in J}$ be a positive operator semigroup on $X$. Suppose that the following two assumptions are satisfied:
1. For each vector $0 \not= x \in X_+$ there exists a time $t_x \in J$ such that $T_{t_x} x$ is an almost interior point of $X_+$.
2. The semigroup ${\mathcal{T}}$ is bounded and there exists a time $\tau \in J$ such that $T_\tau$ is quasi-compact.
Then $T_t$ converges with respect to the operator norm as $t \to \infty$. If the limit operator $Q := \lim_{t \to \infty} T_t$ is not zero, then it is of the form $Q = y' \otimes y$. Here, $y$ is an almost interior point of $X_+$ and a fixed point of ${\mathcal{T}}$, and $y' \in X'$ is a strictly positive functional and a fixed point of the dual semigroup ${\mathcal{T}}' := (T_t')_{t\in J}$.
A special case of this result was proved by Makarow and Weber in [@Makarow2000 Theorems 3 and 5].
According to Proposition \[prop:quasi-compact-operators\](d), the operator $T_t$ is quasi-compact for each $t \in J \setminus \{0\}$.
For the proof of the theorem we distinguish the two cases $J = {\mathbb{N}}_0$ and $J = [0,\infty)$. First let $J = {\mathbb{N}}_0$. Then $T_t = T_1^t$ for all $t \in J = {\mathbb{N}}_0$, and it follows from Proposition \[prop:consequences-of-quasi-compactness\](a) and Theorem \[thm:strong-convergence\] that $T_t$ converges strongly to an operator $Q$ with the claimed properties as $t \to \infty$. Proposition \[prop:consequences-of-quasi-compactness\](b) then implies that the convergence in fact takes place with respect to the operator norm.
Now we consider the case $J = [0,\infty)$ and we reduce it to the time-discrete case, so fix $t \in (0,\infty)$. It follows from Corollary \[cor:almost-interior-points-for-semigroups\] that the time-discrete operator semigroup $(T_{nt})_{n \in {\mathbb{N}}_0} = (T_t^n)_{n
\in {\mathbb{N}}_0}$ satisfies all assumptions of the current theorem, so we conclude that $T_t^n$ converges with respect to the operator norm to an operator $Q_t \in {\mathcal{L}}(X)$, and $Q_t$ is of the form claimed for the operator $Q$ in the theorem. We can now employ [@GerlachLB Theorem 2.1(b)] which shows that $Q := Q_t$ is actually independent of $t$ and that $T_t$ converges to $Q$ with respect to the operator norm as $t \to \infty$.
Acknowledgements {#acknowledgements .unnumbered}
----------------
The authors are very grateful to the referees for many valuable comments and remarks, which enabled us to improve the presentation of the article, to generalize several results and to bring several results and proofs into a more concise form.
The first named author is indebted to the members of the Institute of Analysis at Technische Universität Dresden for their kind invitation to a short stay during which some of the work on this article was done.
[10]{}
Nazar H. [Abdelaziz]{}. , 48:344–350, 1975.
Egor A. [Alekhno]{}. , 2013:11, 2013.
Charalambos D. Aliprantis and Rabee Tourky. , volume 84 of [*Graduate Studies in Mathematics*]{}. American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2007.
W. Arendt, A. Grabosch, G. Greiner, U. Groh, H. P. Lotz, U. Moustakas, R. Nagel, F. Neubrander, and U. Schlotterbeck. , volume 1184 of [*Lecture Notes in Mathematics*]{}. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1986.
Wolfgang Arendt and Robin Nittka. Equivalent complete norms and positivity. , 92(5):414–427, 2009.
I. A. Bakhtin. , 9:359–366, 1968.
I. A. Bakhtin and G. M. Gontcharov. , no.11, 12-18, 1968.
Wojciech Bartoszek. Riesz decomposition property implies asymptotic periodicity of positive and constrictive operators. , 116(1):101–111, 1992.
Charles J. K. Batty and Derek W. Robinson. Positive one-parameter semigroups on ordered [B]{}anach spaces. , 2(3-4):221–296, 1984.
E. [Bishop]{} and R.R. [Phelps]{}. . In [*Proc. Sympos. Pure Math. 7*]{}, pages 27–35, 1963.
Ola Bratteli and Derek W. Robinson. . . Springer-Verlag, New York-Heidelberg, 1979.
Haïm [Brézis]{} and Felix E. [Browder]{}. , 21:355–364, 1976.
Josef [Danes]{}. , 6:369–375, 1972.
Yiming Ding. The asymptotic behavior of [F]{}robenius-[P]{}erron operator with local lower-bound function. , 18(2):311–319, 2003.
M. Eidelheit. Zur Theorie der konvexen Mengen in linearen normierten Räumen, , vol. VI, 104-111. (1936).
Tanja Eisner, Bálint Farkas, Markus Haase, and Rainer Nagel. , volume 272 of [*Graduate Texts in Mathematics*]{}. Springer, Cham, 2015.
E. Yu. Emel’yanov, U. Kohler, F. R[ä]{}biger and M. P. H. Wolff. Stability and almost periodicity of asymptotically dominated semigroups of positive operators. , 129(9):2633–2642, 2001.
Klaus-Jochen Engel and Rainer Nagel. , volume 194 of [*Graduate Texts in Mathematics*]{}. Springer-Verlag, New York, 2000. With contributions by S. Brendle, M. Campiti, T. Hahn, G. Metafune, G. Nickel, D. Pallara, C. Perazzoli, A. Rhandi, S. Romanelli and R. Schnaubelt.
Nazife Erkur[ş]{}un [Ö]{}zcan and Farrukh Mukhamedov. Uniform ergodicity of Lotz–R[ä]{}biger nets of Markov operators on abstract state spaces. , 73(1):35, 2018.
M. Gerlach. On the peripheral point spectrum and the asymptotic behavior of irreducible semigroups of [H]{}arris operators. , 17(3):875–898, 2013.
Moritz Gerlach and Jochen Glück. Convergence of positive operator semigroups. , electronically published on June 17, 2019, DOI: 10.1090/tran/7836 (to appear in print).
Moritz Gerlach and Jochen Gl[ü]{}ck. . , 38(8):3012–3041, 2018.
Moritz Gerlach and Jochen Glück. On a convergence theorem for semigroups of positive integral operators. , 355(9):973–976, 2017.
Jochen Glück. A note on lattice ordered $C^*$-algebras and Perron–Frobenius theory. , 291(11–12):1727–1732, 2018.
Jochen Gl[ü]{}ck. . PhD thesis, Universität Ulm, 2016. DOI: 10.18725/OPARU-4238.
Glück J., Haase M.: Asymptotics of Operator Semigroups via the Semigroup at Infinity. In: Positivity and Noncommutative Analysis, Trends in Mathematics. Birkhäuser, Cham (2019)
Jochen Glück and Manfred P. H. Wolff. . , electronically published on 19 February, 2019, DOI: 10.1007/s11117-019-00655-7 (to appear in print).
G. Greiner. Spektrum und [A]{}symptotik stark stetiger [H]{}albgruppen positiver [O]{}peratoren. , pages 55–80, 1982.
G. Jameson. . Lecture Notes in Math. 141. Springer-Verlag, Berlin-Heidelberg-NewYork, 1970.
V. Keicher. On the peripheral spectrum of bounded positive semigroups on atomic [B]{}anach lattices. , 87(4):359–367, 2006.
M. A. Krasnosel’skii. Regular and completely regular cones. , v.135, no.2, 255–257, 1960.
M. A. Krasnosel’skii, Je. A. Lifshits and A. V. Sobolev. . Heldermann Verlag, Berlin. 1989. Transl. from Russian by Jürgen Appell.
M. G. Krein and M. A. Rutman. Linear operators leaving invariant a cone in a [B]{}anach space. , 1950(26):128, 1950.
Ulrich Krengel. , volume 6 of [*De Gruyter Studies in Mathematics*]{}. Walter de Gruyter & Co., Berlin, 1985. With a supplement by Antoine Brunel.
Alexei Kulik and Michael Scheutzow. A coupling approach to [D]{}oob’s theorem. , 26(1):83–92, 2015.
A. Lasota and James A. Yorke. Exact dynamical systems and the [F]{}robenius-[P]{}erron operator. , 273(1):375–384, 1982.
Heinrich P. Lotz. Positive linear operators on [$L^p$]{} and the [D]{}oeblin condition. In [*Aspects of positivity in functional analysis ([T]{}übingen, 1985)*]{}, volume 122 of [*North-Holland Math. Stud.*]{}, pages 137–156. North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1986.
B. M. Makarow and M. R. Weber. . , 2000. Available online from arxiv.org/abs/1901.04382v1.
S. Mischler and J. Scher. Spectral analysis of semigroups and growth-fragmentation equations. , 33(3):849–898, 2016.
Gerard J. Murphy. . Academic Press, Inc., Boston, MA, 1990.
Gert K. Pedersen. . Academic Press, Inc., London-New York, 1979. London Mathematical Society Monographs, Volume 14.
Katarzyna Pich[ó]{}r and Ryszard Rudnicki. Continuous [M]{}arkov semigroups and stability of transport equations. , 249(2):668–685, 2000.
Augusto C. Ponce and Daniel Spector. A decomposition by non-negative functions in the [S]{}obolev space $W^{k,1}$. To appear in [*Indiana Univ. Math. J.*]{}. Preprint available online from arxiv.org/abs/1807.05221v1.
Helmut Schaefer. Halbgeordnete lokalkonvexe [V]{}ektorräume. [III]{}. , 141:113–142, 1960.
Helmut H. Schaefer. . Springer-Verlag, New York-Berlin, 1971. Third printing corrected, Graduate Texts in Mathematics, Vol. 3.
Helmut H. Schaefer. . Springer-Verlag, New York-Heidelberg, 1974. Die Grundlehren der mathematischen Wissenschaften, Band 215.
S. Sherman. Order in operator algebras. , 73:227–232, 1951.
V.Ja. Stecenko. Criteria of irreducibility of linear operators. , v.21, no.5(131), 265–267, 1966.
A. I. Ve[ĭ]{}tsblit. A property of the boundary spectrum of nonnegative operators. , 37(1):114–116, 136, 1985.
A. I. Ve[ĭ]{}tsblit and Yu. I. Lyubich. The boundary spectrum of nonnegative operators. , 26(6):24–28, 188, 1985.
Boris Zacharowitsch Wulich. De Gruyter, Berlin/Boston. 2017. Transl. from Russian and edited by M. R. Weber.
P.P. Zabrejko, M.A. Krasnosel’skij, V.Ja. Stecenko. On estimates for the spectral radius of positive operators (Russian). , v.1, no.4, 461–470, 1967.
[^1]: Unfortunately, the terminology is by far not unanimous: in [@Krasnoselskii1989] such a point is called quasi-interior!
[^2]: For a slightly more general type of ordered topological vector spaces, assertion (b) can be found in [@Schaefer1971 paragraph V.7.6].
[^3]: We were kindly informed about this result, as well as its proof, by one of the referees.
[^4]: This means: ${\left\lVert e^{tA}\right\rVert}
\le 1$ for all $t \in [0,\infty)$.
[^5]: This means: ${\left\lVert (\lambda\operatorname{id}-A)x\right\rVert} \geq \lambda{\left\lVert x\right\rVert}$ for all $\lambda>0$ and $x\in D(A)$; see [@Engel2000 Proposition II.3.23] for a useful characterisation of dissipativity.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'We study the problem of causal discovery through targeted interventions. Starting from few observational measurements, we follow a Bayesian active learning approach to perform those experiments which, in expectation with respect to the current model, are maximally informative about the underlying causal structure. Unlike previous work, we consider the setting of continuous random variables with non-linear functional relationships, modelled with Gaussian process priors. To address the arising problem of choosing from an uncountable set of possible interventions, we propose to use Bayesian optimisation to efficiently maximise a Monte Carlo estimate of the expected information gain.'
author:
- |
Julius von Kügelgen\
MPI for Intelligent Systems\
University of Cambridge\
`[email protected]` Paul Rubenstein\
MPI for Intelligent Systems\
University of Cambridge\
`[email protected]` Bernhard Schölkopf\
MPI for Intelligent Systems\
Amazon\
`[email protected]` Adrian Weller\
University of Cambridge\
The Alan Turing Institute\
`[email protected]`
bibliography:
- 'references.bib'
title: 'Optimal experimental design via Bayesian optimization: active causal structure learning for Gaussian process networks'
---
Introduction and motivation
===========================
Many of the broad ranging capabilities of human cognition—as opposed to the rather narrow intelligence of current AI systems—can be attributed to the possession of an internal world model [@lake2017building]. These include (among others) the abilities to explain one’s decisions, to transfer previously acquired knowledge, to efficiently adapt to new situations, and to imagine alternative futures. Such internal models are thought to represent causal relationships between real-world entities and concepts. There is evidence that such causal models are acquired already early in childhood, largely through playful interaction with the environment, and that they are continuously updated throughout life in light of new observations. This approach to learning about the world through experimenting, observing evidence, and subsequently updating our hypotheses shows striking similarities to the scientific method—an idea that is termed the “child as a scientist” [@gopnik1996scientist].
We propose to draw inspiration from the human approach to building world models by simulating an intelligent agent which repeatedly interacts with its environment. Specifically, we consider an unsupervised setting where, in absence of a clear task or external reward, the agent’s aim is to learn a causal model of its environment through targeted experimentation. For example, we may think of a robot exploring its surroundings, a virtual agent in a simulated environment, or a scientist in a lab.
Problem setting
===============
Formally, we consider an environment characterised by a structural causal model (SCM) [@Pearl2009] over a set of $d$ real-valued observable variables $\mathbf{X}=\{X_1,...,X_d\}$. We assume that the corresponding causal graph $G^*$ is a directed acyclic graph (DAG), and that the functional relationships between each variable $X_i$ and its causal parents $\mathbf{Pa}_i^{G^*}$ can be captured by an additive noise model (ANM) [@hoyer2009nonlinear], $$\label{eq:ANM}
X_i = f_i(\mathbf{Pa}_i^{G^*})+\epsilon_i, \quad \quad (i=1,...,d)$$ where $\epsilon_i$ are mutually independent noise terms (i.e., we assume acyclicity, causal sufficiency, and additive noise). The induced observational distribution $P$ then factorises according to $G^*$.
At each timestep $t=1,...$ the agent can perform an experiment $a_t$ which consists of intervening on one of the variables and fixing its value, $do(X_j=x)$. Next, it observes the outcome of the experiment in form of a sample of the other variables from the corresponding interventional distribution, $P(\mathbf{X}_{-j}|do(X_j=x))$. Finally, the agent uses the observed outcome to update its beliefs in order to plan what experiment best to perform next. This process is repeated a finite number of times, or until the agent has reached sufficient confidence in its causal world model, see figure \[fig:ABCD\].
(agent) [Intrinsically Motivated Agent]{}; (environment) [Environment: Causal Model over $X_1,...,X_d$]{}; (agent.north) edge \[pil,bend left=45\] node\[text width=12em,text centered\] [chooses an experiment $a_t := do(X_{j}=x)$]{} (environment.north); (environment.south) edge \[pil,bend left=45\] node\[text width=12em,text centered\] [provides a sample\
$D_t\sim P\big(\mathbf{X}_{-j}|do(X_j=x)\big)$]{}(agent.south);
Active Bayesian causal discovery
================================
As opposed to causal discovery methods from observational data [@mooij2016distinguishing; @Spirtes1993], our setting differs in that we aim to actively learn causal structure and functional relationships in a sequential (online) fashion using targeted interventions. In order to make informed choices about which experiments to perform next it is valuable to keep track of uncertainties in current beliefs. Maintaining uncertainty estimates over both graph structures and their associated parameters may also help to deal with an additional trade-off: complex behaviour of a variable may be explained either by simple dependencies on many parent variables, or alternatively by complex dependence on only one or a few variables.
We thus adopt a Bayesian approach to causal discovery [@heckerman1995bayesian; @heckerman2006bayesian]. In the Bayesian framework, we start with a prior distribution $P(G)$ over possible causal graphs $G\in\mathcal{G}$ (where $\mathcal{G}$ is the set of all DAGs over $d$ variables). For each graph $G$, we also place a prior $P(\theta_G|G)$ over its associated parameters $\theta_G\in \Theta_G$. Our prior beliefs thus factorise as $P(G,\theta_G)=P(G)P(\theta_G|G)$. Finally, we define a likelihood function $P(\mathbf{D}|\theta_G,G)$ which describes how to generate data $\mathbf{D}$ from the causal model encoded by the pair $(G,\theta_G)$. The marginal likelihood, or evidence, of $G$ after observing data $\mathbf{D}$ is then given by $$\label{eq:marginal}
P(\mathbf{D}|G)=\int_{\Theta_G} P(\mathbf{D}|\theta_G,G)P(\theta_G|G)d\theta_G,$$ and the posterior distributions over graphs $G$ and parameters $\theta_G$ are respectively given by $$P(G|\mathbf{D})\propto P(G)P(\mathbf{D}|G), \quad\quad \text{and} \quad\quad
P(\theta_G|\mathbf{D},G)\propto P(\theta_G|G)P(\mathbf{D}|\theta_G,G)\label{eq:posteriors}.$$
This Bayesian approach lends itself naturally to our sequential setting, since the posteriors in equation at time $t$ act as new priors for the next observation at time $(t+1)$. One of the main challenges, however, is that the integral in equation is generally not available in closed form for arbitrary combinations of likelihood and prior. This fact will inform our model choice later on.
While score- or constraint-based causal discovery from observational data can usually not go beyond the Markov equivalence class, it is an advantage of the active learning approach that targeted experiments, in principle, allow to uniquely recover the causal graph.[^1] This is because each causal graph $G\in\mathcal{G}$ implies different interventional distributions through its truncated factorisation [@Pearl2009], $$\label{eq:ABCD-truncated-fac}
P(\mathbf{X}_{-j}|G,do(X_j=x))=\prod_{i\neq j}P(X_i|\mathbf{Pa}_i^G)\Big\rvert_{X_j=x}.$$ For the bivariate case of distinguishing $X\rightarrow Y$ and $Y\rightarrow X$ this is illustrated in Table \[tab:ABCD-interventions\].
[0.75]{}[@XXX@]{} Intervention & $G_1: X\rightarrow Y$ & $G_2: Y\rightarrow X$\
$p(y|do(x))$ & $p(y|x)$ & $p(y)$\
$p(x|do(y))$ & $p(x)$ & $p(x|y)$\
\[tab:ABCD-interventions\]
Next, we discuss how to use uncertainties over $(G,\theta_G)$ as captured by their posteriors to decide which experiment to perform next. To tackle this optimal design problem, we turn to *Bayesian experimental design* [@lindley1956measure; @chaloner1995bayesian]. Bayesian experimental design is a decision theoretic approach for selecting an experiment $\xi$ aiming to maximise a given utility function $U(y|\xi)$ which describes the usefulness of outcome $y$. Given the current model specified by a prior $P(\theta)$ and a likelihood $P(y|\theta,\xi)$, the optimal experiment $\xi^*$ is the one which maximises expected utility, $$\label{eq:maximum-utility}
\xi^* = \operatorname*{arg\,max}_{\xi}\int_{\mathcal{Y}} U(y|\xi) P(y|\xi) dy,$$ where $P(y|\xi)$ is the predictive posterior for outcome $y$ under experiment $\xi$. When the goal is to learn the parameters $\theta$, a principled utility function rooted in information theory [@shannon1948mathematical] is the information gain in $\theta$ from performing $\xi$ and observing $y$, $$\label{eq:infogain}
U(y|\xi)=\int_\Theta P(\theta|y,\xi)\log P(\theta|y,\xi)d\theta - \int_\Theta P(\theta)\log P(\theta)d\theta.$$ Equivalently, equation can also be interpreted as the mutual information between $\theta$ and the experiment and its outcome $(\xi,y)$, or as the expected reduction in entropy in $\theta$ from performing $\xi$ and observing $y$. We will drop the second term in the following as it does not depend on $y$ or $\xi$ and is therefore irrelevant for the arg max in equation .
Proposed approach
=================
In our case, the experiment $\xi$ corresponds to an intervention of the form $do(X_j=x)$, the outcome $y$ corresponds to an observation of the remaining variables $\mathbf{X}_{-j}$, and the parameters $\theta$ correspond to the pair $(G,\theta_G)$ as both the causal graph and its functional relations are unknown. Since we are interested in learning the the causal structure, we choose to use information gain in $G$ as utility: $$\label{eq:utility-ours}
U(\mathbf{X}_{-j}|do(X_j=x))=\sum_{G\in\mathcal{G}} P(G|\mathbf{X}_{-j},do(X_j=x)) \log P(G|\mathbf{X}_{-j},do(X_j=x)).$$ The optimal experiment for our setting can then be written as (see Appendix \[sec:appendix-derivation\] for a derivation): $$\label{eq:objective}
(j^*,x^*) = \operatorname*{arg\,max}_{j\in\{1,...,d\}, x\in \mathcal{X}_j} \sum_{G\in\mathcal{G}}P(G) \int P(\mathbf{x}_{-j}|G,do(X_j=x)) \log P(G|\mathbf{x}_{-j},do(X_j=x)) d\mathbf{x}_{-j}$$ This reveals two major challenges for choosing good interventions: first, we need to be able to compute (or efficiently approximate) the integral in equation , which involves the predictive posterior for outcomes in $G$ and the graph posterior after observing evidence; and second, we need to find the arg max over $(j,x)$ where $x$ is chosen from an uncountable set.[^2]
We propose to tackle the first of these computational challenges while allowing for flexible non-linear relationships by using *Gaussian processes* (GPs) [@williams2006gaussian] as priors over the functions $f_i$ in , see Figure \[fig:ABCD-prototype\] for an illustration. GPs are stochastic processes which can be understood as an infinite-dimensional extension of the multivariate Gaussian distribution. They are a popular approach for nonparametric regression due to their nice analytical properties: assuming Gaussian observation noise in , $\epsilon_i\sim\mathcal{N}(0,\sigma_i^2)$, the marginal likelihood and posteriors are available in closed form (see Appendix \[sec:appendix-GPs\] for details). Because of this, we can approximate the objective using a Monte Carlo estimator, $$\label{eq:ABCD-Monte-Carlo-appox}
(j^*,x^*)\approx\operatorname*{arg\,max}_{j\in\{1,...,d\}, x\in \mathcal{X}_j} \sum_{G\in\mathcal{G}}P(G) \frac{1}{M} \sum_{m=1}^M \log P(G|\mathbf{x}_{-j}^{(m)},do(X_j=x)),$$ by drawing $M$ samples $\mathbf{x}_{-j}^{(m)}$ from the interventional distribution $P(\mathbf{X}_{-j}|G,do(X_j=x))$ implied by $G$ (see Eq. \[eq:ABCD-truncated-fac\]) for each graph $G$. Given a sample $\mathbf{x}_{-j}^{(m)}$, the log posterior over graphs in can then be computed according to using the prior over graphs and the GP marginal likelihood (see Eq. \[eq:GP\_marginal\_likelihood\] in Appendix \[sec:appendix-GPs\]), which decomposes over the graph analogously to . Since we can efficiently sample from a Gaussian distribution, and since all necessary ingredients can be computed in closed form when using GPs, this overcomes the first computational challenge.[^3]
To address the second challenge, we require a smart and principled approach to compute the arg max over possible interventions in . For this we propose to use *Bayesian optimisation* (BO) [@mockus1975bayesian; @mockus2012bayesian]. BO is a derivative-free technique for global optimisation which aims to solve $$\label{eq:Bayesian_optimisation}
\operatorname*{arg\,max}_{\mathbf{x}\in\mathcal{X}}f(\mathbf{x})$$ where $f$ is typically a black-box function which is very costly to evaluate. The general idea is to trade off computation due to evaluating $f$ many times with computation invested in selecting more promising candidate solutions $\mathbf{x}$. One standard approach to BO is to model uncertainty in $f$ with a GP, and to use an acquisition function $a(\mathbf{x})$ to select new candidate solutions. A common choice for $a(\mathbf{x})$ is the upper confidence bound of the GP posterior, $$\label{eq:GP-UCB}
\mathbf{x}_{t+1}=\operatorname*{arg\,max}_{\mathbf{x}} a_t(\mathbf{x}), \quad a_t(\mathbf{x})=\mu_t(\mathbf{x})+\beta \sigma_t(\mathbf{x})$$ where $\mu_t(\mathbf{x})$ and $\sigma_t(\mathbf{x})$ correspond to the mean and standard deviation of the GP predictive distribution (see Eq. \[eq:GP\_predictive\] in Appendix \[sec:appendix-GPs\]) after evaluating $f$ at $\mathbf{x}_1,...,\mathbf{x}_t$, and can be interpreted as exploitation and exploration terms, respectively. This approach is known as the GP-UCB algorithm [@srinivas2009gaussian].
In our setting, we propose to run the GP-UCB algorithm $d$ times (for each possible intervention target from $\{X_1, ..., X_d\}$) to deal with the discrete optimisation variable $j$, using the Monte Carlo–approximated expected information gain in as objective function.
Related work
============
The earliest work we are aware of on causal discovery from both observational and interventional data in a Bayesian framework is that of @cooper1999causal using perfect interventions. @tian2001causal, on the other hand, consider data obtained through a series of mechanism changes which affect the conditional distributions but not the parent sets. As opposed to the previous two works, @eaton2007exact assume that intervention targets are not known a priori, and propose to learn both targets and causal graph using the dynamic programming approach of @koivisto2004exact.
Most closely related to our proposed approach are the works of @murphy2001active and @tong2001active who, rather than learning from passively obtained interventional data, consider the task of actively choosing interventions using an information theoretic approach. All of these exclusively consider discrete variables though, assuming a conjugate Dirichlet-multinomial model for computational convenience. Only recently has this approach been extended to continuous variables [@cho2016reconstructing; @ness2017bayesian; @agrawal2019abcd], though limited to linear Gaussian models, and considering only a finite number (rather than a continuous range) of possible intervention values.
A different line of work approaches the experimental design problem from a theoretical perspective on the graph-level [@eberhardt2008almost; @eberhardt2006n; @hauser2014two; @he2008active; @ghassami2017budgeted]. While providing useful insights, these intervention strategies are usually designed for the distribution level (i.e., assuming infinite data), and remain very general in that they do not assume a specific model. Instead, we consider the finite-data setting where each experiment only provides one (or a few) samples.
To the best of our knowledge, ours is the first work to address the Bayesian experimental design problem for continuous variables, allowing for flexible non-linear relationships through the use of GP networks [@friedman2000gaussian]. Unlike other active learning schemes for GP networks [@rubenstein2017probabilistic], we aim to learn both functional relationships and network structure simultaneously. This requires taking into account both types of uncertainty (i.e., over functions and graphs) when selecting new interventions.
Discussion and open problems {#ch:5-ABCD-discussion}
============================
Finally, we discuss some issues and open problems of the proposed approach which we have not covered so far, and suggest ideas and possible solutions for addressing these in future work.
#### Dirichlet process mixtures of Gaussians as flexible input distributions
In absence of parents as inputs, GP networks in their original form [@friedman2000gaussian] use simple Gaussians as marginal distributions for root nodes. However, this is not in the spirit of allowing for flexible relationships as the complexity of a system depends on both the input and the mechanism [@janzing2012information]: a complex joint distribution may arise from either a simple marginal and a complex mechanism, or from a complex marginal and a simple mechanism. To allow for the latter to be captured by our model, we thus suggest to model the marginals of root nodes using Dirichlet mixtures of Gaussians as a flexible Bayesian non-parametric density estimator [@ferguson1973bayesian]. While this poses a computational challenge, we suggest to use an efficient variational inference technique for Dirichlet process mixture models proposed by @blei2006variational.
#### Adaptive updating of hyperparameters
Another issue is how to choose the GP hyperparameters (i.e., lengthscales, signal variances, and noise variances) for each variable and each graph. The standard approach for this is to take a type-2 maximum likelihood approach which selects hyperparameters by maximising the marginal likelihood [@williams2006gaussian]. While this approach works very well in an offline learning setting, it may be less suitable for our online setting. This is because updating hyperparameters at each step is both a computational burden and changes the model which makes iterative model comparison difficult. An alternative is to take a fully Bayesian approach by placing a hyperprior over hyperparameters and to update their posterior at each step. This has the disadvantage that the marginal likelihood is no longer available in closed form, and performing approximate inference thus becomes necessary. When a sufficiently large observational sample is available initially, these problems can be avoided by using it to fit the hyperparameters and keeping them fixed thereafter.
#### On the choice of graph prior
An advantage of the Bayesian approach is that available domain knowledge may be incorporated into the prior. For example, when using our framework for experimental design in a scientific setting, we may have access to a reference graph which captures current expert beliefs. In this case, setting the prior probability of each graph to be inversely proportional to its structural distance to the reference graph seems to be a good choice. Alternatively, the Markov equivalence class may be known from observational data, drastically reducing the number of graphs which need to be considered. Yet another approach is to enforce sparsity via the prior, e.g., by setting the prior probability to be inversely proportional to the number of edges, or even fixing a maximum number of edges per graph or node and setting the prior equal to zero for any graph exceeding this number. All the above may help to reduce the computational burden by restricting the set of DAGs under consideration. If no background knowledge is available, a uniform prior can be used.
#### On the combinatorial number of DAGs
An important aspect of the proposed framework is the computational burden introduced by the super-exponential number of DAGs [@robinson1973counting]. While this can be addressed through sampling approaches such as MCMC in the space of graphs or topological orderings [@friedman2003being], we consider this issue as orthogonal to the challenges we aim to address here, i.e., dealing with continuous variables with non-linear relationships and uncountable intervention sets. To study these problems in isolation we suggest to focus on settings with only a few observed variables (i.e., small $d$) where it is still possible to simply enumerate all DAGs. To scale our approach up to high-dimensional problems, however, it will eventually be necessary to combine it with efficient approximate inference procedures, such as the minimal I-map MCMC of @agrawal2018minimal.
#### Relation to and combination with other causal discovery techniques
The nonlinear ANM we assume in also, in principle, allows to identify causal structure from purely observational data as shown by @hoyer2009nonlinear. However, their approach relies on testing the regression residuals for independence, and therefore requires a sizeable amount of data to achieve statistical significance. Our Bayesian score-based approach, on the other hand, is aimed at drawing maximal insights from very limited amounts of data by actively choosing where to intervene next. In such a small data-regime, the well-known poor scaling of GPs (cubic in the number of observations) is less problematic—the computational bottleneck in our setting is instead given by the inner loop of Monte Carlo sampling combined with BO (as well as the number of DAGs as mentioned before). To improve tractability, a combination of our method with constraint-based approaches [@Spirtes1993], and regression with subsequent independence-testing (RESIT) [@peters2014causal] seems to be an interesting direction for future work.
#### Applicability and suggested use cases
Due to the aforementioned computational challenges, our proposed approach in its current form may be particularly useful for situations (i) involving only small number of observed variables, and (ii) in which experiments are expensive compared to computation time. This suggests decision support for experimental scientists as one suitable use case. There, the involved variables are often continuous and exhibit non-linear (e.g., saturating) behaviour, experiments are usually very expensive to perform and results may take a long time to arrive, and the heavy use of computational resources to increase scientific insights gained from wisely targeted experiments is therefore often justified.
Derivation of expected information gain {#sec:appendix-derivation}
=======================================
The optimal intervention according to is given by $$\label{eq:optimal-intervention}
(j^*,x^*) = \operatorname*{arg\,max}_{j\in\{1,...,d\}, x\in \mathcal{X}_j} \int U(\mathbf{x}_{-j}|do(X_j=x)) P(\mathbf{x}_{-j}|do(X_j=x))d\mathbf{x}_{-j}$$ By substituting into we can rewrite this integral as $$\begin{aligned}
& \int \sum_{G\in\mathcal{G}} P(G|\mathbf{x}_{-j},do(X_j=x)) \log P(G|\mathbf{x}_{-j},do(X_j=x)) P(\mathbf{x}_{-j}|do(X_j=x))d\mathbf{x}_{-j}\\
= & \sum_{G\in\mathcal{G}}\int P(G,\mathbf{x}_{-j}|do(X_j=x)) \log P(G|\mathbf{x}_{-j},do(X_j=x)) d\mathbf{x}_{-j}\\
= & \sum_{G\in\mathcal{G}}P(G) \int P(\mathbf{x}_{-j}|G,do(X_j=x)) \log P(G|\mathbf{x}_{-j},do(X_j=x)) d\mathbf{x}_{-j} \label{eq:ABCD-integral-final-form}\end{aligned}$$ where the last line coincides with . The reason for writing the objective in this form is that the GP predictive posterior and marginal likelihood have a closed form when conditioning on the graph $G$, but not otherwise.
Background on Gaussian processes {#sec:appendix-GPs}
================================
A Gaussian process (GP) is a collection of random variables, any finite number of which have a joint Gaussian distribution.
Just like the Gaussian distribution, a GP is fully determined by its mean and covariance. We write $f\sim GP(m,k)$ to denote that the process $f(\mathbf{x})$ is a GP with mean function $m$ and covariance function (or kernel) $k$, where $$m(\mathbf{x})=\mathbb{E}[f(\mathbf{x})], \quad \text{and} \quad k(\mathbf{x},\mathbf{x}')=\mathbb{E}[(f(\mathbf{x})-m(\mathbf{x}))(f(\mathbf{x}')-m(\mathbf{x}'))].$$ The mean function is usually taken to be zero, $m(x)\equiv 0$, while a common choice of covariance function is given by the squared-exponential, $$\label{eq:squared_exponential}
k_{SE}(\mathbf{x},\mathbf{x}')=\lambda\exp(-\sum_{i=1}^p\nu_i(x_i-x_i')^2).$$ Here, the signal variance $\lambda$ and inverse length scales $\nu_i$ are considered hyperparameters.
What makes inference with GPs possible is that we only ever reason about function values at a finite set of locations. Consider a regression model with observation noise, $$y = f(\mathbf{x}) + \epsilon, \quad \text{where} \quad \epsilon \sim~\mathcal{N}(0,\sigma^2)$$ so $y|f, \mathbf{x}\sim \mathcal{N}(f(\mathbf{x}),\sigma^2)$, and assume a GP prior $f\sim GP(0,k)$. Given $n$ observations $\mathbf{X}=(\mathbf{x}_1, ..., \mathbf{x}_n)$ and $\mathbf{y}=(y_1,...,y_n)$ denote by $\mathbf{f}=(f(\mathbf{x}_1),..., f(\mathbf{x}_n))$ the vector of function values and by $K$ the matrix with entries $K_{ij}=k(\mathbf{x}_i, \mathbf{x}_j)$, also called the Gram matrix. By definition, $\mathbf{f}|\mathbf{X}\sim\mathcal{N}(0,K)$, and using Gaussian identities [see e.g., @williams2006gaussian Appendix A.2 for details] we can compute the log marginal likelihood in closed form: $$\label{eq:GP_marginal_likelihood}
\log p(\mathbf{y}|\mathbf{X}) = \log \int p(\mathbf{y}|\mathbf{f},\mathbf{X})p(\mathbf{f}|\mathbf{X})d\mathbf{f}
= -\frac{1}{2}\mathbf{y}^T(K+\sigma I)^{-1}\mathbf{y}-\frac{1}{2}\log |K+\sigma I| -\frac{n}{2}\log2\pi$$ To predict the function value $f_*$ at a new location $\mathbf{x}_*$, we observe that $(\mathbf{y}, f_*)$ has a joint Gaussian distribution. Denote by $\mathbf{k}_*=(k(\mathbf{x}_1, \mathbf{x}_*),...,k(\mathbf{x}_n, \mathbf{x}_*))$ the vector of covariances between $\mathbf{x}_*$ and the $n$ observations. By conditioning on $\mathbf{y}$ we obtain the predictive posterior, $$\label{eq:GP_predictive}
f_*|\mathbf{x}_*, \mathbf{y}, \mathbf{X} \sim
\mathcal{N}(\mathbf{k}_*^T(K+\sigma^2I)^{-1}\mathbf{y}, k(\mathbf{x}_*,\mathbf{x}_*)-\mathbf{k}_*^T(K+\sigma^2I)^{-1}\mathbf{k}_*).$$
Equations and provide closed form expressions for the marginal likelihood (needed to compute the posterior over graphs) and the predictive posterior (needed to predict experimental outcomes). This computational tractability makes the use of GPs attractive for our setting. Concretely, we consider the following model within each graph $G\in\mathcal{G}$: $$\label{eq:ABCD-model}
X_i = f_i(\mathbf{Pa}_i^G)+\epsilon_i, \quad f_i\sim GP(0,k_{SE}), \quad \epsilon_i \sim \mathcal{N}(0,\sigma_i), \quad \text{for} \quad i=1,...,d.$$
[^1]: Given infinite data, no hidden confounders, and allowing interventions on multiple variables simultaneously.
[^2]: Another challenge is the summation over all possible graphs, since the number of DAGs grows super-exponentially [@robinson1973counting]. Here, we think of a setting with few variables and focus on the other challenges instead.
[^3]: Provided that we can perform the summation over graphs, i.e., in a regime with small $d$.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: |
De Alfaro and Henzinger’s Interface Automata (IA) and Nyman et al.’s recent combination IOMTS of IA and Larsen’s Modal Transition Systems (MTS) are established frameworks for specifying interfaces of system components. However, neither IA nor IOMTS consider conjunction that is needed in practice when a component shall satisfy multiple interfaces, while Larsen’s MTS-conjunction is not closed and Beneš et al.’s conjunction on disjunctive MTS does not treat internal transitions. In addition, IOMTS-parallel composition exhibits a compositionality defect.
This article defines conjunction (and also disjunction) on IA and disjunctive MTS and proves the operators to be ‘correct’, i.e., the greatest lower bounds (least upper bounds) wrt. IA- and resp. MTS-refinement. As its main contribution, a novel interface theory called Modal Interface Automata (MIA) is introduced: MIA is a rich subset of IOMTS featuring explicit output-must-transitions while input-transitions are always allowed implicitly, is equipped with compositional parallel, conjunction and disjunction operators, and allows a simpler embedding of IA than Nyman’s. Thus, it fixes the shortcomings of related work, without restricting designers to deterministic interfaces as Raclet et al.’s modal interface theory does.
address:
- '[a]{}Software Technologies Research Group, University of Bamberg, 96045 Bamberg, Germany'
- '[b]{}Institute for Computer Science, University of Augsburg, 86135 Augsburg, Germany'
author:
- 'Gerald L[ü]{}ttgena'
- Walter Voglerb
bibliography:
- 'literature.bib'
title: Modal Interface Automata
---
Introduction {#sec:introduction}
============
Interfaces play an important role when designing complex software and hardware systems so as to be able to check interoperability of system components already at design stage. Early interface theories deal with types of data and operations only and have been successfully deployed in compilers. Over the past two decades, research has focused on more advanced interface theories for *sequential* and object-oriented software systems, where interfaces also comprise behavioural types. Such types are often referred to as *contracts* [@Mey92] and can express pre- and post-conditions and invariants of methods and classes. Much progress has been made on the design of contract languages and on automated verification techniques that can decide whether a system component meets its contract (cf. [@HatLeaLeinMuePar2012] for a survey).
More recently, *behavioural interfaces* have also been proposed and are being investigated for the use in *concurrent* systems, with prominent application examples being embedded systems (e.g., [@MayGru2005]) and web services (e.g., [@BeyChaHenSes2007; @MerBjo2003]). In this context, behavioural interfaces are intended to capture protocol aspects of component interaction. One prominent example of such an interface theory is de Alfaro and Henzinger’s *Interface Automata* (IA) [@DeAHen2001; @DeAHen2005], which is based on labelled transition systems (LTS) but distinguishes a component’s input and output actions. The theory comes with an asymmetric parallel composition operator, where a component may wait on inputs but never on outputs. Thus, a component’s output must be consumed immediately, or an error occurs. In case no potential system environment may restrict the system components’ behaviour so that all errors are avoided, the components are deemed to be incompatible.
Semantically, IA employs a refinement notion based on an alternating simulation, such that a component satisfies an interface if (a) it implements all input behaviour prescribed by the interface and (b) the interface permits all output behaviour executed by the implementing component. Accordingly and surprisingly, an output in a specification can always be ignored in an implementation. In particular, a component that consumes all inputs but never produces any output satisfies any interface. Since a specifier certainly wants to be able to prescribe at least some outputs, Larsen, Nyman and Wasowski have built their interface theory on Modal Transition Systems (MTS) [@Lar89] rather than LTS, which enables one to distinguish between may- and must-transitions and thus to express mandatory outputs. The resulting *IOMTS* interface theory [@LarNymWas2007], into which IA can be embedded, is equipped with an IA-style parallel composition and an MTS-style modal refinement. Unfortunately, IOMTS-modal refinement is not a precongruence (i.e., not compositional) for parallel composition; a related result in [@LarNymWas2007] has already been shown incorrect by Raclet et al. in [@RacBadBenCaiLegPas2011].
The present article starts from the observation that the above interface theories are missing one important operator, namely conjunction on interfaces. Conjunction is needed in practice since components are often designed to satisfy multiple interfaces simultaneously, each of which specifies a particular aspect of component interaction. Indeed, conjunction is a key operator when specifying and developing systems from different viewpoints as is common in modern software engineering. We thus start off by recalling the IA-setting and defining a conjunction operator ${\wedge}$ for IA; we prove that ${\wedge}$ is indeed conjunction, i.e., the greatest lower bound wrt. alternating simulation (cf. Sec. \[sec:ia\]). Essentially the same operator has recently and independently been defined in [@CheChiJonKwi2012], where it is shown that it gives the greatest lower bound wrt. a *trace-based* refinement relation. As an aside, we also develop and investigate the dual disjunction operator ${\vee}$ for IA. This is a natural operator for describing alternatives in loose specifications, thus leaving implementation decisions to implementors.
Similarly, we define conjunction and disjunction operators for a slight extension of MTS (a subset of *Disjunctive MTS* [@LarXin90], cf. Sec. \[sec:dmts\]), which paves us the way for our main contribution outlined below. Although Larsen has already studied conjunction and disjunction for MTS, his operators do, in contrast to ours, not preserve the MTS-property of syntactic consistency, i.e., a conjunction or disjunction almost always has some required transitions (must-transitions) that are not allowed (missing may-transitions). An additional difficulty when compared to the IA-setting is that two MTS-interfaces may not have a common implementation; indeed, inconsistencies may arise when composing MTSs conjunctively. We handle inconsistencies in a two-stage definition of conjunction, adapting ideas from our prior work on conjunction in a CSP-style process algebra [@LueVog2010] that uses, however, a very different parallel operator and refinement preorder. In [@BenCerKre2011], a conjunction for Disjunctive MTS (DMTS) is introduced in a two-stage style, too. Our construction and results for conjunction significantly extend the ones of [@BenCerKre2011] in that we also treat internal transitions that, e.g., result from communication.
Note also that our setting employs event-based communication via handshake and thus differs substantially from the one of shared-memory communication studied by Abadi and Lamport in their paper on conjoining specifications [@AbaLam95]. The same comment applies to Doyen et al. [@DoyHenJobPet2008], who have studied a conjunction operator for an interface theory involving shared-variable communication.
Our article’s main contribution is a novel interface theory, called *Modal Interface Automata* (MIA), which is essentially a rich subset of IOMTS that still allows one to express output-must-transitions. In contrast to IOMTS, must-transitions can also be disjunctive, and input-transitions are either required (i.e., must-transitions) or allowed implicitly. MIA is equipped with an MTS-style conjunction ${\wedge}$, disjunction ${\vee}$ and an IOMTS-style parallel composition operator, as well as with a slight adaptation of IOMTS-refinement. We show that (i) MIA-refinement is a precongruence for all three operators; (ii) ${\wedge}$ (${\vee}$) is indeed conjunction (disjunction) for this preorder; and (iii) IA can be embedded into MIA in a much cleaner, homomorphic fashion than into IOMTS [@LarNymWas2007] (cf. Sec. \[sec:mia\]). Thereby, we remedy the shortcomings of related work while, unlike the language-based modal interface theory of [@RacBadBenCaiLegPas2011], still permitting nondeterminism in specifications.
Conjunction and Disjunction for Interface Automata {#sec:ia}
==================================================
*Interface Automata* (IA) were introduced by de Alfaro and Henzinger [@DeAHen2001; @DeAHen2005] as a *reactive type* theory that abstractly describes the communication behaviour of software or hardware components in terms of their inputs and outputs. IAs are labelled transition systems where visible actions are partitioned into inputs and outputs. The idea is that interfaces interact with their environment according to the following rules. An interface cannot block an incoming input in any state but, if an input arrives unexpectedly, it is treated as a catastrophic system failure. This means that, if a state does not enable an input, this is a requirement on the environment not to produce this input. Vice versa, an interface guarantees not to produce any unspecified outputs, which are in turn inputs to the environment.
This intuition is reflected in the specific refinement relation of *alternating simulation* between IA and in the *parallel composition* on IA, which have been defined in [@DeAHen2005] and are recalled in this section. Most importantly, however, we introduce and study a *conjunction operator* on IA, which is needed in practice to reason about components that are expected to satisfy multiple interfaces.
An *Interface Automaton* (IA) is a tuple $Q = (Q, I, O,
{\stackrel{}{\longrightarrow}})$, where
(1) $Q$ is a set of states,
(2) $I$ and $O$ are disjoint input and output alphabets, resp., not containing the special, silent action $\tau$,
(3) ${\stackrel{}{\longrightarrow}} \,\subseteq Q \times (I \cup O \cup \{\tau\})
\times Q$ is the *transition relation*.
The transition relation is required to be *input-deterministic*, i.e., $a \in I$, $q {\stackrel{a}{\longrightarrow}} q'$ and $q {\stackrel{a}{\longrightarrow}} q''$ implies $q' = q''$. In the remainder, we write $q \!{\stackrel{a}{\longrightarrow}}$ if $q {\stackrel{a}{\longrightarrow}} q'$ for some $q'$, as well as $q
\,\not\!{\stackrel{a}{\longrightarrow}}$ for its negation. \[def:ia\]
In contrast to [@DeAHen2005] we do not distinguish internal actions and denote them all by $\tau$, as is often done in process algebras. We let $A$ stand for $I \cup O$, let $a$ ($\alpha$) range over $A$ ($A
\cup \{\tau\}$), and introduce the following weak transition relations: $q {\stackrel{{\varepsilon}}{\Longrightarrow}} q'$ if $q ({\stackrel{\tau}{\longrightarrow}})^{\ast}
q'$, and $q {\stackrel{o}{\Longrightarrow}} q'$ for $o \in O$ if $\exists q''.\, q
{\stackrel{{\varepsilon}}{\Longrightarrow}} q'' {\stackrel{o}{\longrightarrow}} q'$; note that there are no $\tau$-transitions after the $o$-transition. Moreover, we define $\hat{\alpha} = {\varepsilon}$ if $\alpha = \tau$, and $\hat{\alpha} =
\alpha$ otherwise.
Let $P$ and $Q$ be IAs with common input and output alphabets. Relation ${\mathcal{R}} \subseteq P \times Q$ is an *alternating simulation relation* if for all ${({p},{q})} \in {\mathcal{R}}$:
1. $q {\stackrel{a}{\longrightarrow}} q'$ and $a \in I$ implies $\exists p'.\, p
{\stackrel{a}{\longrightarrow}} p'$ and ${({p'},{q'})} \in {\mathcal{R}}$,
2. $p {\stackrel{\alpha}{\longrightarrow}} p'$ and $\alpha \in O \cup \{\tau\}$ implies $\exists q'.\, q {\stackrel{\hat{\alpha}}{\Longrightarrow}} q'$ and ${({p'},{q'})} \in {\mathcal{R}}$.
We write $p {\sqsubseteq_{\textrm{IA}}}q$ and say that $p$ *IA-refines* $q$ if there exists an alternating simulation relation ${\mathcal{R}}$ such that ${({p},{q})} \in {\mathcal{R}}$. \[def:iasim\]
According to the basic idea of IA, if specification $Q$ in state $q$ allows some input $a$ delivered by the environment, then the related implementation state $p$ of $P$ must allow this input immediately in order to avoid system failure. Conversely, if $P$ in state $p$ produces output $a$ to be consumed by the environment, this output must be expected by the environment even if $q {\stackrel{a}{\Longrightarrow}}$; this is because $Q$ could have moved unobservedly from state $q$ to some $q'$ that enables $a$. Since inputs are not treated in Def. \[def:iasim\] (ii), they are always allowed for $p$.
It is easy to see that IA-refinement ${\sqsubseteq_{\textrm{IA}}}$ is a preorder on IA and the largest alternating simulation relation. Given input and output alphabets $I$ and $O$, resp., the IA $$\textit{BlackHole}_{I,O} \,{=_{\text{df}}}\, (\{ \textit{blackhole} \}, I, O, \{
(\textit{blackhole},a,\textit{blackhole}) \;|\; a \in I \})$$ IA-refines any other IA over $I$ and $O$.
Conjunction on IA {#subsec:iaconj}
-----------------
Two IAs with common alphabets are always logically consistent in the sense that they have a common implementation, e.g., the respective blackhole IA as noted above. This makes the definition of conjunction on IA relatively straightforward. Here and similarly later, we index a transition by the system’s name to make clear from where it originates, in case this is not obvious from the context.
Let $P = (P, I, O, {\stackrel{}{\longrightarrow}}_P)$ and $Q = (Q, I,$ $O,
{\stackrel{}{\longrightarrow}}_Q)$ be IAs with common input and output alphabets and disjoint state sets $P$ and $Q$. The conjunction $P {\wedge}Q$ is defined by $(\{ p {\wedge}q \;|\; p \in P,\, q \in Q \} \cup P \cup
Q, I, O, {\stackrel{}{\longrightarrow}})$, where ${\stackrel{}{\longrightarrow}}$ is the least set satisfying ${\stackrel{}{\longrightarrow}}_P \subseteq {\stackrel{}{\longrightarrow}}$, ${\stackrel{}{\longrightarrow}}_Q
\subseteq {\stackrel{}{\longrightarrow}}$, and the following operational rules:
---------- --------------------------------------------------------------- ---- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[(I1)]{} $p {\wedge}q {\stackrel{a}{\longrightarrow}} p'$ if $p {\stackrel{a}{\longrightarrow}}_P p'$, $q \,\not\!{\stackrel{a}{\longrightarrow}}_Q$ and $a \in I$
[(I2)]{} $p {\wedge}q {\stackrel{a}{\longrightarrow}} q'$ if $p \,\not\!{\stackrel{a}{\longrightarrow}}_P$, $q {\stackrel{a}{\longrightarrow}}_Q q'$ and $a \in I$
[(I3)]{} $p {\wedge}q {\stackrel{a}{\longrightarrow}} p' {\wedge}q'$ if $p {\stackrel{a}{\longrightarrow}}_P p'$, $q {\stackrel{a}{\longrightarrow}}_Q q'$ and $a \in I$
[(O)]{} $p {\wedge}q {\stackrel{a}{\longrightarrow}} p' {\wedge}q'$ if $p {\stackrel{a}{\longrightarrow}}_P p'$, $q {\stackrel{a}{\longrightarrow}}_Q q'$ and $a \in O$
[(T1)]{} $p {\wedge}q {\stackrel{\tau}{\longrightarrow}} p' {\wedge}q$ if $p {\stackrel{\tau}{\longrightarrow}}_P p'$
[(T2)]{} $p {\wedge}q {\stackrel{\tau}{\longrightarrow}} p {\wedge}q'$ if $q {\stackrel{\tau}{\longrightarrow}}_Q q'$
---------- --------------------------------------------------------------- ---- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\[def:iaandop\]
![Example illustrating IA-conjunction.[]{data-label="fig:iaandopex"}](iaandopex.png)
Intuitively, conjunction is the synchronous product over actions (cf. Rules (I3), (O), (T1) and (T2)). Since inputs are always implicitly present, this also explains Rules (I1) and (I2); for example, in Rule (I1), $q$ does not impose any restrictions on the behaviour after input $a$ and is therefore dropped from the target state. Moreover, the conjunction operator is commutative and associative. As an aside, note that the rules with digit 2 in their names are the symmetric cases of the respective rules with digit 1; this convention will hold true throughout this article. Fig. \[fig:iaandopex\] applies the rules above to an illustrating example; here and in the following figures, we write $a?$ for an input $a$ and $a!$ for an output $a$.
Essentially the same conjunction operator is defined by Chen et al. in [@CheChiJonKwi2012], where a non-standard variant of IA is studied that employs *explicit* error states and uses a trace-based semantics and refinement preorder (going back to Dill [@Dil89]). The difference between their conjunction and Def. \[def:iaandop\] is that error states are explicitly used in the clauses that correspond to Rules (I1) and (I2) above, which renders our definition arguably more elegant. In [@CheChiJonKwi2012], an analogue theorem to Thm. \[thm:iaandisand\] below is shown, but its statement is different as it refers to a different refinement preorder. Also note that, deviating from the IA-literature, error states are called inconsistent in [@CheChiJonKwi2012], but this is not related to logic inconsistency as studied by us.
Our first result states that an implementation satisfies the conjunction of interfaces exactly if it satisfies each of them. This is a desired property in system design where each interface describes one aspect (or view) of the overall specification.
Let $P, Q, R$ be IAs with states $p$, $q$, $r$, resp. Then, $r {\sqsubseteq_{\textrm{IA}}}p$ and $r {\sqsubseteq_{\textrm{IA}}}q$ if and only if $r {\sqsubseteq_{\textrm{IA}}}p
{\wedge}q$. \[thm:iaandisand\]
Technically, this result states that ${\wedge}$ gives the greatest lower-bound wrt. ${\sqsubseteq_{\textrm{IA}}}$ (up to equivalence), and its proof uses the input-determinism property of IA. The theorem also implies compositional reasoning; from universal algebra one easily gets:
For IAs $P, Q, R$ with states $p$, $q$ and $r$: $\,p {\sqsubseteq_{\textrm{IA}}}q$ $\;\Longrightarrow\;$ $p {\wedge}r{\sqsubseteq_{\textrm{IA}}}q {\wedge}r$. \[cor:iaandopcomp\]
Disjunction on IA {#subsec:iadisj}
-----------------
In analogy to conjunction we develop a disjunction operator on IA and discuss its properties; in particular, this operator should give the least upper bound.
Let $P = (P, I, O, {\stackrel{}{\longrightarrow}}_P)$ and $Q = (Q, I,$ $O,
{\stackrel{}{\longrightarrow}}_Q)$ be IAs with common input and output alphabets and disjoint state sets $P$ and $Q$. The disjunction $P {\vee}Q$ is defined by $(\{ p {\vee}q \;|\; p \in P,\, q \in Q \} \cup P \cup Q,
I, O, {\stackrel{}{\longrightarrow}})$, where ${\stackrel{}{\longrightarrow}}$ is the least set satisfying ${\stackrel{}{\longrightarrow}}_P \subseteq {\stackrel{}{\longrightarrow}}$, ${\stackrel{}{\longrightarrow}}_Q \subseteq
{\stackrel{}{\longrightarrow}}$ and the following operational rules:
----------- --------------------------------------------------------- ---- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[(I)]{} $p {\vee}q {\stackrel{a}{\longrightarrow}} p' {\vee}q'$ if $p {\stackrel{a}{\longrightarrow}}_P p'$, $q {\stackrel{a}{\longrightarrow}}_Q q'$ and $a \in I$
[(OT1)]{} $p {\vee}q {\stackrel{\alpha}{\longrightarrow}} p'$ if $p {\stackrel{\alpha}{\longrightarrow}}_P p'$ and $\alpha \in O \cup \{\tau\}$
[(OT2)]{} $p {\vee}q {\stackrel{\alpha}{\longrightarrow}} q'$ if $q {\stackrel{\alpha}{\longrightarrow}}_Q q'$ and $\alpha \in O \cup \{\tau\}$
----------- --------------------------------------------------------- ---- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\[def:iaorop\]
Note that this definition preserves the input-determinism required of IA. The definition is roughly dual to the one of IA-conjunction, i.e., we take the ‘intersection’ of initial input behaviour and the ‘union’ of initial output behaviour. Strictly speaking, this would require the following additional rule for outputs $o \in O$:
---------- --------------------------------------------------------- ---- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[(O3)]{} $p {\vee}q {\stackrel{o}{\longrightarrow}} p' {\vee}q'$ if $p {\stackrel{o}{\longrightarrow}}_P p'$ and $q {\stackrel{o}{\longrightarrow}}_Q q'$
---------- --------------------------------------------------------- ---- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
However, the addition of this rule would in general result in disjunctions $p {\vee}q$ that are larger than the least upper bound of $p$ and $q$ wrt. ${\sqsubseteq_{\textrm{IA}}}$. The following theorem shows that our ${\vee}$-operator properly characterizes the least upper bound:
Let $P, Q, R$ be IAs with states $p$, $q$ and $r$, resp. Then, $p
{\vee}q {\sqsubseteq_{\textrm{IA}}}r$ if and only if $p {\sqsubseteq_{\textrm{IA}}}r$ and $q {\sqsubseteq_{\textrm{IA}}}r$. \[thm:iaorisor\]
Compositionality of disjunction can now be derived dually to the proof of Corollary \[cor:iaandopcomp\] but using Thm. \[thm:iaorisor\] instead of Thm. \[thm:iaandisand\]:
For IAs $P, Q, R$ with states $p$, $q$ and $r$: $\,p {\sqsubseteq_{\textrm{IA}}}q$ $\;\Longrightarrow\;$ $p {\vee}r{\sqsubseteq_{\textrm{IA}}}q {\vee}r$. \[cor:iaoropcomp\]
![Example illustrating IA-disjunction’s different treatment of inputs and outputs.[]{data-label="fig:iaoropex"}](iaoropex.png)
The two examples of Fig. \[fig:iaoropex\] round off our investigation of IA disjunction by illustrating the operator’s different treatment of inputs and outputs. Regarding $p {\vee}q$ on the figure’s left-hand side, the choice of which disjunct to implement is taken with the first action $o \in O$ if both disjuncts are implemented; this meets the intuition of an inclusive-or. In the analogous situation of $r {\vee}s$ on the figure’s right-hand side, a branching on $i \in I$ is not allowed due to input-determinism, and the resulting IA is thus intuitively unsatisfactory. The root cause for this is that the IA-setting does not include sufficiently many automata and, therefore, the least upper bound is ‘too large’. The shortcoming can be remedied by introducing disjunctive transitions, as we will do below in the dMTS- and MIA-settings. Then, we will have more automata and, indeed, will get a smaller least upper bound.\[fromtena\]
Parallel Composition on IA {#subsec:iaparop}
--------------------------
We recall the parallel composition operator ${|}$ on IA of [@DeAHen2005], which is defined in two stages: first a standard product ${\otimes}$ between two IAs is introduced, where common actions are synchronized and hidden. Then, error states are identified, and all states are pruned from which reaching an error state is unavoidable.
IAs $P_1$ and $P_2$ are called *composable* if $A_1 \cap A_2 =
(I_1 \cap O_2) \cup (O_1 \cap I_2)$, i.e., each common action is input of one IA and output of the other IA. For such IAs we define the *product* $P_1 {\otimes}P_2 = (P_1 \times P_2, I, O,
{\stackrel{}{\longrightarrow}})$, where $I = (I_1 \cup I_2) \setminus (O_1 \cup O_2)$ and $O = (O_1 \cup O_2) \setminus (I_1 \cup I_2)$ and where ${\stackrel{}{\longrightarrow}}$ is given by the following operational rules:
------------ ------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[(Par1)]{} ${({p_1},{p_2})} {\stackrel{\alpha}{\longrightarrow}} {({p'_1},{p_2})}$ if $p_1 {\stackrel{\alpha}{\longrightarrow}} p'_1$ and $\alpha \notin A_2$
[(Par2)]{} ${({p_1},{p_2})} {\stackrel{\alpha}{\longrightarrow}} {({p_1},{p'_2})}$ if $p_2 {\stackrel{\alpha}{\longrightarrow}} p'_2$ and $\alpha \notin A_1$
[(Par3)]{} ${({p_1},{p_2})} {\stackrel{\tau}{\longrightarrow}} {({p'_1},{p'_2})}$ if $p_1 {\stackrel{a}{\longrightarrow}} p'_1$ and $p_2 {\stackrel{a}{\longrightarrow}} p'_2$ for some $a$.
------------ ------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\[def:iaparprod\]
Note that, in case of synchronization and according to Rule (Par3), one only gets internal $\tau$-transitions.
A state ${({p_1},{p_2})}$ of a parallel product $P_1 {\otimes}P_2$ is an *error state* if there is some $a \in A_1 \cap A_2$ such that (a) $a \in O_1$, $p_1 \!{\stackrel{a}{\longrightarrow}}$ and $p_2
\,\not\!{\stackrel{a}{\longrightarrow}}$, or (b) $a \in O_2$, $p_2 \!{\stackrel{a}{\longrightarrow}}$ and $p_1 \,\not\!{\stackrel{a}{\longrightarrow}}$.
A state of $P_1 {\otimes}P_2$ is *incompatible* if it may reach an error state autonomously, i.e., only by output or internal actions that are, intuitively, locally controlled. Formally, the set $E \subseteq P_1 \times P_2$ of incompatible states is the least set such that ${({p_1},{p_2})} \in E$ if (i) ${({p_1},{p_2})}$ is an error state or (ii) ${({p_1},{p_2})} {\stackrel{\alpha}{\longrightarrow}}
{({p'_1},{p'_2})}$ for some $\alpha \in O \cup \{\tau\}$ and ${({p'_1},{p'_2})} \in E$.
The *parallel composition* $P_1 {|}P_2$ of $P_1, P_2$ is obtained from $P_1 {\otimes}P_2$ by *pruning*, i.e., removing all states in $E$ and all transitions involving such states as source or target. If ${({p_1},{p_2})} \in P_1 {|}P_2$, we write $p_1
{|}p_2$ and call $p_1$ and $p_2$ *compatible*. \[def:iaparop\]
Parallel composition is well-defined since input-determinism is preserved.
Let $P_1$, $P_2$ and $Q_1$ be IAs with $p_1 \in P_1$, $p_2 \in P_2$, $q_1 \in Q_1$ and $p_1 {\sqsubseteq_{\textrm{IA}}}q_1$. Assume that $Q_1$ and $P_2$ are composable; then, (a) $P_1$ and $P_2$ are composable and (b) if $q_1$ and $p_2$ are compatible, then so are $p_1$ and $p_2$ and $p_1 {|}p_2 {\sqsubseteq_{\textrm{IA}}}q_1 {|}p_2$. \[thm:iaparopcomp\]
This result relies on the fact that IAs are input-deterministic. While the theorem is already stated in [@DeAHen2005], its proof is only sketched therein. Here, it is a simple corollary of Thm. \[thm:miaparopcomp\] in Sec. \[subsec:miaparop\] and Thms. \[thm:iaembeddingmia\] and \[thm:miaembedding\](b) in Sec. \[subsec:embedding\] below.
![Example illustrating IA-parallel composition, where IA *TryOnce* has inputs $\{\textit{send, ack, nack}\}$ and outputs $\{\textit{trnsmt, ok, reset, retry}\}$, while IA *Client* has inputs $\{\textit{ok, retry}\}$ and outputs $\{\textit{send}\}$.[]{data-label="fig:iaparopex"}](iaparopex.png)
We conclude by presenting a small example of IA-parallel composition in Fig. \[fig:iaparopex\], which is adapted from [@DeAHen2005]. *Client* does not accept its input *retry*. Thus, if the environment of $\textit{Client} {\otimes}\textit{TryOnce}$ would produce *nack*, the system would autonomously produce *reset* and run into a catastrophic error. To avoid this, the environment of $\textit{Client} \,{|}\textit{TryOnce}$ is required not to produce *nack*. This view is called optimistic: there exists an environment in which *Client* and *TryOnce* can cooperate without errors, and $\textit{Client} \,{|}\textit{TryOnce}$ describes the necessary requirements for such an environment. In the pessimistic view as advocated in [@BauHenWir2011], *Client* and *TryOnce* are regarded as incompatible due to the potential error.
Conjunction and Disjunction for Modal Transition Systems {#sec:dmts}
========================================================
*Modal Transition Systems* (MTS) were investigated by Larsen [@Lar89] as a specification framework based on labelled transition systems but with two kinds of transitions: must-transitions specify required behaviour, may-transitions specify allowed behaviour, and absent transitions specify forbidden behaviour. Any refinement of an MTS-specification must preserve required and forbidden behaviour and may turn allowed behaviour into required or forbidden behaviour. Technically, this is achieved via an alternating-style simulation relation, called *modal refinement*, where any must-transition of the specification must be simulated by an implementation, while any may-transition of the implementation must be simulated by the specification.
Our aim in this section is to extend MTS with conjunction and also disjunction. Larsen [@Lar89] first defined conjunction and disjunction on MTS (without $\tau$), but the resulting systems often violate syntactic consistency (they are not really MTSs) and are hard to understand. This construction was subsequently generalized by Larsen and Xinxin to Disjunctive MTS (DMTS) [@LarXin90], again ignoring syntactic consistency. This shortcoming was recently fixed by Beneš et al. [@BenCerKre2011] by exploiting the fact that an $a$-must-transition in a DMTS may have several alternative target states. However, this work does still not consider a weak setting, i.e., systems with $\tau$. Below, we will define conjunction and disjunction on a syntactically consistent subclass of DMTS, called *dMTS*, but more generally in a weak setting as defined in [@DeAHen2005; @LarNymWas2007]; this subclass is sufficient for the purposes of the present article, and we leave the extension of our results to DMTS for future work. Since the treatment of $\tau$-transitions is non-trivial and non-standard, we will motivate and explain it in detail.
Note that this section will not consider parallel composition for (d)MTS. This is because we are working towards the MIA-setting that will be introduced in the next section, which like IA and unlike (d)MTS distinguishes between inputs and outputs. (d)MTS parallel composition can simply be defined in the style similar to Def. \[def:iaparprod\]; in particular, it does not have error states and thus fundamentally differs from conjunction as defined below.
Disjunctive Modal Transition Systems {#subsec:dmts}
------------------------------------
We extend standard MTS only as far as needed for defining conjunction and disjunction, by introducing disjunctive must-transitions that are disjunctive wrt. exit states only (see Fig. \[fig:dmtsandopex\]). The following extension also has no $\tau$-must-transitions since these are not considered in the definition of the observational modal refinement of [@LarNymWas2007].
A *disjunctive Modal Transition System* (dMTS) is a tuple $Q =
(Q, A, {\stackrel{}{\longrightarrow}}, {\stackrel{}{\dashrightarrow}})$, where
(1) $Q$ is a set of states,
(2) $A$ is an alphabet not containing the special, silent action $\tau$,
(3) ${\stackrel{}{\longrightarrow}} \,\subseteq Q \times A \times {({\mathcal{P}({Q})} \setminus \emptyset)}$ is the *must-transition* relation,
(4) ${\stackrel{}{\dashrightarrow}} \,\subseteq Q \times (A \cup \{\tau\}) \times Q$ is the *may-transition* relation.
We require *syntactic consistency*, i.e., $q {\stackrel{a}{\longrightarrow}}
Q'$ implies $\forall q' {\in} Q'.\, q {\stackrel{a}{\dashrightarrow}} q'$. \[def:dmts\]
More generally, the must-transition relation in a standard DMTS [@LarXin90] may be a subset of $Q \times {({\mathcal{P}({A \times
Q})} \setminus \emptyset)}$. For notational convenience, we write $q {\stackrel{a}{\longrightarrow}} q'$ whenever $q {\stackrel{a}{\longrightarrow}} {\{{q'}\}}$; all must-transitions in standard MTS have this form.
Our refinement relation on dMTS abstracts from internal computation steps in the same way as [@LarNymWas2007], i.e., by considering the following *weak may-transitions* for $\alpha \in A \cup
\{\tau\}$: $q {\,\raisebox{1.0ex}{$\stackrel{{\varepsilon}}{\underset{\text{\normalsize $\dashrightarrow$}}{\raisebox{-1.0ex}[0ex][0ex]{$\dashrightarrow$}}}$}\,} q'$ if $q
{\stackrel{\tau}{\dashrightarrow}}^{\ast}\! q'$, and $q {\,\raisebox{1.0ex}{$\stackrel{\alpha}{\underset{\text{\normalsize $\dashrightarrow$}}{\raisebox{-1.0ex}[0ex][0ex]{$\dashrightarrow$}}}$}\,} q'$ if $\exists q''.\, q {\,\raisebox{1.0ex}{$\stackrel{{\varepsilon}}{\underset{\text{\normalsize $\dashrightarrow$}}{\raisebox{-1.0ex}[0ex][0ex]{$\dashrightarrow$}}}$}\,} q'' {\stackrel{\alpha}{\dashrightarrow}}
q'$.
Let $P, Q$ be dMTSs. Relation ${\mathcal{R}} \subseteq P \times Q$ is an *(observational) modal refinement relation* if for all ${({p},{q})} \in {\mathcal{R}}$:
1. $q {\stackrel{a}{\longrightarrow}} Q'$ implies $\exists P'.\,
p {\stackrel{a}{\longrightarrow}} P'$ and $\forall p' {\in} P'\,\exists q' {\in} Q'.\;
{({p'},{q'})} \in {\mathcal{R}}$,
2. $p {\stackrel{\alpha}{\dashrightarrow}} p'$ implies $\exists q'.\, q
{\,\raisebox{1.0ex}{$\stackrel{\hat{\alpha}}{\underset{\text{\normalsize $\dashrightarrow$}}{\raisebox{-1.0ex}[0ex][0ex]{$\dashrightarrow$}}}$}\,} q'$ and ${({p'},{q'})} \in {\mathcal{R}}$.
We write $p {\sqsubseteq_{\textrm{dMTS}}}q$ and say that $p$ *dMTS-refines* $q$ if there exists an observational modal refinement relation ${\mathcal{R}}$ such that ${({p},{q})} \in {\mathcal{R}}$. \[def:dmtssim\]
Again, ${\sqsubseteq_{\textrm{dMTS}}}$ is a preorder and the largest observational modal refinement relation. Except for disjunctiveness, dMTS-refinement is exactly defined as for MTS in [@LarNymWas2007]. In the following figures, any (disjunctive) must-transition drawn also represents implicitly the respective may-transition(s), unless explicitly stated otherwise.
Conjunction on dMTS {#subsec:dmtsconj}
-------------------
Technically similar to parallel composition for IA, conjunction will be defined in two stages. State pairs can be logically inconsistent due to unsatisfiable must-transitions; in the second stage, we remove such pairs incrementally.
Let $P = (P, A, {\stackrel{}{\longrightarrow}}_P,$ ${\stackrel{}{\dashrightarrow}}_P)$ and $Q = (Q,
A, {\stackrel{}{\longrightarrow}}_Q, {\stackrel{}{\dashrightarrow}}_Q)$ be dMTSs with common alphabet. The conjunctive product $P {\&}Q {=_{\text{df}}}(P \times Q, A,
{\stackrel{}{\longrightarrow}}, {\stackrel{}{\dashrightarrow}})$ is defined by its operational transition rules as follows:
------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[(Must1)]{} ${({p},{q})} {\stackrel{a}{\longrightarrow}} if $p {\stackrel{a}{\longrightarrow}}_P P'$ and $q {\,\raisebox{1.0ex}{$\stackrel{a}{\underset{\text{\normalsize $\dashrightarrow$}}{\raisebox{-1.0ex}[0ex][0ex]{$\dashrightarrow$}}}$}_{Q}\,}$
{\{{{({p'},{q'})}}\,|\,{p' \in P',\, q {\,\raisebox{1.0ex}{$\stackrel{a}{\underset{\text{\normalsize $\dashrightarrow$}}{\raisebox{-1.0ex}[0ex][0ex]{$\dashrightarrow$}}}$}_{Q}\,} q'}\}}$
[(Must2)]{} ${({p},{q})} {\stackrel{a}{\longrightarrow}} if $p {\,\raisebox{1.0ex}{$\stackrel{a}{\underset{\text{\normalsize $\dashrightarrow$}}{\raisebox{-1.0ex}[0ex][0ex]{$\dashrightarrow$}}}$}_{P}\,}$ and $q {\stackrel{a}{\longrightarrow}}_Q Q'$
{\{{{({p'},{q'})}}\,|\,{p {\,\raisebox{1.0ex}{$\stackrel{a}{\underset{\text{\normalsize $\dashrightarrow$}}{\raisebox{-1.0ex}[0ex][0ex]{$\dashrightarrow$}}}$}_{P}\,} p',\, q' \in Q'}\}}$
[(May1)]{} ${({p},{q})} {\stackrel{\tau}{\dashrightarrow}} {({p'},{q})}$ if $p {\,\raisebox{1.0ex}{$\stackrel{\tau}{\underset{\text{\normalsize $\dashrightarrow$}}{\raisebox{-1.0ex}[0ex][0ex]{$\dashrightarrow$}}}$}_{P}\,} p'$
[(May2)]{} ${({p},{q})} {\stackrel{\tau}{\dashrightarrow}} {({p},{q'})}$ if $q {\,\raisebox{1.0ex}{$\stackrel{\tau}{\underset{\text{\normalsize $\dashrightarrow$}}{\raisebox{-1.0ex}[0ex][0ex]{$\dashrightarrow$}}}$}_{Q}\,} q'$
[(May3)]{} ${({p},{q})} {\stackrel{\alpha}{\dashrightarrow}} {({p'},{q'})}$ if $p {\,\raisebox{1.0ex}{$\stackrel{\alpha}{\underset{\text{\normalsize $\dashrightarrow$}}{\raisebox{-1.0ex}[0ex][0ex]{$\dashrightarrow$}}}$}_{P}\,} p'$ and $q {\,\raisebox{1.0ex}{$\stackrel{\alpha}{\underset{\text{\normalsize $\dashrightarrow$}}{\raisebox{-1.0ex}[0ex][0ex]{$\dashrightarrow$}}}$}_{Q}\,} q'$
------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\[def:dmtsconjprod\]
It might be surprising that a single transition in the product might stem from a transition sequence in one of the components (cf. the first four items above) and that the components can also synchronize on $\tau$ (cf. Rule (May3)). The necessity of this is discussed below; we only repeat here that conjunction is inherently different from parallel composition where, for instance, there is no synchronization on $\tau$.
Given a conjunctive product $P {\&}Q$, the set ${F}\subseteq P
\times Q$ of *(logically) inconsistent states* is defined as the least set satisfying the following rules:
---------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------- -----------------------
[(F1)]{} $p \!{\stackrel{a}{\longrightarrow}}_P$, $q \not\!\!\!{\,\raisebox{1.0ex}{$\stackrel{a}{\underset{\text{\normalsize $\dashrightarrow$}}{\raisebox{-1.0ex}[0ex][0ex]{$\dashrightarrow$}}}$}_{Q}\,}$ implies ${({p},{q})} \in {F}$
[(F2)]{} $p \not\!\!\!{\,\raisebox{1.0ex}{$\stackrel{a}{\underset{\text{\normalsize $\dashrightarrow$}}{\raisebox{-1.0ex}[0ex][0ex]{$\dashrightarrow$}}}$}_{P}\,}$, $q \!{\stackrel{a}{\longrightarrow}}_Q$ implies ${({p},{q})} \in {F}$
[(F3)]{} ${({p},{q})} {\stackrel{a}{\longrightarrow}} R'$ and $R' \subseteq {F}$ implies ${({p},{q})} \in {F}$
---------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------- -----------------------
The conjunction $P {\wedge}Q$ of dMTSs $P, Q$ is obtained by deleting all states ${({p},{q})} \in {F}$ from $P {\&}Q$. This also removes any may- or must-transition exiting a deleted state and any may-transition entering a deleted state; in addition, deleted states are removed from targets of disjunctive must-transitions. We write $p {\wedge}q$ for the state ${({p},{q})}$ of $P {\wedge}Q$; these are the consistent states by construction, and $p {\wedge}q$ is only defined for such a state. \[def:dmtsandop\]
Regarding well-definedness, first observe that $P {\&}Q$ is a dMTS, where syntactic consistency follows from Rule (May3). Now, $P {\wedge}Q$ is a dMTS, too: if $R'$ becomes empty for some ${({p},{q})}
{\stackrel{a}{\longrightarrow}} R'$, then also ${({p},{q})}$ is deleted when constructing $P {\wedge}Q$ from $P {\&}Q$ according to (F3). Finally, our conjunction operator is also commutative and associative.
![Examples motivating the rules of Def. \[def:dmtsconjprod\].[]{data-label="fig:exdmtsconj"}](exdmtsconj.png)
Before we formally state that operator ${\wedge}$ is indeed conjunction on dMTS, we present several examples depicted in Fig. \[fig:exdmtsconj\], which motivate the rules of Def. \[def:dmtsconjprod\]. In each case, $r$ is a common implementation of $p$ and $q$ (but not $r'$ in Ex. I), whence these must be logically consistent. Thus, Ex. I explains Rule (Must1). If we only had ${\stackrel{\tau}{\dashrightarrow}}$ in the precondition of Rule (May1), $p {\wedge}q$ of Ex. II would just consist of a $c$-must- and an $a$-may-transition; the only $\tau$-transition would lead to a state in ${F}$ due to $b$. This would not allow the $\tau$-transition of $r$, explaining Rule (May1). In Ex. III and with only ${\stackrel{\alpha}{\dashrightarrow}}$ in the preconditions of Rule (May3), $p {\wedge}q$ would just have three $\tau$-transitions to inconsistent states (due to $b$, $c$, resp.). This explains the weak transitions for $\alpha \not= \tau$ in Rule (May3). According to Rules (May1) and (May2), $p {\wedge}q$ in Ex. IV has four $\tau$-transitions to states in ${F}$ (due to $d$). With preconditions based on at least one ${\stackrel{\tau}{\dashrightarrow}}$ instead of ${\,\raisebox{1.0ex}{$\stackrel{\tau}{\underset{\text{\normalsize $\dashrightarrow$}}{\raisebox{-1.0ex}[0ex][0ex]{$\dashrightarrow$}}}$}\,}$ in the $\tau$-case of Rule (May3), there would be three more $\tau$-transitions to states in ${F}$ (due to $b$ or $c$). Thus, it is essential that Rule (May3) also allows the synchronization of two weak $\tau$-transitions, which in this case gives $p {\wedge}q {\stackrel{\tau}{\dashrightarrow}} p' {\wedge}q'$.
![Example illustrating dMTS-conjunction.[]{data-label="fig:dmtsandopex"}](dmtsandopex.png)
Fig. \[fig:dmtsandopex\] shows a small example illustrating the treatment of disjunctive must-transitions in the presence of inconsistency. In $P {\&}Q$, the $a$-must-transition of $Q$ combines with the three $a$-transitions of $P$ to a truly disjunctive must-transition with a three-element target set. The inconsistency of state $(4,6)$ due to $b$ propagates back to state $(3,5)$. The inconsistent states are then removed in $P {\wedge}Q$.
Let $P, Q, R$ be dMTSs. Then, (i) $(\exists r \in R.\, r {\sqsubseteq_{\textrm{dMTS}}}p$ and $r {\sqsubseteq_{\textrm{dMTS}}}q)$ if and only if $p {\wedge}q$ is defined. In addition, in case $p {\wedge}q$ is defined: (ii) $r {\sqsubseteq_{\textrm{dMTS}}}p$ and $r {\sqsubseteq_{\textrm{dMTS}}}q \text{ if and only if } r {\sqsubseteq_{\textrm{dMTS}}}p {\wedge}q$. \[thm:dmtsandisand\]
This key theorem states in Item (ii) that conjunction behaves as it should, i.e., ${\wedge}$ on dMTSs is the greatest lower bound wrt. ${\sqsubseteq_{\textrm{dMTS}}}$. Item (i) concerns the intuition that two specifications $p$ and $q$ are logically inconsistent if they do not have a common implementation; formally, $p {\wedge}q$ is undefined in this case. Alternatively, we could have added an explicit inconsistent element ${\textit{ff}}$ to our setting, so that $p {\wedge}q =
{\textit{ff}}$. This element ${\textit{ff}}$ would be defined to be a refinement of every $p'$ and equivalent to any ${({p'},{q'})} \in
{F}$ of some $P {\&}Q$. Additionally, ${\textit{ff}}{\wedge}p'$ and $p' {\wedge}{\textit{ff}}$ would be defined as ${\textit{ff}}$, for any $p'$.
The proof of the above theorem requires us to first introduce the following concept for formally reasoning about inconsistent states:
A *dMTS-witness* $W$ of $P {\&}Q$ is a subset of $P \times
Q$ such that the following conditions hold for all ${({p},{q})} \in
W$:
---------- -------------------------------------------------- --------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[(W1)]{} $p \!{\stackrel{a}{\longrightarrow}}_P$ implies $q {\,\raisebox{1.0ex}{$\stackrel{a}{\underset{\text{\normalsize $\dashrightarrow$}}{\raisebox{-1.0ex}[0ex][0ex]{$\dashrightarrow$}}}$}_{Q}\,}$
[(W2)]{} $q \!{\stackrel{a}{\longrightarrow}}_Q$ implies $p {\,\raisebox{1.0ex}{$\stackrel{a}{\underset{\text{\normalsize $\dashrightarrow$}}{\raisebox{-1.0ex}[0ex][0ex]{$\dashrightarrow$}}}$}_{P}\,}$
[(W3)]{} ${({p},{q})} {\stackrel{a}{\longrightarrow}} R'$ implies $R' \cap W \not= \emptyset$
---------- -------------------------------------------------- --------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\[def:dmtswitness\]
Conditions (W1)–(W3) correspond to the negations of the premises of Conditions (F1)–(F3) in Def. \[def:dmtsandop\]. This implies Part (i) of the following lemma, while Part (ii) is essential for proving Thm. \[thm:dmtsandisand\](i):
Let $P {\&}Q$ be a conjunctive product of dMTSs and $R$ be a dMTS.
1. For any dMTS-witness $W$ of $P {\&}Q$, we have ${F}\cap W = \emptyset$.
2. The set $\{ {({p},{q})} \in P \times Q \;|\; \exists
r \in R.\, \text{$r {\sqsubseteq_{\textrm{dMTS}}}p$}$ and $r {\sqsubseteq_{\textrm{dMTS}}}q \}$ is a dMTS-witness of $P {\&}Q$.
\[lem:dmtswitness\]
We are now able to prove Thm. \[thm:dmtsandisand\]:
The following corollary of Thm. \[thm:dmtsandisand\] now easily follows:
dMTS-refinement is compositional wrt. conjunction, i.e., if $p
{\sqsubseteq_{\textrm{dMTS}}}q$ and $p {\wedge}r$ is defined, then $q {\wedge}r$ is defined and $p {\wedge}r {\sqsubseteq_{\textrm{dMTS}}}q {\wedge}r$. \[cor:dmtsandopcomp\]
Thus, we have succeeded in our ambition to define a syntactically consistent conjunction for MTS, for a weak MTS-variant with disjunctive must-transitions.
![Example illustrating Larsen’s MTS-conjunction; ${\stackrel{a}{\dashrightarrow}}$ drawn separately.[]{data-label="fig:larsen"}](larsen.png)
Larsen [@Lar89] also defines a conjunction operator on MTS, but almost always the result violates syntactic consistency. A simple example is shown in Fig. \[fig:larsen\] where $q$ refines $p$ in Larsen’s setting as well as in our dMTS-setting; in this figure, may-transitions are drawn explicitly, i.e, a must- is not necessarily also a may-transition. Since Larsen’s $p \land q$ is not syntactically consistent, this $p \land q$ and $q$ are, contrary to the first impression, equivalent. In our dMTS-setting, $P {\wedge}Q$ is isomorphic to $Q$ which will also hold for our MIA-setting below (with action $b$ read as output and where $a$ could be either an input or an output).
![Example showing that conjunction cannot be defined on MTS. (A similar example is given in [@BenCerKre2011] without proof.)[]{data-label="fig:mtsand"}](mtsand.png)
Indeed, conjunction cannot be defined on MTS in general, e.g., for the $P$ and $Q$ in Fig. \[fig:mtsand\](a). The states $p$ and $q$ have $r$ as well as $s$ as common implementations; thus, $r$ and $s$ must be implementations of $p {\wedge}q$. An MTS $P {\wedge}Q$ would need in state $p {\wedge}q$ (i) an immediate $a$-must-transition (due to $q$) followed by (ii) a must-$b$ and no $c$ or a must-$c$ and no $b$ (due to $p$). In the first (second) case, $s$ ($r$) is not an implementation of $p {\wedge}q$, which is a contradiction. Using dMTS, the conjunction $P {\wedge}Q$ is as shown in Fig. \[fig:mtsand\](b).
The above shortcoming of MTS has been avoided by Larsen et al. in [@LarSteWei95] by limiting conjunction to so-called *independent* specifications that make inconsistencies obsolete; this restriction also excludes the above example. Recently, Bauer et al. [@BauJuhLarLegSrb2012] have defined conjunction for a version of MTS extended by partially ordered labels; when refining an MTS, also the labels can be refined, and this has various applications. However, the conjunction operator is only defined under some restriction, which corresponds to requiring determinism in the standard MTS-setting. Another MTS-inspired theory including a conjunction operator has been introduced by Raclet et al. [@RacBadBenCaiLegPas2011]. While their approach yields the desired $p {\wedge}q$ as in our dMTS-setting, it is language-based and thus deals with deterministic systems only.
Disjunction on dMTS {#subsec:dmtsdisj}
-------------------
We will see in Sec. \[subsec:iaembeddingdmts\] that input-transitions (output-transitions) in IA correspond to must-transitions (may-transitions) in dMTS. In this light, the following definition of disjunction corresponds closely to the one for IA. In particular, initial must-transitions are also combined, but this time the choice between disjuncts is not delayed.
Let $P = (P, A, {\stackrel{}{\longrightarrow}}_P,$ ${\stackrel{}{\dashrightarrow}}_P)$ and $Q = (Q,
A, {\stackrel{}{\longrightarrow}}_Q,$ ${\stackrel{}{\dashrightarrow}}_Q)$ be dMTSs with common alphabet. The disjunction $P {\vee}Q$ is defined as the tuple $(\{
p {\vee}q \;|\; p \in P,\, q \in Q \} \cup P \cup Q, A,
{\stackrel{}{\longrightarrow}}, {\stackrel{}{\dashrightarrow}})$, where ${\stackrel{}{\longrightarrow}}$ and ${\stackrel{}{\dashrightarrow}}$ are the least sets satisfying ${\stackrel{}{\longrightarrow}}_P
\subseteq {\stackrel{}{\longrightarrow}}$, ${\stackrel{}{\dashrightarrow}}_P \subseteq
{\stackrel{}{\dashrightarrow}}$, ${\stackrel{}{\longrightarrow}}_Q \subseteq {\stackrel{}{\longrightarrow}}$, ${\stackrel{}{\dashrightarrow}}_Q \subseteq {\stackrel{}{\dashrightarrow}}$ and the following operational rules:
------------ -------------------------------------------------------- ---- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[(Must)]{} $p {\vee}q {\stackrel{a}{\longrightarrow}} P' \cup Q'$ if $p {\stackrel{a}{\longrightarrow}}_P P'$, $q {\stackrel{a}{\longrightarrow}}_Q Q'$
[(May1)]{} $p {\vee}q {\stackrel{\alpha}{\dashrightarrow}} p'$ if $p {\stackrel{\alpha}{\dashrightarrow}}_P p'$
[(May2)]{} $p {\vee}q {\stackrel{\alpha}{\dashrightarrow}} q'$ if $q {\stackrel{\alpha}{\dashrightarrow}}_Q q'$
------------ -------------------------------------------------------- ---- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\[def:dmtsorop\]
This definition clearly yields well-defined dMTSs respecting syntactic consistency. It also gives us the desired least-upper-bound property:
Let $P$, $Q$, and $R$ be dMTSs with states $p$, $q$ and $r$, resp. Then, $p {\vee}q {\sqsubseteq_{\textrm{dMTS}}}r$ if and only if $p {\sqsubseteq_{\textrm{dMTS}}}r$ and $q
{\sqsubseteq_{\textrm{dMTS}}}r$. \[thm:dmtsorisor\]
Analogously to the IA-setting we may obtain the following corollary to the above theorem:
dMTS-refinement is compositional wrt. disjunction. \[cor:dmtsoropcomp\]
Embedding of IA into dMTS {#subsec:iaembeddingdmts}
-------------------------
We can now adopt the embedding of IA into MTS from [@LarNymWas2007] to our setting:
Let $P$ be an IA with $A = I \cup O$. Then, the embedding ${[{P}]_{\text{dMTS}}}$ of $P$ into (d)MTS is defined as the (d)MTS $(P\cup\{{u_{P}}\}, A, {\stackrel{}{\longrightarrow}}, {\stackrel{}{\dashrightarrow}})$, where ${u_{P}} \notin P$ and:
--------------------------------------------------- ---- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
$p {\stackrel{\alpha}{\dashrightarrow}} p'$ if $p {\stackrel{\alpha}{\longrightarrow}}_P p'$ and $\alpha \in A \cup \{\tau\}$;
$p {\stackrel{a}{\longrightarrow}} p'$ if $p {\stackrel{a}{\longrightarrow}}_P p'$ and $a \in I$;
$p {\stackrel{a}{\dashrightarrow}} {u_{P}}$ if $p \,\not\!{\stackrel{a}{\longrightarrow}}_P$ and $a \in I$;
${u_{P}} {\stackrel{a}{\dashrightarrow}} {u_{P}}$ if $a \in A$.
--------------------------------------------------- ---- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\[def:iaembeddingdmts\]
For the remainder of this section we simply write ${[{p}]_{\text{}}}$ for $p
\in {[{P}]_{\text{dMTS}}}$. Observe that ${[{P}]_{\text{dMTS}}}$ does not have truly disjunctive transitions; hence, it is an MTS. In [@LarNymWas2007], it is shown that this embedding respects refinement, i.e., $p {\sqsubseteq_{\textrm{IA}}}q$ if and only if ${[{p}]_{\text{}}} {\sqsubseteq_{\textrm{dMTS}}}{[{q}]_{\text{}}}$. Since conjunction (disjunction) on IA and dMTS is the greatest lower bound (least upper bound) wrt. ${\sqsubseteq_{\textrm{IA}}}$ and ${\sqsubseteq_{\textrm{dMTS}}}$ (up to equivalence), resp., we have by general order theory:
For all IAs $P$ and $Q$ with $p \in P$ and $q \in Q$:
1. ${[{p {\wedge}q}]_{\text{}}} \,{\sqsubseteq_{\textrm{dMTS}}}\, {[{p}]_{\text{}}} {\wedge}{[{q}]_{\text{}}}$;
2. ${[{p {\vee}q}]_{\text{}}} \,{\sqsupseteq_{\textrm{dMTS}}}\, {[{p}]_{\text{}}} {\vee}{[{q}]_{\text{}}}$.
\[prop:iaembeddingdmts\]
. All non-labelled transitions depict $i$-may-transitions.[]{data-label="fig:conjiaembeddingdmts"}](conjiaembeddingdmts.png)
 ($a \in A = \{i,j,k\}$).[]{data-label="fig:disjiaembeddingdmts"}](disjiaembeddingdmts.png)
The reverse refinements do not hold due to the additional dMTSs that are not embeddings of IA. To see this for conjunction, consider the example in Fig. \[fig:conjiaembeddingdmts\], where $P$ and $Q$ are IAs. State $r$ in dMTS $R$ is a common implementation of state ${[{p}]_{\text{}}}$ and state ${[{q}]_{\text{}}}$, i.e., their conjunction is sufficiently large to cover $r$. However, $r$ does not refine ${[{p {\wedge}q}]_{\text{}}}$ since the initial $i$-must-transition of the latter cannot be matched by the former. Hence, ${[{p {\wedge}q}]_{\text{}}}$ and ${[{p}]_{\text{}}} {\wedge}{[{q}]_{\text{}}}$ cannot be equivalent. To see this for disjunction, consider $r$ and $s$ in Fig. \[fig:iaoropex\] on the right. Fig. \[fig:disjiaembeddingdmts\] shows all relevant dMTSs, and ${[{r {\vee}s}]_{\text{}}}$ does not refine ${[{r}]_{\text{}}} {\vee}{[{s}]_{\text{}}}$ since it does not have a must-transition after $i$.
Modal Interface Automata {#sec:mia}
========================
An essential point of Larsen, Nyman and Wasowski’s paper [@LarNymWas2007] is to enrich IA with modalities to get a flexible specification framework where inputs and outputs can be prescribed, allowed or prohibited. To do so, they consider IOMTS, i.e., MTS where visible actions are partitioned into inputs and outputs, and define parallel composition in IA-style.
![Example demonstrating the compositionality flaw of IOMTS.[]{data-label="fig:iomtsflaw"}](iomtsflaw.png)
Our example of Fig. \[fig:iomtsflaw\] shows that their approach has a serious flaw, namely observational modal refinement is not a precongruence for the parallel composition of [@LarNymWas2007]. In this example, the IOMTS $P$ has input alphabet $\{a\}$ and empty output alphabet, while $Q$ and $Q'$ have input alphabet $\{i\}$ and output alphabet $\{a\}$. Obviously, $q' {\sqsubseteq_{\textrm{dMTS}}}q$. When composing $P$ and $Q$ in parallel, $p|q$ would reach an error state after an $i$-must-transition in [@LarNymWas2007] since the potential output $a$ of $Q$ is not expected by $P$. In contrast, $p|q'$ has an $i$-must- and $i$-may-transition not allowed by $P|Q$, so that $p|q' \not{\sqsubseteq_{\textrm{dMTS}}}p|q$. This counterexample also holds for (strong) modal refinement as defined in [@LarNymWas2007] and is particularly severe since all systems are deterministic and all must-transitions concern inputs only. The problem is that $p|q$ forbids input $i$.
In [@LarNymWas2007], precongruence of parallel composition is not mentioned. Instead, a theorem relates the parallel composition of two IOMTSs to a different composition on two refining implementations, where an implementation in [@LarNymWas2007] is an IOMTS in which may- and must-transitions coincide. This theorem is incorrect as is pointed out in [@RacBadBenCaiLegPas2011] and repaired in the deterministic setting of that paper; the repair is again not a precongruence result, but still compares the results of two different composition operators. However, a natural solution to the precongruence problem can be adopted from the IA-framework [@DeAHen2005] where inputs are always allowed implicitly. Consequently, if an input transition is specified, it will always be a must.
In the remainder, we thus define and study a new specification framework, called *Modal Interface Automata* (MIA), that takes the dMTS-setting for an alphabet consisting of input and output actions, requires input-determinism, and demands that every input-may-transition is also an input-must-transition. The advantage over IA is that outputs can be prescribed via output-must-transitions, which precludes trivial implementations like *BlackHole* discussed in Sec. \[sec:ia\].
A *Modal Interface Automaton* (MIA) is a tuple $Q = (Q, I, O,
{\stackrel{}{\longrightarrow}}, {\stackrel{}{\dashrightarrow}})$, where $(Q, I \cup O,
{\stackrel{}{\longrightarrow}}, {\stackrel{}{\dashrightarrow}})$ is a dMTS with disjoint alphabets $I$ for inputs and $O$ for outputs and where for all $i
\in I$: (a) $q {\stackrel{i}{\longrightarrow}} Q'$ and $q {\stackrel{i}{\longrightarrow}} Q''$ implies $Q' = Q''$; (b) $q {\stackrel{i}{\dashrightarrow}} q'$ implies $\exists Q'.\, q
{\stackrel{i}{\longrightarrow}} Q'$ and $q' \in Q'$. \[def:mia\]
In the conference version of this article, we have considered truly disjunctive must-transitions only for outputs, so as to satisfy input determinism; this suffices for developing MIA-conjunction. However, for disjunction we have seen that such transitions are also needed for inputs. The above definition of MIA therefore permits one disjunctive must-transition for each input. This allows some choice on performing an input but, surprisingly, it is input-deterministic enough to support compositionality for parallel composition (cf. Thm. \[thm:miaparopcomp\]).
Let $P, Q$ be MIAs with common input and output alphabets. Relation ${\mathcal{R}} \subseteq P \times Q$ is an *(observational) MIA-refinement relation* if for all ${({p},{q})} \in {\mathcal{R}}$:
1. $q {\stackrel{a}{\longrightarrow}} Q'$ implies $\exists P'.\,
p {\stackrel{a}{\longrightarrow}} P'$ and $\forall p' {\in} P'\,\exists q' {\in} Q'.\;
{({p'},{q'})} \in {\mathcal{R}}$,
2. $p {\stackrel{\alpha}{\dashrightarrow}} p'$ with $\alpha \in O \cup
{\{{\tau}\}}$ implies $\exists q'.\, q
{\,\raisebox{1.0ex}{$\stackrel{\hat{\alpha}}{\underset{\text{\normalsize $\dashrightarrow$}}{\raisebox{-1.0ex}[0ex][0ex]{$\dashrightarrow$}}}$}\,} q'$ and ${({p'},{q'})} \in {\mathcal{R}}$.
We write $p {\sqsubseteq_{\textrm{MIA}}}q$ and say that $p$ *MIA-refines* $q$ if there exists an observational MIA-refinement relation ${\mathcal{R}}$ such that ${({p},{q})} \in {\mathcal{R}}$. Moreover, we also write $p {=_{\textrm{MIA}}}q$ in case $p {\sqsubseteq_{\textrm{MIA}}}q$ and $q {\sqsubseteq_{\textrm{MIA}}}p$ (which is an equivalence weaker than ‘bisimulation’). \[def:miasim\]
One can easily check that ${\sqsubseteq_{\textrm{MIA}}}$ is a preorder and the largest observational MIA-refinement relation. Its definition coincides with dMTS-refinement except that Cond. (ii) is restricted to outputs and the silent action $\tau$. Thus, inputs are always allowed implicitly and, in effect, treated just like in IA-refinement. Due to the output-must-transitions in the MIA-setting, MIA-refinement can model, e.g., STG-bisimilarity [@VogWol2002] for systems without internal actions; this is a kind of alternating simulation refinement used for digital circuits.
Conjunction on MIA {#subsec:miaconj}
------------------
Similar to conjunction on dMTS, we define conjunction on MIA by first constructing a conjunctive product and then eliminating all inconsistent states.
Let $P = (P, I, O, {\stackrel{}{\longrightarrow}}_P,$ ${\stackrel{}{\dashrightarrow}}_P)$ and $Q =
(Q, I, O, {\stackrel{}{\longrightarrow}}_Q, {\stackrel{}{\dashrightarrow}}_Q)$ be MIAs with common input and output alphabets and disjoint state sets $P$ and $Q$. The conjunctive product $P {\&}Q {=_{\text{df}}}((P \times Q) \cup P \cup Q, I,
O, {\stackrel{}{\longrightarrow}}, {\stackrel{}{\dashrightarrow}})$ inherits the transitions of $P$ and $Q$ and has additional transitions as follows, where $i \in I$, $o \in O$ and $\alpha \in O \cup \{\tau\}$:
-------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[(OMust1)]{} ${({p},{q})} {\stackrel{o}{\longrightarrow}} if $p {\stackrel{o}{\longrightarrow}}_P P'$ and $q {\,\raisebox{1.0ex}{$\stackrel{o}{\underset{\text{\normalsize $\dashrightarrow$}}{\raisebox{-1.0ex}[0ex][0ex]{$\dashrightarrow$}}}$}_{Q}\,}$
{\{{{({p'},{q'})}}\,|\,{p' \in P',\, q {\,\raisebox{1.0ex}{$\stackrel{o}{\underset{\text{\normalsize $\dashrightarrow$}}{\raisebox{-1.0ex}[0ex][0ex]{$\dashrightarrow$}}}$}_{Q}\,} q'}\}}$
[(OMust2)]{} ${({p},{q})} {\stackrel{o}{\longrightarrow}} if $p {\,\raisebox{1.0ex}{$\stackrel{o}{\underset{\text{\normalsize $\dashrightarrow$}}{\raisebox{-1.0ex}[0ex][0ex]{$\dashrightarrow$}}}$}_{P}\,}$ and $q {\stackrel{o}{\longrightarrow}}_Q Q'$
{\{{{({p'},{q'})}}\,|\,{p {\,\raisebox{1.0ex}{$\stackrel{o}{\underset{\text{\normalsize $\dashrightarrow$}}{\raisebox{-1.0ex}[0ex][0ex]{$\dashrightarrow$}}}$}_{P}\,} p',\, q' \in Q'}\}}$
[(IMust1)]{} ${({p},{q})} {\stackrel{i}{\longrightarrow}} P'$ if $p {\stackrel{i}{\longrightarrow}}_P P'$ and $q \,\not\!{\stackrel{i}{\longrightarrow}}_Q$
[(IMust2)]{} ${({p},{q})} {\stackrel{i}{\longrightarrow}} Q'$ if $p \,\not\!{\stackrel{i}{\longrightarrow}}_P$ and $q {\stackrel{i}{\longrightarrow}}_Q Q'$
[(IMust3)]{} ${({p},{q})} {\stackrel{i}{\longrightarrow}} P' \times Q'$ if $p {\stackrel{i}{\longrightarrow}}_P P'$ and $q {\stackrel{i}{\longrightarrow}}_Q Q'$
[(May1)]{} ${({p},{q})} {\stackrel{\tau}{\dashrightarrow}} {({p'},{q})}$ if $p {\,\raisebox{1.0ex}{$\stackrel{\tau}{\underset{\text{\normalsize $\dashrightarrow$}}{\raisebox{-1.0ex}[0ex][0ex]{$\dashrightarrow$}}}$}_{P}\,} p'$
[(May2)]{} ${({p},{q})} {\stackrel{\tau}{\dashrightarrow}} {({p},{q'})}$ if $q {\,\raisebox{1.0ex}{$\stackrel{\tau}{\underset{\text{\normalsize $\dashrightarrow$}}{\raisebox{-1.0ex}[0ex][0ex]{$\dashrightarrow$}}}$}_{Q}\,} q'$
[(May3)]{} ${({p},{q})} {\stackrel{\alpha}{\dashrightarrow}} {({p'},{q'})}$ if $p {\,\raisebox{1.0ex}{$\stackrel{\alpha}{\underset{\text{\normalsize $\dashrightarrow$}}{\raisebox{-1.0ex}[0ex][0ex]{$\dashrightarrow$}}}$}_{P}\,} p'$ and $q {\,\raisebox{1.0ex}{$\stackrel{\alpha}{\underset{\text{\normalsize $\dashrightarrow$}}{\raisebox{-1.0ex}[0ex][0ex]{$\dashrightarrow$}}}$}_{Q}\,} q'$
[(IMay1)]{} ${({p},{q})} {\stackrel{i}{\dashrightarrow}} p'$ if $p {\stackrel{i}{\dashrightarrow}}_P p'$ and $q \,\not\!{\stackrel{i}{\dashrightarrow}}_Q$
[(IMay2)]{} ${({p},{q})} {\stackrel{i}{\dashrightarrow}} q'$ if $p \,\not\!{\stackrel{i}{\dashrightarrow}}_P$ and $q {\stackrel{i}{\dashrightarrow}}_Q q'$
[(IMay3)]{} ${({p},{q})} {\stackrel{i}{\dashrightarrow}} {({p'},{q'})}$ if $p {\stackrel{i}{\dashrightarrow}}_P p'$ and $q {\stackrel{i}{\dashrightarrow}}_Q q'$
-------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\[def:miaconjprod\]
This product is defined analogously to IA-conjunction for inputs (plus the corresponding ‘may’ rules) and to the dMTS-product for outputs and $\tau$. Thus, it combines the effects shown in Fig. \[fig:iaandopex\] (where all outputs are treated as may) and Fig. \[fig:dmtsandopex\] (where all actions are outputs).
Given a conjunctive product $P {\&}Q$, the set ${F}\subseteq P
\times Q$ of (logically) *inconsistent states* is defined as the least set satisfying the following rules:
---------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------- -----------------------
[(F1)]{} $p \!{\stackrel{o}{\longrightarrow}}_P$, $q \not\!\!\!{\,\raisebox{1.0ex}{$\stackrel{o}{\underset{\text{\normalsize $\dashrightarrow$}}{\raisebox{-1.0ex}[0ex][0ex]{$\dashrightarrow$}}}$}_{Q}\,}$, $o \in O$ implies ${({p},{q})} \in {F}$
[(F2)]{} $p \not\!\!\!{\,\raisebox{1.0ex}{$\stackrel{o}{\underset{\text{\normalsize $\dashrightarrow$}}{\raisebox{-1.0ex}[0ex][0ex]{$\dashrightarrow$}}}$}_{P}\,}$, $q \!{\stackrel{o}{\longrightarrow}}_Q$, $o \in O$ implies ${({p},{q})} \in {F}$
[(F3)]{} ${({p},{q})} {\stackrel{a}{\longrightarrow}} R'$ and $R' \subseteq {F}$ implies ${({p},{q})} \in {F}$
---------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------- -----------------------
The conjunction $P {\wedge}Q$ of MIAs $P, Q$ with common input and output alphabets is obtained by deleting all states ${({p},{q})} \in
{F}$ from $P {\&}Q$ as for dMTS in Def. \[def:dmtsandop\]. We write $p {\wedge}q$ for state ${({p},{q})}$ of $P {\wedge}Q$; all such states are defined – and consistent – by construction. \[def:miaandop\]
The conjunction $P {\wedge}Q$ is a MIA and is thus well-defined. This can be seen by a similar argument as we have used above in the context of dMTS-conjunction, while input-determinism can be established by an argument similar to that in the IA-setting. Note that, in contrast to the dMTS-situation, Rules (F1) and (F2) only apply to outputs. Fig. \[fig:dmtsandopex\] is also an example for conjunction in the MIA-setting if all actions are read as outputs.
To reason about inconsistency we use a notion of witness again. This may be defined analogously to the witness notion for dMTS but replacing $a \in A$ in Def. \[def:dmtswitness\](W1) and (W2) by $a
\in O$. We then obtain the analogous lemma to Lemma \[lem:dmtswitness\], which is needed in the proof of the analogue theorem to Thm. \[thm:dmtsandisand\]:
A *MIA-witness* $W$ of $P {\&}Q$ is a subset of $(P \times
Q) \cup P \cup Q$ such that the following conditions hold for all ${({p},{q})} \in W$:
---------- ------------------------------------------------------- --------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[(W1)]{} $p \!{\stackrel{o}{\longrightarrow}}_P$ with $o\in O$ implies $q {\,\raisebox{1.0ex}{$\stackrel{o}{\underset{\text{\normalsize $\dashrightarrow$}}{\raisebox{-1.0ex}[0ex][0ex]{$\dashrightarrow$}}}$}_{Q}\,}$
[(W2)]{} $q \!{\stackrel{o}{\longrightarrow}}_Q$ with $o\in O$ implies $p {\,\raisebox{1.0ex}{$\stackrel{o}{\underset{\text{\normalsize $\dashrightarrow$}}{\raisebox{-1.0ex}[0ex][0ex]{$\dashrightarrow$}}}$}_{P}\,}$
[(W3)]{} ${({p},{q})} {\stackrel{a}{\longrightarrow}} R'$ implies $R' \cap W \not= \emptyset$
---------- ------------------------------------------------------- --------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\[def:miawitness\]
Let $P {\&}Q$ be a conjunctive product of MIAs. Then, for any MIA-witness $W$ of $P {\&}Q$, we have (i) ${F}\cap W =
\emptyset$. Moreover, (ii) the set $W {=_{\text{df}}}\{ {({p},{q})} \in P
\times Q \;|\; \exists\,\text{MIA}\,R$ and $r \in R.\, r {\sqsubseteq_{\textrm{MIA}}}p
\text{ and } r {\sqsubseteq_{\textrm{MIA}}}q \} \cup P \cup Q$ is a MIA-witness of $P
{\&}Q$. \[lem:miawitness\]
We can now state and prove the desired largest-lower-bound theorem, from which compositionality of ${\sqsubseteq_{\textrm{MIA}}}$ wrt. ${\wedge}$ follows in analogy to the IA- and dMTS-settings:
Let $P, Q$ be MIAs. We have *(i)* $(\exists\,\text{MIA}\,R$ and $r \in
R.\, r {\sqsubseteq_{\textrm{MIA}}}p$ and $r {\sqsubseteq_{\textrm{MIA}}}q)$ if and only if $p {\wedge}q$ is defined. Further, in case $p {\wedge}q$ is defined and for any MIA $R$ and $r \in R$: *(ii)* $r {\sqsubseteq_{\textrm{MIA}}}p \text{ and } r {\sqsubseteq_{\textrm{MIA}}}q
\text{ if and only if } r {\sqsubseteq_{\textrm{MIA}}}p {\wedge}q$. \[thm:miaandisand\]
In analogy to Corollary \[cor:dmtsandopcomp\] we obtain:
MIA-refinement is compositional wrt. conjunction. \[cor:miaandopcomp\]
Disjunction on MIA {#subsec:miadisj}
------------------
The disjunction of two MIAs $P$ and $Q$ can be defined in the same way as for dMTS, except for the special treatment of inputs in the may-rules which guarantees that $P {\vee}Q$ is a MIA and, especially, that Def. \[def:mia\](b) is satisfied:
Let $P = (P, I, O, {\stackrel{}{\longrightarrow}}_P,$ ${\stackrel{}{\dashrightarrow}}_P)$, $Q = (Q,
I, O, {\stackrel{}{\longrightarrow}}_Q,$ ${\stackrel{}{\dashrightarrow}}_Q)$ be MIAs with common input and output alphabets and disjoint state sets $P$ and $Q$. The disjunction $P {\vee}Q$ is defined by $(\{ p {\vee}q \;|\; p \in
P,\, q \in Q \} \cup P \cup Q, I, O, {\stackrel{}{\longrightarrow}},
{\stackrel{}{\dashrightarrow}})$, where ${\stackrel{}{\longrightarrow}}$ and ${\stackrel{}{\dashrightarrow}}$ are the least sets satisfying ${\stackrel{}{\longrightarrow}}_P \subseteq {\stackrel{}{\longrightarrow}}$, ${\stackrel{}{\dashrightarrow}}_P \subseteq {\stackrel{}{\dashrightarrow}}$, ${\stackrel{}{\longrightarrow}}_Q
\subseteq {\stackrel{}{\longrightarrow}}$, ${\stackrel{}{\dashrightarrow}}_Q \subseteq {\stackrel{}{\dashrightarrow}}$ and the following operational rules:
------------ -------------------------------------------------------- ---- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[(Must)]{} $p {\vee}q {\stackrel{a}{\longrightarrow}} P' \cup Q'$ if $p {\stackrel{a}{\longrightarrow}}_P P'$ and $q {\stackrel{a}{\longrightarrow}}_Q Q'$
[(May1)]{} $p {\vee}q {\stackrel{\alpha}{\dashrightarrow}} p'$ if $p {\stackrel{\alpha}{\dashrightarrow}}_P p'$ and, in case $\alpha \in I$, also $q \!{\stackrel{\alpha}{\dashrightarrow}}_Q$
[(May2)]{} $p {\vee}q {\stackrel{\alpha}{\dashrightarrow}} q'$ if $q {\stackrel{\alpha}{\dashrightarrow}}_Q q'$ and, in case $\alpha \in I$, also $p \!{\stackrel{\alpha}{\dashrightarrow}}_P$
------------ -------------------------------------------------------- ---- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\[def:miaorop\]
It is easy to see that this definition is well-defined, i.e., the resulting disjunctions are indeed MIAs, and we additionally have:
Let $P$, $Q$ and $R$ be MIAs with states $p$, $q$ and $r$, resp. Then, $p {\vee}q {\sqsubseteq_{\textrm{MIA}}}r$ if and only if $p {\sqsubseteq_{\textrm{MIA}}}r$ and $q
{\sqsubseteq_{\textrm{MIA}}}r$. \[thm:miaorisor\]
The theorem’s proof is as for dMTS (cf. Thm. \[thm:dmtsorisor\]) but, in the (ii)-cases, only $\alpha \in O \cup \{\tau\}$ has to be considered. Analogously to dMTS we obtain the following corollary to Thm. \[thm:miaorisor\]:
MIA-refinement is compositional wrt. disjunction. \[cor:miaoropcomp\]
![MIA-disjunction is more intuitive than IA-disjunction.[]{data-label="fig:miadisjintuitive"}](miadisjintuitive.png)
To conclude this section we argue that MIA-disjunction is more intuitive than IA-disjunction. The example in Fig. \[fig:miadisjintuitive\] shows MIAs $P$, $Q$, $P {\vee}Q$ as well as a MIA $R$, where state $r$ corresponds to the IA-disjunction of states $p$ and $q$ when we understand $P$ and $Q$ as IAs. As expected (cf. p. ), $p {\vee}q$ is a refinement of $r$, but not vice versa. MIA-disjunction can now be considered to be more intuitive since the first transition in the disjunction decides which disjunct has to be satisfied afterward, in contrast to IA-disjunction.
![MIA-disjunction is an inclusive-or.[]{data-label="fig:miainclusiveor"}](miainclusiveor.png)
Moreover, Fig. \[fig:miainclusiveor\] shows that MIA-disjunction is an inclusive-or: an implementation of $p {\vee}q$ can have an $o1$-transition followed by $i$ and another $o1$-transition followed by $j$; interestingly, $r {\sqsubseteq_{\textrm{MIA}}}p {\vee}q$ satisfies ‘half’ of $p$ and ‘half’ of $q$. In general, for each action separately, a refinement of some disjunction has to satisfy at least all initial $a$-must-transitions of one of its disjuncts.
Parallel Composition on MIA {#subsec:miaparop}
---------------------------
In analogy to the IA-setting [@DeAHen2005] we provide a parallel operator on MIA. Here, error states are identified, and all states are removed from which reaching an error state is unavoidable in some implementation, as is done for IOMTS in [@LarNymWas2007].
MIAs $P_1$ and $P_2$ are *composable* if $A_1 \cap A_2 = (I_1
\cap O_2) \cup (O_1 \cap I_2)$, as in IA. For such MIAs we define the *product* ${\stackrel{}{\longrightarrow}}, {\stackrel{}{\dashrightarrow}})$, where $I = (I_1 \cup I_2)
\setminus (O_1 \cup O_2)$ and $O = (O_1 \cup O_2) \setminus (I_1
\cup I_2)$ and where ${\stackrel{}{\longrightarrow}}$ and ${\stackrel{}{\dashrightarrow}}$ are defined as follows:
------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[(Must1)]{} ${({p_1},{p_2})} {\stackrel{a}{\longrightarrow}} P'_1 \times {\{{p_2}\}}$ if $p_1 {\stackrel{a}{\longrightarrow}} P'_1$ and $a \notin A_2$
[(Must2)]{} ${({p_1},{p_2})} {\stackrel{a}{\longrightarrow}} {\{{p_1}\}} \times P'_2$ if $p_2 {\stackrel{a}{\longrightarrow}} P'_2$ and $a \notin A_1$
[(May1)]{} ${({p_1},{p_2})} {\stackrel{\alpha}{\dashrightarrow}} {({p'_1},{p_2})}$ if $p_1 {\stackrel{\alpha}{\dashrightarrow}} p'_1$ and $\alpha \notin A_2$
[(May2)]{} ${({p_1},{p_2})} {\stackrel{\alpha}{\dashrightarrow}} {({p_1},{p'_2})}$ if $p_2 {\stackrel{\alpha}{\dashrightarrow}} p'_2$ and $\alpha \notin A_1$
[(May3)]{} ${({p_1},{p_2})} {\stackrel{\tau}{\dashrightarrow}} {({p'_1},{p'_2})}$ if $p_1 {\stackrel{a}{\dashrightarrow}} p'_1$ and $p_2 {\stackrel{a}{\dashrightarrow}} p'_2$ for some $a$.
------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\[def:miaparprod\]
Recall that there are no $\tau$-must-transitions since they are irrelevant for refinement.
Given a parallel product $P_1 {\otimes}P_2$, a state ${({p_1},{p_2})}$ is an *error state* if there is some $a \in A_1 \cap A_2$ such that (a) $a \in O_1$, $p_1 \!{\stackrel{a}{\dashrightarrow}}$ and $p_2
\,\not\!{\stackrel{a}{\longrightarrow}}$, or (b) $a \in O_2$, $p_2 \!{\stackrel{a}{\dashrightarrow}}$ and $p_1 \,\not\!{\stackrel{a}{\longrightarrow}}$.
Again we define the set $E \subseteq P_1 \times P_2$ of *incompatible* states as the least set such that ${({p_1},{p_2})} \in E$ if (i) ${({p_1},{p_2})}$ is an error state or (ii) ${({p_1},{p_2})} {\stackrel{\alpha}{\dashrightarrow}} {({p'_1},{p'_2})}$ for some $\alpha \in O \cup \{\tau\}$ and ${({p'_1},{p'_2})} \in E$.
The *parallel composition* $P_1 {|}P_2$ of $P_1$ and $P_2$ is now obtained from $P_1 {\otimes}P_2$ by *pruning*, namely removing all states in $E$ and every transition that involves such states as its source, its target or one of its targets; all may-transitions underlying a removed must-transition are deleted, too. If ${({p_1},{p_2})} \in P_1 {|}P_2$, we write $p_1 {|}p_2$ and call $p_1$ and $p_2$ *compatible*. \[def:miaparop\]
Parallel products and parallel compositions are well-defined MIAs. Syntactic consistency is preserved, as is input-determinism since input-transitions are directly inherited from one of the *composable* systems. In particular, Cond. (b) in Def. \[def:mia\] holds due to the additional clause regarding the deletion of may-transitions. In addition, targets of disjunctive must-transitions are never empty since all must-transitions that remain after pruning are taken from the product without modification.
As an example why pruning is needed, consider Fig. \[fig:iaparopex\] again and read the $\tau$-transitions as may-transitions and all other transitions as must-transitions. Further observe that pruning is different from removing inconsistent states in conjunction. For truly disjunctive transitions ${({p_1},{p_2})} {\stackrel{a}{\longrightarrow}} P'$ of the product $P_1 {\otimes}P_2$, the state ${({p_1},{p_2})}$ is removed already if $P' \cap E \not= \emptyset$, i.e., there exists some ${({p'_1},{p'_2})} \in P' \cap E$, and not only if $P' \subseteq E$. This is clear for $a \in O$ since ${({p_1},{p_2})} {\stackrel{a}{\dashrightarrow}}
{({p'_1},{p'_2})}$ by syntactic consistency and, therefore, ${({p_1},{p_2})}$ is deleted itself by Cond. (ii) above. Note that Cond. (ii) corresponds directly to the IA-case since output-transitions there correspond to may-transitions here (see Sec. \[subsec:iaembeddingdmts\]). For $a \in I$, reaching the error state can only be prevented if the environment does not provide $a$; intuitively, this is because $P'$ has w.l.o.g. the form $P'_1 \times
\{p_2\}$ in the product of $P_1$ and $P_2$ (i.e., $p'_2 = p_2$). The implementor of $P_1$ might choose to implement $p_1 {\stackrel{a}{\longrightarrow}} p'_1$ such that – when $P_1$’s implementation is composed with $P_2$’s – the error state is reached. To express the requirement on the environment not to exhibit $a$, must-transition ${({p_1},{p_2})}
{\stackrel{a}{\longrightarrow}} P'$ and all underlying may-transitions have to be deleted.
Let $P_1$, $P_2$ and $Q_1$ be MIAs with $p_1 \in P_1$, $p_2 \in
P_2$, $q_1 \in Q_1$ and $p_1 {\sqsubseteq_{\textrm{MIA}}}q_1$. Assume that $Q_1$ and $P_2$ are composable; then:
1. $P_1$ and $P_2$ are composable.
2. If $q_1$ and $p_2$ are compatible, then so are $p_1$, $p_2$ and $p_1 {|}p_2 {\sqsubseteq_{\textrm{MIA}}}q_1 {|}p_2$.
\[thm:miaparopcomp\]
![Example illustrating the need of input-determinism for MIA.[]{data-label="fig:miainputdet"}](miainputdet.png)
This precongruence property of MIA-refinement would not hold if we would do away with input-determinism in MIA. To see this, consider the example of Fig. \[fig:miainputdet\] for which $p {\sqsubseteq_{\textrm{MIA}}}q$; however, $p {|}r {\sqsubseteq_{\textrm{MIA}}}q {|}r$ does not hold since $q$ and $r$ are compatible while $p$ and $r$ are not. An analogue reasoning applies to IA, although we do not know of a reference in the IA literature where this has been observed.
Embedding of IA into MIA {#subsec:embedding}
------------------------
To conclude, we provide an embedding of IA into MIA in the line of [@LarNymWas2007]:
Let $P$ be an IA. The embedding ${[{P}]_{\text{MIA}}}$ of $P$ into MIA is defined as the MIA $(P, I, O, {\stackrel{}{\longrightarrow}}, {\stackrel{}{\dashrightarrow}})$, where (i) $p {\stackrel{i}{\longrightarrow}} p'$ if $p {\stackrel{i}{\longrightarrow}}_P p'$ and $i \in I$, and (ii) $p {\stackrel{\alpha}{\dashrightarrow}} p'$ if $p {\stackrel{\alpha}{\longrightarrow}}_P p'$ and $\alpha \in I \cup O \cup \{\tau\}$. \[def:iaembeddingmia\]
In the remainder of this section we simply write ${[{p}]_{\text{}}}$ for $p
\in {[{P}]_{\text{MIA}}}$. This embedding is much simpler than the one of [@LarNymWas2007] since MIA more closely resembles IA than IOMTS does. In particular, the following theorem is obvious:
For IAs $P, Q$ with $p \in P$, $q \in Q$: $\,p {\sqsubseteq_{\textrm{IA}}}q$ if and only if ${[{p}]_{\text{}}} {\sqsubseteq_{\textrm{MIA}}}{[{q}]_{\text{}}}$. \[thm:iaembeddingmia\]
Our embedding respects operators ${\wedge}$ and ${|}$, unlike the one in [@LarNymWas2007]:
For IAs $P, Q$ with $p \in P$, $q \in Q$:
1. ${[{p}]_{\text{}}} {\wedge}{[{q}]_{\text{}}}$ ${=_{\textrm{MIA}}}$ ${[{p {\wedge}q}]_{\text{}}}$;
2. ${[{p}]_{\text{}}} \,{|}\, {[{q}]_{\text{}}}$ ${=_{\textrm{MIA}}}$ ${[{p {|}q}]_{\text{}}}$.
\[thm:miaembedding\]
We observe that the IA-embedding into MIA is ‘better’ wrt. conjunction than that into dMTS since refinement holds in both directions. The reason is that MIA-refinement is coarser (i.e., larger) than dMTS-refinement applied to MIAs (which are dMTSs after all): input may-transitions do not have to be matched in the former. Thus, there can be more lower bounds wrt. MIA-refinement and the greatest lower bound can be larger.
For IAs $P, Q$ with $p \in P$, $q \in Q$, we have: ${[{p}]_{\text{}}}
{\vee}{[{q}]_{\text{}}} \,{\sqsubseteq_{\textrm{MIA}}}\, {[{p {\vee}q}]_{\text{}}}$. \[prop:thm:miaembeddingdisj\]
This result holds by general order theory due to Thm. \[thm:iaembeddingmia\]. The reverse refinement for disjunction is not valid as we have already seen in Fig. \[fig:miadisjintuitive\], and this difference repairs a shortcoming of IA-disjunction as discussed on p. .
Conclusions and Future Work {#sec:conclusions}
===========================
We introduced *Modal Interface Automata* (MIA), an interface theory that is more expressive than *Interface Automata* (IA) [@DeAHen2005]: it allows one to mandate that a specification’s refinement must implement some output, thus excluding trivial implementations, e.g., one that accepts all inputs but never emits any output. This was also the motivation behind *IOMTS* [@LarNymWas2007] that extends *Modal Transition Systems* (MTS) [@Lar89] by inputs and outputs; however, the IOMTS-parallel operator in the style of IA is not compositional. Apart from having disjunctive must-transitions, MIA is a subset of IOMTS, but it has a different refinement relation that is a precongruence for parallel composition.
Most importantly and in contrast to IA and IOMTS, the MIA theory is equipped with a conjunction operator for reasoning about components that satisfy multiple interfaces simultaneously. Along the way, we also introduced conjunction on IA and a disjunctive extension of MTS – as well as disjunction on IA, MTS and MIA – and proved these operators to be the desired greatest lower bounds (resp., least upper bounds) and thus compositional. Compared to the language-based modal interface theory of [@RacBadBenCaiLegPas2011], our formalism supports nondeterministic specifications and allows limited nondeterminism (in the sense of deterministic *disjunctive* transitions) even for inputs. Hence, MIA establishes a theoretically clean and practical interface theory that fixes the shortcomings of related work.
![In Logic LTS [@LueVog2010], disjunction is internal choice.[]{data-label="fig:intchoice"}](intchoice.png)
From a technical perspective, our MIA-theory borrows from our earlier work on Logic LTS [@LueVog2010]. There, we started from a very different conjunction operator appropriate for a deadlock-sensitive CSP-like process theory, and then derived a ‘best’ suitable refinement relation. In [@LueVog2010], disjunction is simply internal choice $\sqcap$, as sketched in Fig. \[fig:intchoice\]. For MIA, $p
\sqcap q$ is not suited at all since both $p$ and $q$ require that input $i$ is performed immediately.
Future work shall follow both theoretical and practical directions. On the theoretical side, we firstly wish to study MIA’s expressiveness in comparison to other theories via thoroughness [@FecFruLueSch2009]. More substantially, however, we intend to enrich MIA with temporal-logic operators, in the spirit of truly mixing operational and temporal-logic styles of specification in the line of our *Logic LTS* in [@LueVog2011]. Important guidance for this will be the work of Feuillade and Pinchinat [@FeuPin2007], who have introduced a temporal logic for modal interfaces that is equally expressive to MTS. In contrast to [@LueVog2011], their setting is not mixed, does not consider nondeterminism, and does not include a refinement relation. Indeed, a unique feature of Logic LTS is that its refinement relation subsumes the standard temporal-logic satisfaction relation.
On the practical side, we plan to study the algorithmic complexity implied by MIA-refinement, on the basis of existing literature for MTS. For example, Antonik et al. [@AntHutLarNymWas2010] discuss related decision problems such as the existence of a common implementation; Fischbein and Uchitel [@FisUch2008] generalize the conjunction of [@LarSteWei95] and study its algorithmic aspects; Beneš et al. [@BenCerKre2011] show that refinement problems for DMTS are not harder than in the case of MTS and also consider conjunction; Raclet et al. [@RacBadBenCaiLegPas2011] advocate deterministic automata for modal interface theories in order to reduce complexity. In addition, we wish to adapt existing tool support for interface theories to MIA, e.g., the *MIO Workbench* [@BauMaySchHen2010].
Acknowledgement {#acknowledgement .unnumbered}
===============
We thank the anonymous reviewers for their constructive comments and for pointing out additional related work. Part of this research was supported by the DFG (German Research Foundation) under grant nos. LU 1748/3-1 and VO 615/12-1 (“Foundations of Heterogeneous Specifications Using State Machines and Temporal Logic”).
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'We propose a coarse-grained model for polymer chains and polymer networks based on the meso-scale dynamics. The model takes the internal degrees of freedom of the constituent polymer chains into account using memory functions and colored noises. We apply our model to dilute polymer solutions and polymer networks. A numerical simulation on a dilute polymer solution demonstrates the validity of the assumptions on the dynamics of our model. By applying this model to polymer networks, we find a transition in the dynamical behavior from an isolated chain state to a network state.'
author:
- Takashi Shibata
- 'Hidemitsu Furukawa$^{+}$'
- Toshihiro Kawakatsu
date: '2008/3/22'
title: |
A coarse grained model of polymer networks\
focusing on the intermediate length scales
---
A wide class of systems possesses hierarchical structures over large length scales. Typical examples are critical liquids and soft matter such as polymers, surfactants, colloidal suspensions, and polymer gels. Due to the coexistence of the different length scales of the internal freedom degree, soft matter shows various anomorous and interesting phenomena including shear induced phase separation of polymer solutions [@test1][@test2], and viscoelastic phase separations of entangled polymers [@test3]. In such point of view, the system of polymer gels is a somewhat interesting target, because it has widely distributed length scales, i.e. the size of monomers, the size of networks, and the size of the whose elastic body. Due to such hierarchical structures, many interesting phenomena such as swelling behavior coupled with inhomogeneity [@batterfly][@Furukawa1] and anomalous relaxation process in the dynamics of networks[@critical; @slowing; @down][@topologycal; @relax] occur. The hierarchical structures of polymer gels are also utilized to develop many innovative materials[@topological][@cray][@double; @network].
To realize these phenomena and to design these materials, it is important to model meso-scale structures and to bridge between these mesoscale structures and those on the larger and smaller scales. There have been many models for the polymer network systems on different length scales[@Polymer; @Science]. However, due to the complexity of the polymer networks, these models are far from realistic especially on the intermediate length and time scales, which are important in understanding the experimental results and in materials designing.
In this paper, we propose a coarse-grained model of polymer networks based on the meso-scale structures and dynamics. We perform numerical simulations of this model to verify the validity of our assumptions and modeling.
Let us discuss our coarse-grained model for polymer networks. To reduce the degrees of freedom, we derive a set of dynamical equations for the polymer networks which are described in terms of the degrees of freedom of the crosslinkers. In Fig.\[fig:model\_picture\], we show a schematic illustration of our reduction process of the degrees of freedom.
![Schematic diagram of the reduction process of the degrees of freedom of polymer network. (a) A polymer network before the reduction. (b) A tagged single polymer chain in the polymer network. (c) The polymer chain described by memory functions $\Psi^{\pm}$. (d) Polymer network after the reduction.[]{data-label="fig:model_picture"}](fig1.eps){width="6.5cm"}
Here we model the polymer network as a set of linear polymer chains connected by crosslinkers as is shown in Fig.\[fig:model\_picture\](a). We can describe this network topology using so-called adjacency matrix. To obtain explicit expressions for the memory functions and the colored noises based on the meso-scale polymer network model, we decompose polymer network into a set of linear polymer chains which are described by the Zimm model for the dilute polymer solution under hydrodynamic interaction(Fig.\[fig:model\_picture\](b))[@doi-ed]. By a reduction of the degree of freedom of the dynamic equation for the linear polymer chain, we gain the memory functions and colored noises for the polymer chain(Fig.\[fig:model\_picture\](c)). Then, we reconstruct the polymer network by connecting these chains using the adjacency matrix. With this procedure, we can express the motion of the crosslinkers without using information on the motion of the monomers (Fig.\[fig:model\_picture\](d)). After this reduction, the degrees of freedom of the monomers are reduced to the memory functions and colored noises[@Moriformula].
Now, we discuss the dynamics of an isolated linear polymer chain, which is composed of $N$ monomers. Let $\mathbf{R}(n,t),(n=1,...N-1)$ be the position of $i$-th monomer at time $t$, and define $\mathbf{R}_+(t)=\mathbf{R}(0,t)$, $\mathbf{R}_-(t)=\mathbf{R}(N,t)$, $\mathbf{v}_\pm=d\mathbf{R}_\pm/dt$, and $\mathbf{f}_{\pm}$ as the positions and the velocities of crosslinkers at the chain ends and the forces acting on them. In this dilute polymer case, the dynamics of monomers are well described by the Zimm model[@doi-ed]. In the Zimm model, the equation of motion of individual monomer is expressed as $$\begin{aligned}
\label{Zimm model about linear polymer}
&\frac{\partial \mathbf{R}_n}{\partial t} =k\int_0^N dm \mspace{5mu} h(n-m) \frac{\partial ^2 \mathbf{R}_m}{\partial m^2}
+ \bm{\mathbf{\eta}}_n + \mathbf{f}_n \\
\label{Zimm model fluctuation dispation theorem}
&\langle \bm{\mathbf{\eta}}_n(t) \bm{\mathbf{\eta}}^T_m(t') \rangle = 2k_BT h(n-m)\bm{I}\delta(t-t')\end{aligned}$$ where $h(n-m)$ and $\bm{\mathbf{\eta}}_n$ are mobility of the monomer and the noise acting on the $n$-th monomer and $\mathbf{f}_n$ is defined as $\mathbf{f}_n=\mathbf{f}_+N\delta (n) + \mathbf{f}_-N\delta (n-N)$. The mobility of the monomers is related to the noise $\bm{\mathbf{\eta}}_n$ by the fluctuation dissipation theorem eq., where $\bm{I}$ is the unit tensor. In order to solve eq. formally, we introduce the Fourier series expansion of any vector variable $\mathbf{Q}_n$ such as $\bm{\mathbf{R}}_n$ as $\mathbf{Q}_n=\tilde{\mathbf{Q}}_0+2 \sum_{p=1}^N \tilde{\mathbf{Q}}_p\cos (\frac{p\pi n}{N})$ together with the expressions for the Fourier coefficients $\tilde{\mathbf{Q}}_0=\frac{1}{N}\int_0^N dn \mathbf{Q}_n$ and $\tilde{\mathbf{Q}}_p=\frac{1}{N}\int_0^N dn \mathbf{Q}_n\cos (\frac{p\pi n}{N})$. Here we neglected the sine modes in the Fourier series, because we focus on the dynamics of the end points of the polymer chain which do not excite the cosine modes. Then the equation of motion eq is rewritten as $$\begin{aligned}
\label{Zimm model about linear polymer to mode}
\frac{\partial}{\partial t}\tilde{\mathbf{X}}_p = \zeta_p^{-1}(-k_p \tilde{\mathbf{X}}_p + \tilde{\mathbf{f}_p}) + \tilde{\bm{\mathbf{\eta}}}_p,\end{aligned}$$ where $k_{p}=6\pi^2k_BT(Nb^{2})^{-1}p^2$ and $\zeta_{p}=(12\pi^3 N b^2 p)^{1/2}\eta_{s}$. Here, the longest relaxation time $\tau_R=\zeta_1/k_1$ is called Rouse time. If we only focus on the dynamics of crosslinkers, the independent variables we need are $\mathbf{R}_+(t)=\mathbf{R}(0,t)$ and $\mathbf{R}_-(t)=\mathbf{R}(N,t)$. Since eq. is linear equation, we can directly integrate eq. over $t$. Then, we can sum up Fourier coefficients $\tilde{\mathbf{X}}_p$ to derive $\mathbf{R}_{\pm}$. As a result, the velocities of crosslinkers $\mathbf{v}_{\pm}=d\mathbf{R}_{\pm}/dt$ are given by $$\begin{aligned}
\label{R_pm}
\mathbf{v}_{\pm}=\int ds\{g_+(t-s)\mathbf{f}_{\pm}(s)+g_-(t-s)\mathbf{f}_{\mp}(s)\}+\tilde{\bm{\mathbf{\xi}}}_{\pm} ,\end{aligned}$$ where $g_{\pm}(t)$ and $\xi_{\pm}(t)$ are the memory functions and colored noises that are defined by $$\begin{aligned}
\label{Green function Gpm}
g_{\pm}(t) &= \frac{1}{\zeta_0}+\sum_{p=1}^N \frac{2}{\zeta_p}
\bigg[1 - \frac{({\pm}1)^p p^{3/2}}{\tau_R} \exp \big({-\frac{tp^{3/2}}{\tau_R}}\big) \bigg], \\
&\langle \tilde{\bm{\xi}}_{\pm}(t) \tilde{\bm{\xi}}^T_{\pm}(t') \rangle = k_BT g_{+}(t-t'), \\
&\langle \tilde{\bm{\xi}}_{\pm}(t) \tilde{\bm{\xi}}^T_{\mp}(t') \rangle = k_BT g_{-}(t-t') .\end{aligned}$$ Using eq., the force acting on the crosslinkers which is caused by the motion of internal degrees of freedom of the polymer chain can be described as $$\begin{aligned}
\label{f_pm_final}
\mspace{-11mu}\mathbf{f}_{\pm}
=\int ds \{ \Phi^+(t-s) \mathbf{v}_{\pm}(s) +\Phi^-(t-s) \mathbf{v}_{\mp}(s) \}+ \bm{\xi}_{\pm}.\end{aligned}$$ The memory functions $\Phi^{\pm}$ are given by $$\begin{aligned}
\label{g and Phi}
\Phi^{\pm}(\omega)=\pm g_{\pm}(\omega) / (g_+^2(\omega)-g_-^2(\omega)),\end{aligned}$$ where $\Phi^{\pm}(t)$ are calculated from eqs. and numerically. In Fig.\[fig:phi\], we show the result of the numerical evaluation of $\Phi^{\pm}(t)$.
![Time dependence of the normalized memory kernels $\bar{\Phi}^{\pm}$ which are defined by $\bar{\Phi}_{\pm}=\Phi_{\pm}/A_{\pm}t_0^{\alpha_{\pm}}$ on (a) semi-log plot and on (b) log-log plot. The top (solid) curve is $\bar{\Phi}^{+}$, the middle (broken) curve is $\bar{\Phi}^{-}$, and the bottom (dotted) curve shows the single exponential function for comparison.[]{data-label="fig:phi"}](fig2.eps){width="8cm"}
We confirm that the memory functions $\Phi^{\pm}(t)$ can be very well approximated by $$\begin{aligned}
\label{Phi_pm_2}
\Phi^{\pm}(t;\tau_R) =\mp A_{\pm} (t/t_0)^{-\alpha_{\pm}}\exp (-t/\tau_R), \end{aligned}$$ where $t_0$ are the characteristic time scales of the microscopic dynamics, and the numerical values of exponent $\alpha_{\pm}$ are found to be $\alpha_{+} = 0.66$ and $\alpha_{-} = 0.15$, respectively.
Now, we derive a coarse-grained model for polymer networks based on the Langevin equation for a single chain eqs. and . Let $\mathbf{R}_i(t)$ and $\mathbf{v}_i(t)$ be the position and the velocity of $i$-th crooslinker at time $t$, and $\mathbf{F}_i(t)$ be the force acting on it. We define $\mathbf{f}_{ij}$ the force acting on the $i$-th crosslinker imposed by the $j$-th crosslink through the chain connecting them. Since the system we discuss is composed of the linear polymer chains which obey the linear integral equation eq., we can derive the force $\mathbf{F}_{i}$ as $\mathbf{F}_i=\sum_{j=0}^N A_{ij} \mathbf{f}_{ij}$ using linear superposition with the adjacency matrix $A_{ij}$ for the polymer network. If $i$ and $j$ is connected, $(i,j)$ element of the adjacency matrix is defined as $A_{ij}=1$. On the other hand, $A_{ij}=0$, if $i$ and $j$ are unconnected. The equations of motion of the crosslinkers are given by $$\begin{aligned}
\label{general langevin 6}
\frac{d}{d t}\mathbf{R}_{i} &= \mathbf{v}_{i}, \\
\label{general langevin 7}
m\frac {d\mathbf{v}_i}{dt}&=\sum_j \int_{-\infty}^{t} \mspace{-15mu} ds \mathcal{M}_{ij}(t-s) \mathbf{v}_{j}(s)
+k\sum_j \Omega_{ij}\mathbf{R}_{j}+\bm{\xi}_{i},\\
\label{momory_karnel}
\mathcal{M}_{ij} &=
\bigg(\sum_k A_{ik} \Phi^+_{ik}-\zeta\bigg) \delta_{ij}+A_{ij}\Phi^-_{ij}.\end{aligned}$$ The memory functions $\Phi_{ij}^{\pm}$ are defined as $\Phi_{ij}^{\pm}= {\mp}A_{\pm}(t/t_0)^{-\alpha_{\pm}}\exp (-t/\tau_{ij}) $, and $\tau_{ij}$ is the maximum relaxation time of the chain between $i$-th and $j$-th crosslinkers. $\zeta$ and $k$ are friction coefficient of a crosslinker and spring constant of a chain. Because the viscosity term in eq. is in general much larger than the inertia term in polymer solution, we can neglect the latter term. Finally, we discretize eqs. and so that we can integrate them numerically by Euler method as $$\begin{aligned}
&\label{discretize form 1}
\mathbf{R}_{i}(t+\Delta t) = \mathbf{v}_{i}(t) \Delta t + \mathbf{R}_{i}(t) + O(\Delta t^2), \\
\label{discretize form 2}
&\mathbf{v}_i(t)=\sum_{j,k}\bigg[\int_0^{\Delta t} \mspace{-15mu} ds\bm{\mathcal{M}}(s)\bigg]^{-1}_{ik} \notag \\
&\mspace{15mu} \times\bigg[\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\Delta t\mathcal{M}_{kj}(n\Delta t)\mathbf{v}_j(t-n\Delta t)+k\Omega_{kj}\mathbf{R}_j(t)
+\bm{\mathbf{\xi}}_k(t)\bigg], \\
\label{discretize form 3}
&\langle \bm{\mathbf{\xi}}_i(t) \bm{\mathbf{\xi}}^T_j(t+n\Delta t) \rangle \notag \\
&\mspace{15mu}= 2k_B T \bm{I} \bigg\{ \bigg[\int_0^{\Delta t} \mspace{-15mu} ds\bm{\mathcal{M}}(s)\bigg]^{-1}_{ij} \mspace{-15mu} \delta_{0,\Delta t} + \mathcal{M}_{ij}^{-1}(n\Delta t) \bigg\},\end{aligned}$$ where the memory kernel $\mathcal{M}_{ij}(t)$ is related to the colored noise $\bm{\mathbf{\xi}}_i(t)$ by the fluctuation dissipation theorem eq..
We calculate the mean-square displacement $C(t)$, intermediate scattering function of the position of the crosslinkers $g_c(\mathbf{q},t)$, and the total scattering from both the crosslinkers and the monomers $g(\mathbf{q},t)$ by molecular dynamics (MD) simulations using eqs. and . Here, $C(t)$, $g_c(\mathbf{q},t)$ and $g(\mathbf{q},t)$ are defined by $$\begin{aligned}
\label{C_t_define}
&C(t)=\frac{1}{N}\sum_{i} \langle |\mathbf{R}_i(t)-\mathbf{R}_i(0)|^2 \rangle, \\
\label{g_c_t_define}
&g_c(\mathbf{q},t)=\sum_{i,j} \langle\exp\big[i\mathbf{q}\cdot(\mathbf{R}_i(t)-\mathbf{R}_j(0))\big]\rangle, \\
\label{g_t_define}
&g(\mathbf{q},t)=\sum_{i,j,k,l}\langle S_{ij}(\mathbf{q})S^{*}_{kl}(\mathbf{q})\rangle\langle\exp\big[i\mathbf{q}\cdot(\mathbf{X}_{ij}(t)-\mathbf{X}_{kl}(0))\big]\rangle,\end{aligned}$$ where $\mathbf{R}_i$ and $\mathbf{X}_{ij}=(\mathbf{R}_i+\mathbf{R}_j)/2$ are the position of the $i$-th crosslinker andthe position of center of mass of the chain between crosslinkers $i$ and $j$. Here, $S_{ij}(\mathbf{q})$ expresses the scattering from the chain connecting $i$-th and $j$-th crosslinkers, and defined as $S_{ij}(\mathbf{q})=\sum_{m} \exp(i\mathbf{q} \cdot \mathbf{r}_m)$, with $\mathbf{r}_m$ being the position of $m$-th monomer that belongs to the chain between $i$-th and $j$-th crosslinkers. In eq., we neglect correlation between the internal degrees of freedom of each chain and that of its center of mass. Then, $\langle S_{ij}(\mathbf{q})S^{*}_{kl}(\mathbf{q})\rangle=\langle |S_{ij}(\mathbf{q})|^2 \rangle\delta_{ik}\delta_{jl} $ is approximated as Debye function, because the relaxation of $\langle S_{ij}(\mathbf{q})S^{*}_{kl}(\mathbf{q})\rangle$ is much faster than that of the correlation between the positions of centers of mass.
To confirm the validity of our model, we first calculate $C(t)$ for a single linear polymer chain, whose ends are labeled as $1$ and $2$. In this case, we set $\Delta t =0.001$, $A_{\pm}t_0^{\alpha_{\pm}}=1.1$, $\zeta=0.25$, $k=0.075$, $k_B T=1.0$ and $\tau_{12}=1.0$, where we measure length and time in the units of $\tilde{x}=R_g$ and $\tilde{t}=\tau_{12}=\tau_R$, where $R_g$ is the radius of gyration of the polymer chain. For this linear polymer, the adjacency matrix and the interaction matrix are given by
$
\bm{A}=
\left(
\begin{array}{@{\,}cc@{\,}}
0 & 1 \\
1 & 0 \\
\end{array}
\right)
$ $ \bm{\Omega}
=
\left(
\begin{array}{@{\,}cc@{\,}}
-1 & 1 \\
1 & -1 \\
\end{array}
\right).
$
The simulation results are shown in Fig.\[fig:C\_t\](a) along with the data of the non coarse-grained bead-spring model that will be described later.
![(a)Auto-correlation function of the position of the one end point of a linear polymer chain. (b)Dynamic structure factor of a strand composed of a linear polymer chain. The solid line is result of coarse-grained model, and dotted line shows spring-beads model’s one, where the dotted line is scrolled up for comparison.[]{data-label="fig:C_t"}](fig3.eps){width="8.0cm"}
It is evident that in the short time regime ($t\ll\tilde{t}$) the auto-correlation function $C(t)$ behaves as $C(t)\sim t^{2/3}$, while in the long time regime ($t\gg\tilde{t}$) this function can be approximated as $C(t) \sim t$. These results are consistent with the experimental study[@DNA] and the scaling argument[@preparation]. Therefore we confirm the validity of our model for a single polymer chain. The intermediate scattering function eq. for a dilute polymer solution is also calculated and is shown in Fig.\[fig:C\_t\](b). Here, we set $\mathbf{q}$ as $|\mathbf{q}|R_g=2 \pi$ . In the short time regime, the relaxation of $g(\mathbf{q},t)$ is well described as the stretched exponential function $g(\mathbf{q},t) \sim g(\mathbf{q},0) \exp (-\Gamma_1 t^{2/3})$. On the other hand, in the long time regime, we can fit $g(\mathbf{q},t)$ as $g(\mathbf{q},t)\sim g(\mathbf{q},0) \exp (-\Gamma_2 t)$. From this numerical result, it is clear that the intermediate scattering function $g(\mathbf{q},t)$ can be described only using the degrees of freedom of the crosslinkers. In this simulation, we also compare our model to the spring-bead model (non coarse-grained model). In Fig.\[fig:C\_t\], it is shown that our model correctly reproduces the non coarse-grained one, in spite of its degrees of freedom is smaller than the non coarse-graind one[@preparation].
![ Time dependence of intermediate scattering function of the position of the crosslinkers $g_c(t)$ in (a) short time regime and in (b) intermediate time regime. The solid line is the simulation result of polymer network, and the dotted line shows that of single polymer chain for comparison. []{data-label="fig:network"}](fig4.eps){width="8cm"}
Next, we apply this model to a polymer network to understand the hierarchical structure. In the simulation, we use the same parameters as those used in Fig.\[fig:C\_t\], and we set the number of crosslinkers as $N$ = 1000. To describe connectivity of the polymer network systems, we prepare a set of $N$ linear polymers, and connect any pair of the end points randomly with a probability $p$. Here, we set the probability $p=0.0005$, which corresponds to the percolation point of this random network system [@preparation]. The interaction matrix $\Omega_{ij}$ is given by $\Omega_{ij}=-(\sum_k A_{ik}) \delta_{ij}+A_{ij}$. In Fig.\[fig:network\], we show the result of simulations on $g_c(\mathbf{q},t)$ with $|\mathbf{q}|R_g=2 \pi$. This numerical result shows that in short time regime ($t/\tilde{t}<0.1$), the correlation function of the network is the same as the one for a single chain. On the other hand, in the intermediate time regime ($0.1<t/\tilde{t}<1$), the relaxation of this function is much slower than that of a single chain, and this is roughly approximated by a power low function as $t^{-0.6}$. This power law relaxation process can be explained by a simple scaling approach using the cluster distribution function $P(n) \sim n^{\alpha}$ and the maximum relaxation time $\tau_{\textrm{max}}(n)\sim n^{\beta}$ at a percolation threshold. Since this percolated system can be classified as Bathe grid system, the cluster distribution function $P(n)$ and the cluster radius $R_s$ is described in general as $P(n)\sim n^{-2.5}$ and $R_s\sim n^{0.25}$. The relation between $\tau_{\textrm{max}}$, $R_s$ and number of monomers form end to end of the cluster $N$ are $\tau_{\textrm{max}}\sim N^2 \sim R_s^{4}$, and hence $\beta=1$. In the present situation, because of finite size effect and hydrodynamic interaction between crosslinkers, the exponent $\beta$ is slightly smaller than this expected value and is estimated as $\beta \sim 5/6$. Then, in the intermediate time regime $g_c(t)$ is described as $g_c(t)\sim \int dn \mspace{5mu} nP(n)e^{-t/\tau_{\textrm{max}}(n)} \sim t^{(\alpha+2)/\beta}=t^{-0.6}$,which reproduces the power low’s behavior shown in Fig.\[fig:network\](b). Thus, we conclude that the origin of the power law relaxation in the intermediate time scale (Fig.\[fig:network\](b)) is the motion of percolated clusters. Similar phenomena were observed experimentally under the gelatin process[@critical; @slowing; @down].
In conclusion, we have proposed a coarse-grained model for polymer networks and showed its numerical results. The main results of the present work are summarized below. (i) We have derived a set of dynamic equations of polymer networks only using the degrees of freedom of the crosslinkers, and obtained the expressions of the quite general memory kernels and the random noises. (ii) The auto-correlation function $C(t)$ of the crosslinkers at the both sides of a single polymer chain and their intermediate scattering function $g(\mathbf{q},t)$ in dilute polymer solution were calculated numerically. The simulation results were consistent with the experimental and theoretical results [@DNA]. (iii) We applied this model to a polymer network, and succeeded in smoothly connecting the dynamics of crosslinkers between the internal motion of a single chain and the motion of percolated clusters.
We thank Yoshinori Hayakawa, Nariya Uchida, Katsuhiko Sato, Hiroto Ogawa, and Kenji Ohira for variable discussions and useful comments. This work is supported by the 21 Century COE Program of Tohoku Univ. and Grant in Aid for Priority Area Research “Soft Matter Physics” (No.463) from MEXT of Japan.
[99]{} X.L.Wu, *et al*., *Phys. Rev. Lett.*, **66**, 2408 (1991). L.Jupp, *et al*., *J. Chem. Phys.*, **119**, 6361 (2003). H.Tanaka, *Phys. Rev. Lett.*, **71**, 3158 (1993). J.Bastide, *et al*., *Macromolecules*, **23**, 1821 (1990). H.Furukawa, *et al*., *Phys. Rev. E*, **68**, 031406 (2003). M.Takeda, *et al*., *Macromolecules*, **33**, 2909 (1990). C.Zhao, *et al*., *J.Phys.:Condens.Matter*, **17**, S2841 (2005). Y.Okumura ,*et al*., *Advanced Materials*, **13**, 485 (2000). K.Haraguchi, *et al*., *Macromolecules* **35**, 10162 (2002). JP.Gong, *et al*., *Advanced Materials*, **15**, 1155 (2003). J. P. Cohen-Addad *Physical properties of polymeric gels*, (John Wiley Sons 1996). M.Doi and S.F.Edwards, *The Theory of Polymer Dynamics*, (Oxford Univ. Press 1986). H Mori, *Prog. Theor. Phys*, **33**, 423 (1965). M.Matsumoto, *et al*. , *J. Polym. Sci. Part B*, **30**, 779 (1992). T.Shibata, *et al*. ,(in preparation). D.Stauffer, *Introduction to Percolation Theory*, (Taylor Francis, London, 1985).
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: |
We searched for cluster X-ray luminosity and radius evolution using our sample of 201 galaxy clusters detected in the 160 deg$^2$ survey with the PSPC (Vikhlinin et al. 1998). With such a large area survey, it is possible, for the first time with , to test the evolution of luminous clusters, $L_x>3\times10^{44}\,$ in the 0.5–2 keV band. We detect a factor of 3–4 deficit of such luminous clusters at $z>0.3$ compared to the present. The evolution is much weaker or absent at modestly lower luminosities, 1–$3\times10^{44}\,$. At still lower luminosities, we find no evolution from the analysis of the $\log N -
\log S$ relation. The results in the two upper $L_x$ bins are in agreement with the [*Einstein*]{} EMSS evolution result (Gioia et al. 1990a, Henry et al. 1992) while being obtained using a completely independent cluster sample. The low-$L_x$ results are in agreement with other surveys (e.g. Rosati et al. 1998, Jones et al. 1998).
We also compare the distribution of core radii of nearby and distant ($z>0.4$) luminous (with equivalent temperatures 4–7 keV) clusters, and detect no evolution. The ratio of average core radius for $z\sim0.5$ and $z<0.1$ clusters is $0.9\pm0.1$, and the core radius distributions are remarkably similar. A decrease of cluster sizes incompatible with our data is predicted by self-similar evolution models for high-$\Omega$ universe.
author:
- 'A. Vikhlinin, B. R. McNamara, W. Forman, C. Jones, H. Quintana, and A. Hornstrup'
title: 'EVOLUTION OF CLUSTER X-RAY LUMINOSITIES AND RADII: RESULTS FROM THE 160 SQUARE DEGREE SURVEY'
---
Introduction
============
The cluster evolution rate is a strong test of cosmological parameters (e.g., White & Rees 1978, Kaiser 1986, Eke, Cole & Frenk 1996). It is best to study evolution using X-ray selected samples of distant clusters which are much less affected by projection than the optically selected samples (van Haarlem et al. 1997). Of all the interesting cluster parameters such as mass, velocity dispersion, and temperature, the X-ray luminosity is the most accessible to measurements with present-day instruments, and most of the earlier studies were focused on evolution of the cluster X-ray luminosity function.
A strong evolution of cluster luminosities at $z\sim0.1$ was reported from the EXOSAT survey (Edge et al. 1990), but was later disproved by the All-Sky Survey (Ebeling et al. 1997). At higher redshifts, negative evolution of the cluster X-ray luminosity function was first reported by Gioia et al. (1990a) using the [*Einstein*]{} Extended Medium Sensitivity Survey (EMSS; Gioia et al. 1990b, Stocke et al. 1991). Gioia et al. and later Henry et al. (1992) compared the cluster luminosity functions below and above $z=0.3$. They found that while the number of the low luminosity clusters does not evolve, there is a significant deficit of luminous, $L_x(0.3-3.5\mbox{~keV})>5\times10^{44}\,$, clusters at high redshift.
This EMSS result was questioned recently. Nichol et al. (1997) reanalyzed the EMSS cluster sample using X-ray and new optical observations and argued that the evolution reported in the original EMSS papers was not significant. Several groups pursued independent searches for distant clusters in archival PSPC observations. Collins et al. (1997) found that the redshift distribution of 35 clusters detected in their 17 deg$^2$ survey is consistent with no evolution. This contradicted the earlier claim by Castander et al. (1995) of a strong evolution in a similar sample; however, the latter authors used an X-ray source detection algorithm not optimized for the cluster search. Jones et al. (1998) presented the $\log N - \log S$ relation for 46 clusters from their 16 deg$^2$ survey and found that this relation is consistent with no evolution of the $L_x<2\times10^{44}\,$ (0.5–2 keV band) clusters. Rosati et al. (1998) derived cluster luminosity functions up to $z\sim 0.8$ from their sample of 70 clusters detected in a 33 deg$^2$ survey, and found no evolution at low luminosities, $L_x<3\times10^{44}\,$. However, none of these surveys covers an area large enough to probe the evolution of the luminous clusters, and their no-evolution claims do not contradict the EMSS results.
Our 160 deg$^2$ survey (Vikhlinin et al. 1998, hereafter Paper I) is the first survey comparable with the EMSS in sky coverage for distant clusters. We are able to test, and confirm, the EMSS evolution results even with the incomplete redshift data currently at hand. Eventually, when the spectroscopic work is complete, we will be able to characterize the luminosity evolution more accurately. In this Letter, we also show that the cluster X-ray core radii do not evolve between $z\sim0.5$ and now. Throughout the paper, we use definitions $f_{-14}$ and $L_{44}$ for flux and luminosity in the 0.5–2 keV energy band in units of $10^{-14}\,$ and $10^{44}\,$, respectively. We also use $H_0=50$ km s$^{-1}$ Mpc$^{-1}$ and $q_0=0.5$.
Cluster Sample
==============
In Paper I, we presented a catalog of 223 extended X-ray sources detected in 646 high Galactic latitude PSPC observations. For each detected source, we measured the X-ray flux and angular core-radius. We optically confirmed 89% of detected sources as clusters of galaxies; 8% are false detections due to point source confusion and 3% still lack optical data. In the high X-ray flux range, which is the focus of the present work, 80 out of 82 detected sources are optically confirmed clusters. We measured and compiled from the literature spectroscopic redshifts for 76 clusters. For the rest of the optically confirmed clusters, redshifts are estimated with an accuracy of $\Delta z \approx 0.07$ by optical photometry of the brightest cluster galaxies. All the X-ray and optical data are presented in Paper I. Below we use these data to constrain the evolution of cluster luminosities and sizes at high redshift, $z\sim 0.5$.
{width="3.5in"} {width="3.5in"}-15pt
Deficit of luminous clusters at high redshift {#sec:deficit}
=============================================
Cluster evolution is detected in the EMSS sample only for the most luminous clusters, $L_{44}>5$ in the 0.3–3.5 keV energy band, or $L_{44} \gtrsim 3$ in the 0.5–2 keV band (Gioia et al. 1990a, Henry et al. 1992). The lower-luminosity clusters in the EMSS sample show little or no evolution. We will search for evolution in our sample above this limiting luminosity. Although we cannot derive accurate luminosity functions with the presently incomplete spectroscopic data, a sample of luminous high-redshift clusters can be selected using the observed X-ray flux and the conservative upper bound of their estimated redshift. With such a sample, one can test the evolution of the cluster luminosity function by comparing the number of detected clusters with the prediction of the no evolution model.
High-Luminosity and High-Redshift Subsample
-------------------------------------------
A luminosity $L_{44}=3$ corresponds to observed fluxes, $f_{-14}=77.5$, 44.3, and 27.8 at redshifts $z=0.3$, 0.4, and 0.5, respectively. Our high-luminosity, high-redshift subsample is defined using these limiting fluxes as follows. The cluster flux must be $f_{-14}>77.5$ and redshift must be $z>0.3$, or $f_{-14}>44.3$ and $z>0.4$, or $f_{-14}>27.8$ and $z>0.5$. For this sample definition, the lower limit of the luminosity varies with redshift; the variations are, however, limited between $L_{44}=3$ and $6$ for $z<0.7$.
There are 48 clusters with fluxes $f_{-14}>27.8$ in our sample. Spectroscopic redshifts are available for 25 of them; none of these 25 clusters satisfies the selection criteria above. The remaining 23 clusters with photometric redshifts are listed in Table \[tab:listbright\]. Column (4) in this Table shows the 95% confidence interval of the photometric redshift. The observed flux corresponds to the minimum redshift required by our sample definition (column 5). It can be seen that all clusters except 1641+4001 and 1641+8232 can be confidently excluded from the high-$L_x$, high-$z$ subsample. We conclude that at most, only two clusters belong to this subsmaple.
Comparison with No-Evolution Model Predictions
----------------------------------------------
To calculate the expected number of observed clusters, we integrated the local luminosity function (Ebeling et al. 1997) in the appropriate redshift and luminosity range and accounted for the survey solid angle as a function of flux (Paper I). We then compare these predictions with the observed number of clusters in different subsamples. The results are presented in Table \[tab:noevol\]. For the no-evolution model, we expect 9.3 clusters in the high-$L_x$, high-$z$ subsample, where we observe at most 2. Such a deviation is significant at more than 99.5% confidence. For the negative evolution observed in the EMSS, we predict that this subsample should contain 2–3 clusters, in agreement with the observed number. Finally, for $q_0=0$, the no evolution model predicts 8.1 clusters; the observed deficit is still significant in this case.
For a consistency check, we compare the number of $z<0.3$ clusters above the same limiting fluxes, $f_{-14}=77.5$, 44.3, and 27.8, with the prediction of the no evolution model (Table \[tab:noevol\]); in all flux bins, there is an excellent agreement.
--------------------------- ------ ---- ----------
high-$L_x$, high-$z$ 9.3 2 $<0.005$
$z<0.3$, $f_{-14}>27.8$ 32.5 39
$z<0.3$, $f_{-14}>44.3$ 20.4 21
$z<0.3$, $f_{-14}>77.5$ 11.3 10
$z>0.4$, $f_{-14}>13.9$ 22.2 18 0.22
--------------------------- ------ ---- ----------
We also can compare the observed and predicted number of lower-luminosity clusters at high redshift. For that, we use a subsample of clusters with fluxes in the range $13.9<f_{-14}<44.3$ and $z>0.4$. This flux range at $z=0.4$ corresponds to the luminosity range $1<L_{44}<3$, which combines the two lowest luminosity bins in the EMSS luminosity function at high redshift. To obtain a conservative lower limit of the number of observed clusters, we use the lower bound of photometric redshifts. We find 18 clusters, compared with 22.2 predicted by the no-evolution model. That is, the evolution in this interval is certainly different from that of the high $L_x$ clustrs.
To summarize, we find a large deficit, by a factor of 3–4, of $L_{44}>3$ clusters at high redshift, similarly to the EMSS result. The evolution rate is smaller at lower luminosities, $1<L_{44}<3$, again similar to the EMSS and other surveys (Rosati et al. 1998). At still lower $L_x$, our redshift database is very incomplete, but additional constraints on cluster evolution can be derived from the $\log N - \log S$ relation, as described below.
$\LOG \;N\; -\; \LOG\; S\;$ relation for clusters
=================================================
The number of clusters as a function of flux (the $\log N - \log S$ relation) can provide some constraints on evolution without redshift information. To obtain the evolution constraints from the $\log N - \log
S$, we parameterize the evolution of the luminosity function as a combination of pure luminosity and pure number density evolution, both as powers of $(1+z)$. With this type of evolution, the luminosity function at redshift $z$ can be expressed through the local luminosity function $F_0(L)$ as: $$\label{eq:lfevol}
F_z(L) = (1+z)^{p_N}\, F_0\left(L/(1+z)^{p_L}\right).$$ In this equation, $p_N$ and $p_L$ parameterize the rate of the density and luminosity evolution, respectively. These parameters can be constrained by fitting the observed $\log N - \log S$ relation.
To predict the model $\log N - \log S$ relation, we integrated the local luminosity function (Ebeling et al. 1997), scaled according to eq. (\[eq:lfevol\]) in the redshift interval $0<z<2$ and in the luminosity interval $0.01<L_{44}<100$. The model $\log N - \log S$ was normalized by the surface density of clusters expected in the no-evolution model above $10^{-12}\,$, approximately the completeness limit of the Ebeling et al. All-Sky Survey sample. Finally, we multiplied the model $\log
N - \log S$ relation by the solid angle of our survey as a function of flux (Paper I).
We then found the allowed range of parameters $p_N$ and $p_L$ using the $C$-statistic (Cash 1979) calculated in the flux range ($f_{-14}$) from 100 to 4, where the solid angle of our survey still exceeds 4 deg$^2$. The 68% and 95% confidence region is shown by solid lines in the right panel of Fig \[fig:lognlogs\]. The allowed combination of $p_N$ and $p_L$ corresponds approximately to a non-evolving comoving volume emissivity. The dotted and dashed lines in the right panel correspond to no evolution of the volume emissivity of all clusters (i.e. defined by $p_N+p_L=0$), and clusters in the range $10^{42}$–$10^{46}\,$ at $z=0.5$, respectively. The no-evolution model ($p_N=0$, $p_L=0$) is shown by the dashed line in the left panel of Fig \[fig:lognlogs\]. All the allowed $p_N, p_L$ parameters predict virtually the same $\log N - \log S$ relations. On the contrary, the rejected models predict $\log N - \log S$ relations which are markedly different from the data (dotted lines in the left panel of Fig \[fig:lognlogs\]).
The observed $\log N - \log S$ relation favors no evolution of the cluster volume emissivity. This indirectly implies that the luminosity function at low $L_x$, which dominates the volume emissivity, does not evolve. This, however, does not imply that there is no evolution at all. For example, the $p_N=4,p_L=-3$ model is allowed. Since the power-law slope of the luminosity function is close to $-1.8$ (Ebeling et al. 1997), the number of low luminosity clusters, $L_{44}<1$, does not evolve in this model, while the number of $L_{44}>3$ clusters decreases significantly at $z>0.3$. This behavior is similar to what we find in §\[sec:deficit\].
Evolution of cluster sizes
==========================
In Paper I, we measured angular core radii by fitting surface brightness distributions with the $\beta$-model (e.g., Jones & Forman 1984). Here we compare the radius distribution for our distant, $z>0.4$, clusters and for nearby clusters in Jones & Forman (1998) sample. To convert angular radii to proper sizes of distant, $z>0.3$, clusters, we used both spectroscopic and photometric redshifts. The accuracy of the photometric redshift, $\pm
0.07$, is sufficient for this purpose. The corresponding proper size uncertainty is 15% at $z=0.3$, which is smaller than the statistical uncertainty of the angular radius measurements, $\sim 20\%$. Jones & Forman fitted both core-radius and $\beta$ while we fixed $\beta=0.67$ for distant clusters. For consistency, we converted core radii from Jones & Forman to $\beta=0.67$ using Eq. (4) of Paper I. Since Jones & Forman found a correlation between core-radius and luminosity, we matched the luminosity ranges by using only clusters with $1<L_{44}<5$ (corresponding to temperatures 4–7 keV) in both samples. The luminosities of distant clusters were computed using both spectroscopic and photometric redshifts. The accuracy of photometric redshifts is sufficient because radius is a weak function of luminosity. The median redshift of the 25 selected distant clusters is $z_{\rm med}=0.51$. The uncertainty of an individual radius measurement is $\lesssim 30\%$, which includes photon statistics, background modeling, and scatter in $\beta$-parameters (Paper I). This is significantly smaller than the intrinsic width of the derived radius distributions.
The core radius distributions for distant and nearby clusters are remarkably similar (Fig. \[fig:axdistr\]), especially for $q_0=0$. To characterize the radius evolution quantitatively, we use the ratio of median radii in both samples. The median radius is $240\pm14$ kpc for nearby clusters, and $210\pm14$ kpc ($q_0=0.5$) or $230\pm16$ kpc ($q_0=0$) for distant clusters. The ratio lies in the range $0.95-1.25$. Some models predict a much stronger evolution of radii. For example, in Kaiser’s (1986) self-similar models, the cluster radius grows by a factor of $\sim 2$ from $z=0.4$ to the present, while hydrodynamic simulations with $\Omega+\Lambda=1$ (Cen & Ostriker 1994) show a factor of 1.5 growth. However, neither these models nor our measurements account for cooling flows (e.g. Fabian 1994) which can cause underestimation of the core-radius. A comparison of core radii is not meaningful if the cooling flow fraction changes with redshift.
Conclusions
===========
We present a first analysis of the evolution of luminous, $L_x>3\times10^{44}\,$ distant clusters. We find a significant, factor of 3–4, decrease in the number of such clusters at $z>0.3$, confirming the detection of evolution in the EMSS (Gioia et al. 1990a, Henry et al. 1992). At lower luminosities, 1–$3\times10^{44}\,$, the evolution is undetectable, with a decrease in number by a factor of only $1.3\pm0.2$. This is also consistent with the EMSS and other surveys (e.g. Rosati et al. 1998). The absence of evolution of low luminosity clusters is also supported by the analysis of the $\log N - \log
S$ distribution from which we find that the cluster volume emissivity, dominated by low-luminosity objects, does not evolve. The observed evolution can be reproduced by a model in which the characteristic luminosity decreases with redshift, but the comoving number density of clusters increases. Such models arise naturally in the hierarchical cluster formation scenario (e.g. Kaiser 1986).
We compare the distribution of core-radii of distant, $z>0.4$ and nearby clusters. We find that the distribution of core radii at $z>0.4$ is very similar to that in nearby clusters; the average radius has changed at $z>0.4$ by a factor of only $0.9\pm0.1$. A stronger change is expected for hierarchical cluster formation in a flat universe (Kaiser 1986, Cen & Ostriker 1994). We also note that the assumption of no evolution of cluster sizes has been essentially used in flux measurements and area calculations in several X-ray surveys (e.g. EMSS, Nichol et al. 1997), but is only verified here for the first time.
{width="3.25in"}
-15pt
We thank M. Markevitch for useful comments on the manuscript. Financial support was provided by the Smithsonian Institution and NAS8-39073 contract. HQ acknowledges support from FONDECYT grant 8970009 and the award of Presidential Chair in Science.
Cash, W. 1979, ApJ, 228, 939 Castander, F. J. et al. 1995, Nature, 377, 39 Cen, R. & Ostriker, J. P. 1994, ApJ, 429, L4 Collins, C. A., Burke, D. J., Romer, A. K., Sharples, R. M., & Nichol, R. C. 1997, ApJ, 479, L117 Ebeling, H., Edge, A. C., Fabian, A. C., Allen, S. W., Craford, C. S., & Böhringer, H. 1997, ApJ, 479, L101 Edge, A. C., Stewart, G. C., Fabian, A. C., & Arnaud, K. A. 1990, MNRAS, 245, 559 Eke, V. R., Cole, S., & Frenk, C. S. 1996, MNRAS, 282, 263 Fabian, A. C. 1994, ARA&A, 32, 277 Gioia, I. M., Henry, J. P., Maccacaro, T., Morris, S. L., Stocke, J. T., & Wolter, A. 1990a, ApJ, 356, L35 Gioia, I. M., Maccacaro, T., Schild, R. E., Wolter, A., Stocke, J. T., Morris, S. L., & Henry, J. P. 1990b, ApJS, 72, 567 Henry, J. P., Gioia, I. M., Maccacaro, T., Morris, S. L., Stocke, J. T., & Wolter, A. 1992, ApJ, 386, 408 Jones, C. J. & Forman, W. R. 1984, ApJ, 276, 38 Jones, C. J. & Forman, W. R. 1998, ApJ, submitted Jones, L. R., Scharf, C. A., Ebeling, H., Perlman, E., Wegner, G., Malkan, M., & Horner, D. 1998, ApJ, 495, 100 Kaiser, N. 1986, MNRAS, 222, 323 Nichol, R. C., Holden, B. P., Romer, A. K., Ulmer, M. P., Burke, D. J., & Collins C. A. 1997, ApJ, 481, 644 Rosati, P., Della Ceca, R., Norman, C., & Giacconi, R. 1998, ApJ, 492, L21 Stocke, J. T., Morris, S. L., Gioia, I. M., Maccacaro, T., Schild, R., Wolter, A., Fleming, T. A., & Henry, J. P. 1991, ApJS, 76, 813 van Haarlem, M. P., Frenk, C. S., & White, S. D. M. 1997, MNRAS, 287, 817 Vikhlinin, A., McNamara, B. R., Forman, W., Jones, C., Quintana, H. & Hornstrup, A. 1998, ApJ, in press (astro-ph/9803099) White, S. D. M. & Rees, M. J. 1978, MNRAS, 183, 341
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
author:
- '<span style="font-variant:small-caps;"></span> [^1] <span style="font-variant:small-caps;"></span> [^2] <span style="font-variant:small-caps;"></span> [^3]'
bibliography:
- './EMCS\_20190404.bib'
title: '<span style="font-variant:small-caps;"></span>[^4] '
---
Introduction {#sec:intro}
============
EMCS Designs {#sec:designs}
============
Theory {#sec:theory}
======
Application {#sec:application}
===========
Results {#sec:results}
=======
Discussion {#sec:discussion}
==========
Appendix {#appendix .unnumbered}
========
Theory {#sec:appendix_theory}
======
Empirical Application: Estimators {#sec:appendix_estimators}
=================================
Empirical Application: Structured EMCS Procedure {#sec:appendix_strEMCSprocedure}
================================================
[^1]: University of Warwick, CAGE, and Institute for Fiscal Studies.
[^2]: University College London and cemmap.
[^3]: Brandeis University and IZA. Correspondence: Department of Economics & International Business School, Brandeis University, MS 021, 415 South Street, Waltham, MA 02453. E-mail: [email protected].
[^4]: This version: April 4, 2019. Previously circulated as ‘Mostly Harmless Simulations? On the Internal Validity of Empirical Monte Carlo Studies’. For helpful comments, we thank Thierry Magnac (Co-Editor), four anonymous referees, Alberto Abadie, Cathy Balfe, Richard Blundell, Colin Cameron, M[ó]{}nica Costa Dias, Gil Epstein, Alfonso Flores-Lagunes, Ira Gang, Martin Huber, Justin McCrary, Blaise Melly, Mateusz Myśliwski, Pedro Sant’Anna, Tony Strittmatter, Tim Vogelsang, Ed Vytlacil, Jeff Wooldridge, Tiemen Woutersen, and numerous seminar and conference participants. We also thank Michael Lechner and Blaise Melly for providing us with their codes, as well as Steven Karel and Francesco Pontiggia for assistance with the Brandeis HPC cluster. This research was supported by a grant from the CERGE-EI Foundation under a program of the Global Development Network (Grant No: RRC12+09). All opinions expressed are those of the authors and have not been endorsed by CERGE-EI or the GDN. Advani also acknowledges support from Programme Evaluation for Policy Analysis, a node of the National Centre for Research Methods, supported by the ESRC (Grant No: RES-576-25-0042). Kitagawa also acknowledges support from the ESRC through the ESRC Centre for Microdata Methods and Practice (cemmap) (Grant No: RES-589-28-0001) and from the ERC through an ERC starting grant (Grant No: EPP-715940). Słoczyński also acknowledges support from the Foundation for Polish Science (FNP) through a START scholarship and from the Theodore and Jane Norman Fund. No authors are aware of any conflict of interest.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'The space astrometry mission GAIA will construct a dense optical QSO-based celestial reference frame. For consistency between optical and radio positions, it will be important to align the GAIA frame and the International Celestial Reference Frame (ICRF) with the highest accuracy. Currently, it is found that only 10% of the ICRF sources are suitable to establish this link, either because they are not bright enough at optical wavelengths or because they have significant extended radio emission which precludes reaching the highest astrometric accuracy. In order to improve the situation, we have initiated a VLBI survey dedicated to finding additional suitable radio sources for aligning the two frames. The sample consists of about 450 sources, typically 20 times weaker than the current ICRF sources (down to the 20 mJy flux level), which have been selected by cross-correlating optical and radio catalogues. This paper presents the observing strategy to detect, image, and measure accurate positions for these sources. It will also provide results about the VLBI detectability of the sources, as derived from initial observations with the European VLBI Network in June and October 2007. Based on these observations, an excellent detection rate of 89% is found, which is very promising for the continuation of this project.'
---
Section name
------------------------------------------------------------------------
height1pt
Context
=======
The ICRF (International Celestial Reference Frame; [@Ma1998] [@Fey2004]) is the fundamental celestial reference frame adopted by the International Astronomical Union (IAU) in August 1997. It is currently based on the VLBI (Very Long Baseline Interferometry) positions of 717 extragalactic radio sources, estimated from dual-frequency S/X (2.3 and 8.6 GHz) observations. The European space astrometry mission GAIA, to be launched by 2011, will survey about one billion stars in our Galaxy and 500 000 Quasi Stellar Objects (QSOs) brighter than magnitude 20 [@Perryman2001]. Unlike Hipparcos, GAIA will construct a dense optical celestial reference frame directly at optical bands, based on the QSOs with the most accurate positions (i.e. those with optical apparent magnitude $V\leq18$ [@Mignard2003]). In the future, the alignment of the ICRF and the GAIA frame will be crucial, in particular for ensuring consistency between measured radio and optical positions. This alignment, to be determined with the highest accuracy, requires hundreds of sources in common, with a uniform sky coverage and very accurate radio and optical positions. Obtaining such accurate positions implies that the link sources must have $V\leq18$ and no extended VLBI structures.
In a previous study, we investigated the current status of this link based on the present list of ICRF sources [@Bourda2008]. We found that although about 30% of the ICRF sources have an optical counterpart with $V \leq 18$, only one third of these are compact enough on VLBI scales for the highest astrometric accuracy. Overall, only 10% of the current ICRF sources (70 sources) are thus available for the alignment with the GAIA frame. This highlights the need to identify additional suitable radio sources, which is the purpose of the project described here.
Strategy to identify new link radio sources
===========================================
Searching for additional radio sources suitable for aligning accurately the ICRF and the GAIA frame could rely on the VLBA Calibrator Survey (VCS; [@Petrov2008] and references therein), the catalogue of more than 3000 extragalactic radio sources observed with the VLBA (Very Long Baseline Array; the american VLBI network), which is currently underway. Another possibility is to search for new VLBI sources, which implies going to weaker radio sources with flux densities typically below 100 mJy. This can now be realized owing to recent increases in the VLBI network sensitivity (e.g. recording now possible at 1Gb/s) and by using a network comprising large antennas like the European VLBI Network (EVN).
A sample of about 450 radio sources, for which there are no published VLBI observations, was selected for this purpose by cross-identifying the NRAO VLA Sky Survey (NVSS [@Condon1998]), a deep radio survey (complete to the 2.5 mJy level) which covers the entire sky north of $-40^{\circ}$, with the Véron & Véron (2006) optical catalogue [@Veron2006]. This sample is based on the following criteria: $V\leq18$ (to ensure very accurate positions with GAIA), $\delta\geq-10^{\circ}$ (for possible observing with northern VLBI arrays), and NVSS flux density $\geq$ 20 mJy (for possible VLBI detection).
The observing strategy to identify the most appropriate link sources from this sample includes three successive steps to detect, image and measure accurate positions for these sources: (i) to determine the VLBI detectability of these weak radio sources; (ii) to image the sources detected in the first step, in order to identify the most point-like sources; and (iii) to determine an accurate astrometric position for the most compact sources of the sample.
Initial VLBI results
====================
Initial VLBI observations for this project were carried out in June and October 2007 (during two 48-hours experiments, named EC025A and EC025B, respectively), with a network of four EVN telescopes (Effelsberg, Medicina, Noto, Onsala; and the 70 m Robledo telescope for part of the time in EC025B). The purpose of these two experiments was to determine the VLBI detectability of the 447 weak radio sources in our sample based on snapshot observations.
Our results indicate excellent detection rates of 97% at X band and 89% at S band, with 432 sources and 399 sources detected at X and S bands, respectively (the individual results for EC025A and EC025B are detailed separately in Table \[tab:Tab1\]). This detection rate is in agreement with that reported in [@Frey2008] (80%) for quasars from the Sloan Digital Sky Survey. The overall mean correlated flux densities (i.e. for each source and band, the mean over all scans and baselines detected) have a median value of 26 mJy at X band and 46 mJy at S band (see Figure \[fig:Fig1\]) with the weakest sources at the level of 1 mJy at X band and 8 mJy at S band. A comparison between the X-band flux density distribution for our sources, those from the VCS and the ICRF sources shows that the sources of our sample are indeed much weaker. On average, they are 27 times weaker than the ICRF sources and 8 times weaker than the VCS sources.
The spectral index $\alpha$ (defined as $S \propto \nu^{\alpha}$, where $S$ is the source flux density and $\nu$ is the frequency) was also investigated. In this definition, the sources with a compact core are expected to have $\alpha > -0.5$. Figure \[fig:Fig2\] shows the spectral index distribution for the 398 radio sources detected at both frequencies in EC025A and EC025B. The corresponding distribution for the sources which also belong to the CLASS catalogue [@Myers2003], well known to be composed of compact sources, is also plotted and no major differences are noticed. The median value of $\alpha$ is $-0.34$ and about 70% of the sources have $\alpha > -0.5$, hence indicating that they must have a dominating core component, which is very promising for the future stages of this project.
------------- -------------- --------------- --------------- ---------------
**Sources** **X-band** **S-band** **S and X**
**observed** **detection** **detection** **detection**
**EC025A** 218 216 sources 211 sources 211 sources
99% 96% 96%
**EC025B** 229 216 sources 188 sources 187 sources
94% 82% 82%
**Overall** 447 432 sources 399 sources 398 sources
97% 89% 89%
------------- -------------- --------------- --------------- ---------------
: VLBI detection rate for the 447 weak extragalactic radio sources observed during EC025A and EC025B.[]{data-label="tab:Tab1"}
Summary
=======
Based on observations with the European VLBI Network, we identified 398 new VLBI sources which are potential candidates to align the ICRF and the future GAIA frame. On average, these sources are 27 times weaker than the ICRF sources. Overall, this multiplies by a factor of 6 the current number of potential ICRF–GAIA link sources (awaiting for the potential candidates identified from the VCS catalogue). The excellent detection rate inferred from the observations may suggest that our initial VLBI detection step is unnecessary for such radio sources having an optical counterpart with magnitude brighter than 18. Future steps will be targeted at imaging the 398 sources that we have detected at both frequencies by using the global VLBI network (EVN+VLBA), in order to identify the most point-like sources and therefore the most suitable ones for the ICRF–GAIA link.
Acknowledgements
================
The authors wish to thank Dave Graham for assistance with the correlation in Bonn, John Gipson for advice when scheduling the observations, and Alexander Andrei for providing improved optical positions. This work has benefited from research funding from the European Community’s sixth Framework Programme under RadioNet R113CT 2003 5058187. The EVN is a joint facility of European, Chinese, South African and other radio astronomy institutes funded by their national research councils.
[99]{}
Ma, C., E. Arias, T. Eubanks, A. Fey, A.-M. Gontier, et al., AJ 116, 516–546, 1998.
Fey, A., C. Ma, E. Arias, P. Charlot, M. Feissel-Vernier, et al., AJ 127, 3587–3608, 2004.
Perryman, M., K. de Boer, G. Gilmore, E. Hog, M. Lattanzi, et al., A&A 369, 339–363, 2001.
Mignard, F., In: IAU 25 Joint Discussion 16, 133–140, 2003.
Bourda, G., P. Charlot, J.-F. Le Campion, A&A submitted, 2008.
Condon, J., W. Cotton, E. Greisen, Q. Yin, R. Perley, et al., AJ 115, 1693–1716, 1998.
Véron-Cetty, M.-P., P. Véron, A&A 455, 773–777, 2006.
Frey, S., L. Gurvits, Z. Paragi, L. Mosoni, M. Garrett, S. Garrington, A&A 477, 781–-787, 2008.
Petrov, L., Y. Kovalev, E. Fomalont, D. Gordon, AJ submitted, 2008 (ArXiv:0801.3895).
Myers, S., N. Jackson, I. Browne, A. de Bruyn, T. Pearson, et al., MNRAS 341, 1–12, 2003.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'Quantum systems with discrete symmetries can usually be desymmetrized, but this strategy fails when considering transport in open systems with a symmetry that maps different openings onto each other. We investigate the joint probability density of transmission eigenvalues for such systems in random-matrix theory. In the orthogonal symmetry class we show that the eigenvalue statistics manifests level repulsion between only every second transmission eigenvalue. This finds its natural statistical interpretation as a [*staggered*]{} superposition of two eigenvalue sequences. For a large number of channels, the statistics for a system with a lead-transposing symmetry approaches that of a superposition of two uncorrelated sets of eigenvalues as in systems with a lead-preserving symmetry (which can be desymmetrized). These predictions are confirmed by numerical computations of the transmission-eigenvalue spacing distribution for quantum billiards and for the open kicked rotator.'
author:
- Marten Kopp
- Henning Schomerus
- Stefan Rotter
title: |
Staggered repulsion of transmission eigenvalues\
in symmetric open mesoscopic systems
---
Introduction
============
Mesoscopic systems exhibit variations in their phase-coherent electronic transport properties that are conveniently characterized via statistical approaches. Geometries that classically give rise to chaotic motion typically display universal fluctuations which can be captured using ensembles of random scattering matrices [@B97]. For normal conductors the universal properties fall into Dyson’s three universality classes with symmetry index $\beta=1,2,4$ [@D62], while a further seven universality classes can be identified in the presence of superconducting or chiral particle-hole symmetries [@AZ97]. A powerful tool to distinguish these ensembles is the amount of level repulsion between the transmission eigenvalues $T_n$. These eigenvalues determine fundamental transport properties such as the conductance $G$ or the shot-noise Fano factor $F$ [@B97; @BB00]. In the Dyson ensembles, the probability density to find two closely spaced adjacent transmission eigenvalues with small distance $s=T_{n+1}-T_{n}$ is suppressed as $P(s)\propto s^\beta$ [@mehta-2004; @haake-2001]. This introduces a stiffness in the transmission-eigenvalue sequence which suppresses the fluctuations of the conductance and of the Fano factor when compared to the case of uncorrelated transmission eigenvalues (the latter being characteristic for classically integrable systems with a complete set of good quantum numbers) [@B97; @BB00].
From the investigation of closed systems it is well known that discrete symmetries result in a reduction of level repulsion. In such systems, desymmetrization delivers independent variants of the system which differ by the boundary conditions on the symmetry lines (e.g., Dirichlet and Neumann boundary conditions for eigenfunctions of odd and even parity, respectively). The statistics of the desymmetrized versions can depend on the dimensionality of the irreducible representation [@keating:robbins], but still remain within the conventional universality classes. The combined level statistics is then built by superimposing the independent level sequences of the desymmetrized variants [@mehta-2004]. In open systems, this concept of desymmetrization can be directly applied as long as the symmetry in question preserves the shape and position of the leads [@GMMB96; @BM96].
This paper is motivated by the observation that systems with a lead-transposing symmetry (which maps [*different*]{} openings onto each other while leaving the dynamics in the system unchanged) exhibit transport properties that can only be understood as collective features of the desymmetrized variants of the system [@GMMB96; @BM96]. An obvious indication of this complication is the fact that the symmetry-reduced variants only possess a reduced number of leads (we concentrate on systems with two leads, for which the desymmetrized variants only possess a single lead). We demonstrate that such systems exhibit nevertheless a reduced repulsion of transmission eigenvalues which is similar to that for systems with a lead-preserving symmetry. For a large number $N$ of transport channels, the local statistical fluctuations in the eigenvalue sequence indeed become indistinguishable for both types of symmetry. However, for a small numbers of channels, the statistics differ from each other, which can be traced back to the absence or presence of $1/N$ corrections in these ensembles.
In the specific case of $\beta=1$, we derive exact closed expressions for the joint probability density of transmission eigenvalues thereby gaining detailed insight into these statistical features. In particular, we find for both the lead-preserving and the lead-transposing symmetry class that level repulsion occurs only between every second transmission eigenvalue. The fluctuations in the transmission eigenvalue sequence hence find their most natural statistical interpretation in a staggered superposition of two independent level sequences. In such a superposition, the transmission eigenvalues alternate between the two sequences when they are ordered by magnitude.
The exact expressions for the joint probability density with $\beta=1$ are different for the two types of symmetry. Hence, the details of the transport statistics for a lead-transposing symmetry deviate from those for a lead-preserving symmetry. We show that these deviations are most significant for a small number of channels, while for a large number of channels the local eigenvalue statistics do indeed converge onto each other.
Previous studies of open systems with lead-transposing or lead-preserving symmetries have derived the distribution of transmission eigenvalues for one or two open channels and the one-point density for arbitrary numbers of channels [@GMMB96; @BM96; @SSML05; @gopar-2006-73]. For time-reversal symmetric systems with $\beta=1$, a key observation of these works was an enhancement of universal fluctuations for both types of symmetry (when compared to asymmetric systems). For systems with a lead-transposing symmetry it was found that the weak localization correction is vanishing, leading to ensemble averaged expressions for the conductance and for the shot noise Fano factor which are entirely independent of the channel number N [@gopar-2006-73]. The underlying staggered level statistics embodied in the joint distribution of transmission eigenvalues provides a unifying explanation for all of these observations. We verify our predictions by numerical computations for quantum billiards [@RTWTB00; @RAB07] and for the open kicked rotator [@TTSB03; @JSB03; @OKG03].
This paper is organized as follows. Section \[sec:2\] provides background information on the scattering approach to transport and on standard random-matrix theory. In Sec. \[sec:2a\] we revisit the case of systems with a lead-preserving symmetry and provide the exact reformulation of the eigenvalue statistics in the orthogonal symmetry class ($\beta=1$) as a staggered superposition of two eigenvalue sequences. Section \[sec:3\] concerns systems with a lead-transposing symmetry. In particular, for $\beta=1$ we derive the exact joint probability density of transmission eigenvalues for arbitrary $N$, and show that this again takes the form of a staggered eigenvalue sequence. We also describe the convergence of the local statistics for both types of symmetry, which emerges in the limit $N\to\infty$. Section \[sec:4\] provides numerical results that illustrate the similarities and differences of the random-matrix ensembles for the two symmetry classes. This section also contains the comparison to specific model systems. Section \[sec:5\] provides a summary and discussion of our main results.
Basic Concepts\[sec:2\]
=======================
![(Color online) Sketches of quantum billiards (a,b) without any spatial symmetry, (c) with a lead-preserving symmetry, (d) with both a lead-preserving as well as a lead-transposing symmetry, (e) with a lead-transposing reflection symmetry, and (f) with a lead-transposing inversion symmetry. The inversion symmetry in panel (f) survives in the presence of a finite magnetic field, as is indicated by a symmetric pair of trajectories.[]{data-label="fig1"}](fig1.eps){width="0.8\columnwidth"}
Scattering approach to transport
--------------------------------
Figure \[fig1\] depicts open two-dimensional quantum billiards representing mesoscopic systems with two attached leads (L – left and R – right), each carrying $N$ incoming and $N$ outgoing modes. The systems in Fig.\[fig1\](a,b) are asymmetric while those in Fig. \[fig1\](e,f) possess a lead-transposing reflection or inversion symmetry, respectively. The inversion symmetry in panel (f) survives in the presence of a finite magnetic field, which however breaks time-reversal symmetry (an inversion symmetry does not induce a generalized antiunitary symmetry, in contrast to reflection symmetries [@haake-2001]). In the middle panels, Fig. \[fig1\](c) shows a system with a lead-preserving symmetry, and Fig. \[fig1\](d) shows a system which possesses both a lead-preserving (up-down) and a lead-transposing (right-left) symmetry.
In order to describe the phase-coherent transport through these systems for small bias voltage $V$, one solves the Schr[ö]{}dinger equation for fixed values of the $2N$ amplitudes ${\bf a}=[a_n^{(L)},a_n^{(R)}]^T$ in the incoming modes. This results in linear relations ${\bf b}=S{\bf a}$ for the $2N$ amplitudes ${\bf b}=[b_n^{(L)},b_n^{(R)}]^T$ in the outgoing modes, which delivers a $2N\times 2N$-dimensional scattering matrix of the form $$S=\left(\begin{array}{cc}r&t'\\t&r'\end{array}\right).
\label{eqn:srt}$$ Here $r, r', t, t'$ are $N\times N$-dimensional matrices describing reflection at each lead and transmission from one lead to the other, respectively.
The scattering matrix is unitary, and its structure is further constrained by symmetries of the system. The three main universality classes arise for systems with time-reversal and spin-rotation symmetry (orthogonal symmetry class with $S=S^T$, symmetry index $\beta=1$), systems without time-reversal symmetry (unitary symmetry class with no constraints on $S$, $\beta=2$), and systems with time-reversal but broken spin-rotation symmetry (symplectic symmetry class composed of self-dual matrices $S=S^R$, $\beta=4$). Spatial symmetries entail additional constraints on the scattering matrix, which are detailed in Secs. \[sec:2a\] and \[sec:3\].
The transmission eigenvalues $T_n$ are defined as the eigenvalues of the hermitian matrix $tt^\dagger$. In the case of spin-independent transport or Kramers degeneracy (the latter occurs for $\beta=4$), the transmission eigenvalues are twofold degenerate. We then only account for each pair of eigenvalues once and introduce a spin-degeneracy factor $\alpha=2$. When the two-fold degeneracy is lifted then $\alpha=1$. From here on, $N$ refers to the number of distinct transmission eigenvalues (ignoring accidental degeneracies). Furthermore we will assume that the transmission eigenvalues are ordered by magnitude, $$T_1\leq T_2\leq T_3\leq\ldots\leq T_N,
\label{eq:ordering}$$ as this results in a number of technical simplifications. The conductance quantum is defined as $G_0=\alpha e^2/h$.
With these conventions, the transmission eigenvalues determine fundamental transport properties such as the conductance via $$G=G_0\sum_{n=1}^NT_n$$ and the shot-noise power via $$P=2 G_0eV\sum_{n=1}^N T_n(1-T_n).$$ Here $V$ is the bias voltage, which is assumed to be small.
Dyson’s circular ensembles
--------------------------
Random-matrix theory delivers a statistical description of transport by drawing the scattering matrices from ensembles of unitary matrices which obey the constraints of the given universality class. For the three main universality classes with $\beta=1$, $2$, or $4$, random-matrix theory is based on Dyson’s circular ensembles, for which the probability measure is given by the Haar measure of unitary symmetric, unitary, or unitary self-dual matrices, respectively. The joint probability density of transmission eigenvalues then takes the form [@B97] $$P(\{T_n\})
\propto \prod_{m>n} \left(T_m-T_n\right)^\beta \prod_l
T_l^{-1+\beta/2}.\label{eq:dyson}$$
The first product in Eq. (\[eq:dyson\]) involves pairs of transmission eigenvalues and favors sequences in which neighboring transmission eigenvalues do not approach each other closely. (As we have ordered the transmission eigenvalues by magnitude, all differences $T_m-T_n$ are positive.) This suppresses fluctuations in the eigenvalue sequence and ultimately results in conductance fluctuations of the order of a single conductance quantum, which for large $N$ approach the asymptotic value $$\mbox{var}\,G/G_0=\frac{1}{8\beta}.
\label{eq:varg}$$
For large $N$, the one-point probability density of transmission eigenvalues approaches $$\label{eq:onepoint}
P(T)=\frac{1}{\pi\sqrt{T(1-T)}}.$$ The second product in Eq. (\[eq:dyson\]) induces an asymmetry into this bi-modal distribution, which for large $N$ results in the weak-localization correction $$\langle
G\rangle-\frac{N}{2}G_0=G_0\left(\frac{1}{4}-\frac{1}{2\beta}\right)
\label{eq:dg}$$ of the ensemble-averaged conductance.
An insightful quantity derived from the joint probability density $P(\{T_n\})$ is the distribution $P(s)$ of spacings $s=T_{n+1}-T_n$ between neighboring transmission eigenvalues. For uncorrelated eigenvalues with average spacing ${\bar s}$ one would expect a Poisson distribution, $$P(s)={\bar s}^{-1}e^{-s/\bar s},\label{eq:poisson}$$ while for the circular ensembles and $N\gg1$, the spacing distribution can be well approximated by the Wigner distributions [@mehta-2004; @haake-2001], $$P(s)=\left\{\begin{array}{ll}
\frac{\pi}{2{\bar s}^2}s \exp\left(-\frac{\pi s^2}{4{\bar s}^2}\right)&\beta=1\\
\frac{32}{\pi^2{\bar s}^3}s^2 \exp\left(-\frac{4 s^2 }{\pi{\bar s}^2}\right)&\beta=2\\
\frac{2^{18}}{3^6\pi^3{\bar s}^5}s^4 \exp\left(-\frac{64
s^2}{9\pi{\bar s}^2}\right)&\beta=4
\end{array}\right.
. \label{eqn:wignerdistribution}$$
Lead-preserving and lead-transposing symmetries entail further constraints on the scattering matrix. The consequences of these constraints for the transmission eigenvalue statistics are explored in the remainder of this paper.
Lead-preserving symmetries\[sec:2a\]
====================================
. (c) Sketch of the individual transmission eigenvalue sequences of fixed parity. (d) Reorganization as a staggered level sequence, where transmission eigenvalues alternate after ordering by magnitude.[]{data-label="fig:leadpreserving"}](fig2.eps){width="\columnwidth"}
A useful reference point for our subsequent investigation of systems with a lead-transposing symmetry (in Sec. \[sec:3\]) are open systems with a lead-[*preserving*]{} symmetry, to which one can directly apply the standard ideas of desymmetrization. The goal of the present section is to reformulate the resulting random-matrix statistics for the case of a lead-preserving symmetry with $\beta=1$ as a staggered level repulsion, as this will allow us to establish a connection to the case of a lead-transposing symmetry.
Constraints on the scattering matrix
------------------------------------
An example of a system with a lead-preserving reflection symmetry is shown in Fig. \[fig1\] (c). Figure \[fig:leadpreserving\] (a,b) shows the desymmetrized version of the system, which is halved at the symmetry line. Dirichlet boundary conditions on the line of symmetry select scattering wave functions with an odd parity, while Neumann boundary conditions yield even parity. Consequently, the transmission matrix $t$ assumes a block structure where each block corresponds to a given parity. As dictated by the one-dimensional transverse-mode quantization in the leads, the block of even parity has dimension $N_1\equiv[(N+1)/2]$, while the block of odd parity has dimension $N_2\equiv[N/2]$ (here $[\cdot]$ denotes the integer part of a number). Hence, both blocks have either the same size (when $N=N_1+N_2$ is even), or the block with even parity is by one larger than the block with odd parity (when $N$ is odd).
The total transmission-eigenvalue sequence is therefore obtained from a superposition of two sequences of size $N_1$ and $N_2$ \[for illustration see Fig. \[fig:leadpreserving\](c)\]. In order to fix the way we address the elements of this superposition, we impose the ordering of Eq. (\[eq:ordering\]) and denote by ${\cal P}$ the set of all strictly increasing sequences of indices $I_n\in\{1,2,3,\ldots,N\}$, where each sequence is of length $N_1$. Such sequences are of the form $I=(I_1,I_2,\ldots,I_{N_1})$, where $1\leq I_1< I_2< I_3<\ldots<
I_{N_1}\leq N$. For each sequence we also define a complementary sequence $\bar I=(\bar I_1,\bar
I_2,\bar I_3,\ldots,\bar I_{N_2})$, which consists of the indices $1\leq \bar I_1< \bar I_2< \bar I_3<\ldots< \bar I_{N_2}\leq N$ not contained in $I$. This partition delivers two ordered subsequences $T_{I_n}$ and $T_{\bar I_n}$.
Conventional random-matrix theory
---------------------------------
Within random-matrix theory, the joint probability distribution of the total transmission-eigenvalue sequence is the sum of the corresponding probabilities for each way to distribute the transmission eigenvalues into two sets containing $N_1$ and $N_2$ eigenvalues. With each sequence obeying the statistics of the appropriate Dyson ensemble one finds with Eq. (\[eq:dyson\]) $$\begin{aligned}
P(\{T_n\})
&\propto& \sum_{I\in {\cal P}}
\prod_{m>n} \left(T_{I_m}-T_{I_n}\right)^\beta
\prod_{m>n} \left(T_{\bar I_m}-T_{\bar I_n}\right)^\beta
\nonumber\\
&&\times \prod_{l=1}^N T_l^{-1+\beta/2}. \label{eq:cis}\end{aligned}$$
For large $N$, the separation into two effectively independent systems with Dirichlet and Neumann boundary conditions naturally results in a doubling of the conductance fluctuations (\[eq:varg\]) and a doubling of the weak-localization correction (\[eq:dg\]). Moreover, level repulsion is only effective for transmission eigenvalues which are part of the same sequence. This modifies the spacing probability density, which can be calculated from the general expression [@mehta-2004] $$P(s)=\frac{d^2}{ds^2}\prod_i \int_0^\infty\int_0^\infty
p_i(\frac{\rho_i}{\rho}s+y+z)dydz$$ for multiple sequences $i$, where $p_i(s)$ is the spacing probability densities of each sequence, while $\frac{\rho_i}{\rho}$ is the associated fractional eigenvalue density.
For two sequences following the Wigner distribution (\[eqn:wignerdistribution\]), the resulting spacing probability densities is ($\bar s\equiv1$)
\[eq:wignersup\] $$\begin{aligned}
P_{\beta=1}(s)&=&\frac{e^{-2x^2}}{2}+\frac{\sqrt{\pi}}{2} x
e^{-x^2}\mathcal{E}(x),
\quad x= \frac{\sqrt{\pi} s}{4}\label{eq:wignersupa}
\\
P_{\beta=2}(s)&=&\frac{6x^2e^{-2x^2}}{\pi}
+2\frac{x-x^3}{\sqrt{\pi}}e^{-x^2}\mathcal{E}(x)+\frac{\mathcal{E}^2(x)}{2},
\nonumber\\&& \quad x=\frac{s}{\sqrt{\pi}} \label{eq:wignersup2a}
\\
P_{\beta=4}(s)&=&\frac{x}{3\sqrt{\pi}}(6+4
x^2-4x^4)e^{-x^2}\mathcal{E}(x)+\frac{\mathcal{E}^2(x)}{2} \nonumber \\
&&\hspace*{-1cm}{}+\frac{2 x^2}{9 \pi}(9+28x^2+8x^4)e^{-2x^2}
,\quad x=\frac{4s}{3\sqrt{\pi}},
\label{eq:wignersup3a}\end{aligned}$$
where $\mathcal{E}(x)=\mathrm{erfc}\,(x)$ denotes the complementary error function.
$\beta=1$: Reformulation as a staggered eigenvalue sequence
-----------------------------------------------------------
In most situations encountered in random-matrix theory, the combinatorial sum over partitions involved in the superposition of eigenvalue sequences (\[as in Eq. (\[eq:cis\])\] cannot be performed explicitly. For the specific case $\beta=1$, however, the combinatorial sum over $I$ in Eq. (\[eq:cis\]) can be carried out (see below), which then yields a closed-form expression $$P(\{T_n\})\propto\prod_{m>n,\atop \rm both\,odd}(T_m-T_n)
\prod_{m>n,\atop \rm
both\,even}(T_m-T_n)\prod_l\frac{1}{\sqrt{T_l}}.
\label{eq:cis2}$$ (A similar simplification does not present itself in the cases $\beta=2$ and $\beta=4$.) This result finds its natural statistical interpretation as a [*staggered*]{} superposition of two sequences, which is illustrated in Fig. \[fig:leadpreserving\](d). In such a superposition, the transmission eigenvalues in each sequence are not distinguished by the parity of the associated wavefunction under the symmetry operation. Instead, the transmission eigenvalues are ordered by magnitude (irrespective of parity), and one sequence is composed of all odd-indexed transmission eigenvalues (of which there are $N_1$) while the other sequence is composed of all even-indexed transmission eigenvalues (of which there are $N_2$). Compared to the original superposition of two independent sequences, this differs by the additional constraint $$T_{I_1}\leq T_{\bar I_1}\leq
T_{I_2}\leq T_{\bar I_2}\leq T_{I_3}\leq T_{\bar I_3}\ldots
\label{eq:constraint}$$ (which is satisfied when all the ordered indices $I_n$ are odd while the indices $\bar I_n$ are all even).
In order to demonstrate the equivalence of Eq. (\[eq:cis\]) (for $\beta=1$) and Eq. (\[eq:cis2\]) we have to show that the level-repulsion terms are proportional to each other (both expressions share the same product of one-point weights $\prod_lT_l^{-1/2}$, and the proportionality constant is fixed by normalization). We set out to work towards this goal by defining a matrix $$M=\left(
\begin{array}{cccccccr}
-\mathbf{v}_1 & \mathbf{v}_2 & -\mathbf{v}_3 &\mathbf{v}_4
&-\mathbf{v}_5 &\mathbf{v}_6 &\ldots& (-1)^N\mathbf{v}_N
\\
\mathbf{w}_1 & \mathbf{w}_2 & \mathbf{w}_3 & \mathbf{w}_4 &
\mathbf{w}_5 & \mathbf{w}_6&\ldots & \mathbf{w}_N
\end{array}
\right), \label{eq:mmatrix}$$ which is composed of column vectors $$\begin{aligned}
&&\mathbf{v}_n=(1,T_n,T_n^2,\ldots,T_n^{N_1-1})^T,\quad
\\
&&\mathbf{w}_n=(1,T_n,T_n^2,\ldots,T_n^{N_2-1})^T.\end{aligned}$$
The determinant $\det M$ can be evaluated in two different ways. In the first way, we expand it in terms of subdeterminants with $N_1$ vectors $\mathbf{v}_n$ from the first $N_1$ rows and $N_2$ vectors $\mathbf{w}_m$ from the remaining rows. In other words, we sum over all determinants of the form $$\det\left(
\begin{array}{ccccccc}
-\mathbf{v}_1 & \mathbf{v}_2 & 0 &\mathbf{v}_4 &0 &0 &\ldots
\\
0 & 0 & \mathbf{w}_3 & 0 & \mathbf{w}_5 & \mathbf{w}_6&\ldots
\end{array}
\right),$$ etc., where the indices of the vectors ${\bf v}_{I_n}$ form an ordered subsequence $I$ and the indices of the vectors ${\bf
w}_{\bar I_n}$ are given by the complementary subsequence $\bar
I$. The alternating signs in front of the vectors ${\bf
v}_{I_n}$ can be pulled out of the determinant at the cost of an overall factor $(-1)^{I_1+I_2+\ldots+I_{N_1}}$. Next, we use permutations of neighboring rows to bring all vectors $\mathbf{v}_{I_n}$ to the left (into row $n$). This results in an additional sign factor $(-1)^{(I_1-1)+(I_2-2)+\ldots+(I_{N_1}-N_1)}$. The determinant of the resulting block matrix factorizes. Overall, this expansion yields $$\begin{aligned}
&&\det M=(-1)^{N_1(N_1+1)/2} \nonumber \\ &&\times\sum_{I\in{\cal
P}}\det(\mathbf{v}_{I_1},\mathbf{v}_{I_2},\ldots,\mathbf{v}_{I_{N_1}})
\det(\mathbf{w}_{{\bar I}_1},\mathbf{w}_{{\bar
I}_2},\ldots,\mathbf{w}_{{\bar I}_{N_2}}). \nonumber \\
\label{eq:mexpansion1}\end{aligned}$$ Each subdeterminant is of the form of a Vandermonde determinant, and therefore $$\begin{aligned}
\det M & = &(-1)^{N_1(N_1+1)/2} \nonumber \\ &&\times \sum_{I\in
{\cal P}}
\prod_{m>n} \left(T_{I_m}-T_{I_n}\right)
\prod_{m>n}
\left(T_{\bar I_m}-T_{\bar I_n}\right). \nonumber \\
\label{eq:detmres1}\end{aligned}$$
Secondly, the determinant $\det M$ can be evaluated by adding in Eq. (\[eq:mmatrix\]) the first $N_2$ rows to the last $N_2$ rows. This yields $$\det M=\det\left(
\begin{array}{ccccccc}
-\mathbf{v}_1 & \mathbf{v}_2 & -\mathbf{v}_3 &\mathbf{v}_4 &
-\mathbf{v}_5 & \mathbf{v}_6 &\ldots
\\
0 & 2\, \mathbf{w}_2 & 0 & 2\, \mathbf{w}_4 & 0 & 2\,
\mathbf{w}_6&\ldots
\end{array}
\right).$$ Proceeding again with the evaluation of subdeterminants we are left with a single choice, namely, to select vectors $\mathbf{v}_n$ with odd index and vectors $\mathbf{w}_n$ with even index. Accounting for all signs and now also factors of two, this results in $$\begin{aligned}
\det M&=&(-1)^{N_1(N_1+1)/2} \,2^{N_2}\nonumber
\\ && \times
\det(\mathbf{v}_{1},\mathbf{v}_{3},\mathbf{v}_{5},\ldots)\det(\mathbf{w}_{2},\mathbf{w}_{4},\mathbf{w}_{6},\ldots).\qquad\end{aligned}$$ As this again involves Vandermonde determinants, we find $$\begin{aligned}
\det M &=&(-1)^{N_1(N_1+1)/2} \,2^{N_2} \nonumber
\\ && \times \prod_{m>n,\atop\rm
both\,odd}(T_m-T_n)\prod_{m>n,\atop\rm both\,even}(T_m-T_n).\qquad
\label{eq:detmres2}\end{aligned}$$
The two results Eqs. (\[eq:detmres1\]) and (\[eq:detmres2\]) deliver the remarkable identity $$\begin{aligned}
&&\sum_{I\in {\cal P}} \prod_{m>n}
\left(T_{I_m}-T_{I_n}\right)\prod_{m>n}
\left(T_{\bar I_m}-T_{\bar I_n}\right) \nonumber \\
&&= 2^{N_2}\prod_{m>n,\atop\rm
both\,odd}(T_m-T_n)\prod_{m>n,\atop\rm both\,even}(T_m-T_n).
\label{identity}\end{aligned}$$ An equivalent identity has been derived for superpositions of energy eigenvalue sequences with a length difference of at most one which are distributed according to the Gaussian orthogonal ensemble [@forrester]. Relation (\[identity\]) shows that the level-repulsion term in Eq.(\[eq:cis\]) is indeed proportional to the level-repulsion term in Eq.(\[eq:cis2\]). As already mentioned, the one-point product $\prod_lT_l^{-1/2}$ in both expressions is identical, and the proportionality constant is fixed by normalization. It follows that for $\beta=1$, the independent superposition of two transmission-eigenvalue sequences with $N_1$ and $N_2$ levels (with $N_1$ and $N_2$ constrained to differ at most by one) is identical to a staggered superposition of two transmission-eigenvalue sequences with $N_1$ and $N_2$ levels, which are correlated by the ordering requirement (\[eq:constraint\]).
Lead-transposing symmetries\[sec:3\]
====================================
. (c,d) Eigenphases $\Theta_n$ of the matrix $Q$ on the unit circle, and their projection Eq. (\[eq:taun\]) which delivers the transmission eigenvalues.[]{data-label="fig:leadtransposing"}](fig3.eps){width="0.8\columnwidth"}
Systems with a lead-transposing symmetry require a separate treatment since the symmetry operation only commutes with the Hamiltonian, but not with the current operator (which changes its sign). In the presence of an applied bias, the symmetry operation exchanges the electronic source and drain reservoirs. An obvious symptom of this complication is the fact that the desymmetrized system only possesses a single lead (see Fig.\[fig:leadtransposing\]). Mathematically, the transmission matrix does not assume a block structure but remains full. We will first adapt the concept of desymmetrization to derive the constraints of the scattering matrix, and then turn to the joint probability density of the transmission eigenvalues in random-matrix theory. Just as in the previous section, we then focus on the orthogonal symmetry class ($\beta=1$) and derive a closed expression for the joint probability density, which again assumes the form of a staggered level repulsion.
Constraints on the scattering matrix
------------------------------------
The presence of a lead-transposing symmetry immediately results in the constraint $r=r'$, $t=t'$ (when time-reversal symmetry is broken by a magnetic field, this can be achieved by an inversion symmetry but not by a reflection symmetry). In order to further exploit the consequences of the symmetry, let us inspect a time-reversal symmetric system with a reflection symmetry, as shown in Fig. \[fig1\](e). As shown in Fig.\[fig:leadtransposing\](a,b), the desymmetrized versions are cut at the symmetry line, where they are equipped with Dirichlet or Neumann boundary conditions for wavefunctions of odd ($-$) or even parity ($+$), respectively. Such wave functions are readily constructed starting from the original system when one chooses incoming amplitudes of the form ${\bf a}^{(R)}=\pm {\bf a}^{(L)}$. The outgoing amplitudes are then given by ${\bf b}^{(L)}=(r\pm
t){\bf a}^{(L)}$. Consequently, the scattering matrices of the desymmetrized systems are given by $$S_{\pm}=r\pm t. \label{eq:spm}$$
The desymmetrized systems only possess a single opening. In order to revert to the scattering matrix of the original system we invert Eq. (\[eq:spm\]). The transport in the original system is therefore described by the transmission matrix $t=\frac{1}{2}(S_+-S_-)$, which gives $$\label{ttdagger}
tt^\dagger=\frac{1}{4}(2-S_+S_-^\dagger-S_-S_+^\dagger).$$ The properties of this matrix—and especially, of its eigenvalues $T_n$—are not separable and depend on the interplay of both desymmetrized variants.
Conventional random-matrix theory\[sec:3conv\]
----------------------------------------------
Random-matrix ensembles for systems with lead-transposing symmetry can be obtained by assuming that the scattering matrices $S_+$ and $S_-$ of the desymmetrized variants are statistically independent realizations of the appropriate standard circular ensemble. The resulting ensembles are identical to those introduced by Baranger and Mello [@BM96], who based their considerations on a maximal-entropy principle.
Earlier works have addressed isolated aspects of these ensembles, but not the complete transmission-eigenvalue statistics. For instance, it has been observed that a lead-transposing symmetry increases the conductance fluctuations [@GMMB96; @gopar-2006-73] but eliminates the weak-localization correction [@gopar-2006-73]. For large $N$, the conductance fluctuations double, just as is the case for lead-preserving symmetries. We now provide a complete explanation of these observations on the basis of the joint probability density of the transmission eigenvalues.
The starting point of these considerations is the relation $$\label{eq:taun}
T_n=\sin^2(\Theta_n/2)=\frac{1}{2}\left(1-\cos\Theta_n\right)$$ between the transmission eigenvalues $T_n$ and the eigenphases $\Theta_n$ of the unitary matrix $Q\equiv S_+S_-^\dagger$, which follows from Eq. (\[ttdagger\]). As illustrated in Fig.\[fig:leadtransposing\](c,d), the statistics of transmission eigenvalues is hence directly imposed by the statistics of the real parts $\cos\Theta_n$ of the unimodular eigenvalues $e^{i\Theta_n}$ of $Q$.
In random-matrix theory, the eigenphases $\Theta_n$ follow the statistics of the associated circular ensemble. This is evident for the unitary ensemble ($\beta=2$), which is invariant under the multiplication of an arbitrary fixed matrix (it hence suffices, e.g., to assume that $S_+$ is random while $S_-$ is fixed, or vice versa). In the orthogonal case ($\beta=1$), the unitary transformation $Q'=S_-^{-1/2}QS_-^{1/2}=S_-^{-1/2}S_+S_-^{-1/2}$ results in a symmetric matrix with identical eigenvalues. Their circular statistics then follows from the fact that the circular orthogonal ensemble is invariant under the symmetric involution with any fixed symmetric matrix (here, $S_-^{-1/2}$). The same transformation also succeeds in the case of self-dual matrices ($\beta=4$).
Because of the uniform distribution of eigenphases in the circular ensemble [@mehta-2004], the one-point probability density $P(T_n)$ is given by Eq. (\[eq:onepoint\]) for any finite $N$ (i.e., not only in the limit $N\to\infty$) [@gopar-2006-73]. The joint probability density of the eigenphases $\Theta_n$ is given by [@mehta-2004] $$P_\Theta(\{\Theta_n\})\propto\prod_{m>n}\left[\sigma_m\sin\frac{\Theta_m-\Theta_n}{2}\right]^\beta.
\label{eq:theta1}$$ Here we ordered the eigenphases by their moduli, $$0\leq|\Theta_1|\leq|\Theta_2|\leq|\Theta_3|\leq\ldots\leq|\Theta_N|\leq\pi,
\label{eq:thetaordering}$$ and denoted $\sigma_n={\rm sgn}\,\Theta_n$. Since Eq.(\[eq:taun\]) does not discriminate the sign of $\Theta_n$ we proceed to the distribution of the moduli $\theta_n=|\Theta_n|$, $$P_\theta(\{\theta_n\})=\sum_{\{\sigma_n\}}P_\Theta(\{\sigma_n\theta_n\}).
\label{eq:theta2}$$ With the help of the relations $$\sin(\theta_n/2)=\sqrt{T_n},\quad \cos(\theta_n/2)=\sqrt{1-T_n},
\label{eq:trafo1}$$ and also accounting for the Jacobian $$\frac{d\theta_n}{d T_n}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{T_n(1-T_n)}},
\label{eq:jacobian}$$ this yields the joint probability density [@gopar-2006-73] $$\begin{aligned}
&&
P(\{T_n\})
\propto \prod_{l}\frac{1}{\sqrt{T_l(1-T_l)}} \nonumber \\
&&\times\sum_{\{\sigma_n\}} \prod_{m>n}\left[
\sqrt{T_n(1-T_m)}-\sigma_m\sigma_n\sqrt{T_m(1-T_n)} \right]^\beta
.\nonumber \\
\label{eq:pjointtransposed}\end{aligned}$$ This expression is symmetric under the replacement $T_n\to 1-T_n$, which explains the absence of weak-localization corrections to the conductance. Moreover, transmission eigenvalues do not repel each other when $\sigma_n=-\sigma_m$, i.e., when the underlying eigenphases $\Theta_n$ lie on the opposite (upper and lower) arcs of the unit circle \[see again Fig. \[fig:leadtransposing\](c)\]. As the sets of eigenphases on both arcs is only weakly cross-correlated, this explains the doubling of the conductance fluctuations for large $N$.
Staggered level repulsion for $\beta=1$
---------------------------------------
While the general conclusions of the previous section can be drawn for any $\beta$, it should be noted that Eq.(\[eq:pjointtransposed\]) still involves a combinatorial sum, and hence is similar in status as expression (\[eq:cis\]) for systems with a lead-preserving symmetry. We now show that a much more detailed insight is possible for the orthogonal symmetry class ($\beta=1$), where the combinatorial sum in Eq. (\[eq:pjointtransposed\]) can be carried out explicitly (see below). The resulting statistics again assume the form of a staggered level repulsion, but are not identical to Eq.(\[eq:cis2\]) (which was derived from the superposition of two independent level sequences): For $N$ an odd integer, we find
\[eq:result\]$$\begin{aligned}
P(\{T_n\})
&\propto& \prod_{m>n,\,\rm both\,odd}\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!(T_m-T_n)
\prod_{l \,{\rm\, odd}}\frac{1}{\sqrt{T_l(1-T_l)}} \nonumber \\
& \times & \prod_{m>n,\,\rm both\,even}\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!(T_m-T_n)
\label{eq:result1}
,\end{aligned}$$while for even $N$ $$\begin{aligned}
P(\{T_n\})
& \propto & \prod_{m>n,\,\rm both\,odd}\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!(T_m-T_n)
\prod_{l \,{\rm\, odd}}\frac{1}{\sqrt{T_l}} \nonumber
\\
& \times & \prod_{m>n,\,\rm both\,even}\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!(T_m-T_n)
\prod_{l\,{\rm\,even}}\frac{1}{\sqrt{1-T_l}}
\label{eq:result2}
.\qquad\end{aligned}$$
Similar to Eq. (\[eq:cis2\]), the joint probability density again separates into two factors, each involving only every second eigenvalue. In particular, neighboring levels are not prohibited to approach each other closely, and statistical fluctuations of observables are enhanced, as has been earlier observed for the conductance and the Fano factor [@GMMB96; @BM96; @SSML05; @gopar-2006-73]. The correlation between the two level sequences is again imposed only indirectly by the requirement that the sequences are staggered. This ordering requirement is independent of the parity of the wave function – indeed, in the present case, parity is not well defined as the transmission eigenvalues arise from the combined properties of $S_+$ and $S_-$.
In order to derive Eq. (\[eq:result\]), let us first inspect Eq. (\[eq:theta1\]). Because of the ordering (\[eq:thetaordering\]), each factor $\sigma_m$ appears $m-1$ times, and therefore $$P_\Theta(\{\Theta_n\})\propto\prod_{l\,\rm
even}\sigma_l\prod_{m>n}\sin\frac{\Theta_m-\Theta_n}{2}.
\label{eqn:pTheta}$$
We next pass over to the joint distribution of moduli (\[eq:theta2\]). In order to evaluate the combinatorial sum over the $\sigma_n$ we express the factor of sine functions in Eq.(\[eqn:pTheta\]) as a Vandermonde determinant, $$\prod_{m>n}\sin\frac{\Theta_m-\Theta_n}{2}=(-i)^{N(N-1)/2}\det
B(\{\sigma_n\theta_n\}),$$ where $B_{ml}(\{\Theta_n\})=\exp(i\Theta_ml)$, $m=1,2,3,\ldots,N$, while the index $l$ runs in integer steps from $-(N-1)/2$ to $(N-1)/2$. The multilinearity of the determinant then yields $$P_\theta(\{\theta_n\})\propto(-i/2)^{N(N-1)/2}\,{\rm det}\, C,$$ where $C_{ml}=2\cos(\theta_m l)$ for odd $m$ and $C_{ml}=2i\sin(\theta_m l)$ for even $m$.
For every $l>0$ we now add the $l$th column in $C$ to the $-l$th column, which cancels all sine terms in the latter columns. The determinant $\det C=\det D \det E$ then factorizes, where $D_{ml}=\cos{\theta_m l}$, $m$ odd, and $E_{ml}=\sin{\theta_m l}$, $m$ even. If $N$ is even, the index $l$ is now restricted to $l=1/2,3/2,\ldots,(N-1)/2$. For odd $N$, this index is restricted to $l=0,1,2,\ldots,(N-1)/2$ for the matrix $D$, and to $l=1,2,\ldots,(N-1)/2$ for the matrix $E$.
For odd $N$ we can write $D_{ml}$ as a polynomial of degree $l$ in $\cos\theta_m$, and $E_{ml}$ as $\sin \theta_m$ times a polynomial of degree $l-1$ in $\cos\theta_m$. We only need to keep the highest monomial, as the other terms are linear combinations of the rows of lower index $l$. This leaves us again with Vandermonde determinants, $$\begin{aligned}
\det D&\propto&\!\!\prod_{m>n,{\rm\,both\,
odd}}\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!(\cos\theta_n-\cos\theta_m),
\\
\det E&\propto&\prod_{l{\,\rm\,
even}}\sin\theta_l\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\prod_{
m>n,{\rm\,both\,even}}\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!(\cos\theta_n-\cos\theta_m).\end{aligned}$$
For even $N$, the index $l$ is half-integer, and the elements of $D$ can now be written as $\cos(\theta_m/2)$ times a polynomial in $\cos(\theta_m)$, while those of $E$ can be written as $\sin(\theta_m/2)$ times such a polynomial. This yields $$\begin{aligned}
\det D&\propto&\prod_{l{\,\rm\,
odd}}\cos(\theta_l/2)\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\prod_{m>n,{\rm\,both\,
odd}}\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!(\cos\theta_n-\cos\theta_m),\quad
\\
\det E&\propto&\prod_{l{\,\rm\,
even}}\sin(\theta_l/2)\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\prod_{
m>n,{\rm\,both\,even}}\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!
(\cos\theta_n-\cos\theta_m).\quad\end{aligned}$$ The joint probability density (\[eq:result\]) follows by transforming from $\theta_n$ to $T_n$, where the Jacobian is given by Eq. (\[eq:jacobian\]), while the factors in the expressions for $D$ and $E$ can be rewritten with the help of Eq.(\[eq:trafo1\]) and the relation $\cos\theta_n-\cos\theta_m=2(T_m-T_n)$.
Large-$N$ asymptotics\[sec:3a\]
-------------------------------
It is natural to ask whether the similarity of Eq.(\[eq:result\]) to Eq. (\[eq:cis2\]) indicates a possible interpretation as a superposition of two independent level sequences \[from which Eq. (\[eq:cis2\]) was derived\]. In Eq.(\[eq:result\]), however, this interpretation is prevented by the different one-point weight terms associated to the even and odd indexed eigenvalues. A symptom of this difference is the fact that Eq. (\[eq:cis2\]) implies finite-$N$ weak-localization corrections to the conductance, while Eq. (\[eq:result\]) delivers the absence of such corrections, in agreement with the general conclusions in Sec. \[sec:3conv\]. Hence, the statistics of systems with a lead-transposing and a lead-preserving symmetry (with $\beta=1$) only find a common ground when both are interpreted as a staggered level sequence.
For the case of a lead-preserving symmetry, the framework of superpositions of independent level sequences of course provides a powerful tool for the derivation of low-point correlation functions and local statistics \[such as the two-point correlation function, or the level spacing distribution (\[eq:wignersup\])\]. We now argue that in the limit $N\to \infty$, this framework can also be adopted for systems with a lead-transposing symmetry.
In this limit, the transmission eigenvalues form a quasi-continuum, and the asymptotical statistics follow from the formal analogy to the statistics of coordinates of a dense set of parallel line charges in one dimension (the Coulomb gas), which exhibit a logarithmic repulsion [@mehta-2004; @B97]. In leading order, the weight terms enter the analysis of the statistical fluctuations only via the one-point function $P(T)$: For fixed index $n$, the transmission eigenvalue $T_n$ are confined to a small neighborhood around a nominal equilibrium position $\bar
T_n$, which is given by the implicit equation $n-1/2=N\int_0^{\bar
T_n} P(T) dT$. Subsequently, the weight terms can be approximated by a constant (with all the $T_n$ fixed to $\bar T_n$), while the fluctuations are exclusively governed by the level-repulsion factors of the joint probability distribution. As the level-repulsion factors are identical in Eqs. (\[eq:cis2\]) and (\[eq:result\]) one concludes that the local statistics in both ensembles become indistinguishable in the limit of $N\to\infty$.
We therefore obtain the following remarkable result of purely statistical origin: For a lead-transposing symmetry, as $N$ is sent to infinity the local statistics (embodied in low-point correlation functions) converges to that of a superposition of two independent level sequences. This is the case even though a classification of transmission eigenvalues by parity is not possible. In particular, we arrive at the prediction that in this limit, the level-spacing distribution is well approximated by Eq.(\[eq:wignersup\]).
Numerical investigations\[sec:4\]
=================================
For the three standard Dyson ensembles of random-matrix theory, the joint probability density (\[eq:dyson\]) manifests the celebrated repulsion between neighboring eigenvalues, since the probability to find two closely spaced adjacent eigenvalues is suppressed as $(T_{n+1}-T_{n})^\beta$. In contrast, the joint densities (\[eq:cis2\]) and (\[eq:result\]) (both derived for $\beta=1$) describe sequences of reduced stiffness, where only every second level is subject to mutual level repulsion. As argued before, as long as $N$ takes on moderate values, the latter joint densities imply quantitative differences in the transmission eigenvalue statistics for lead-preserving and lead-transposing symmetries, while for large $N$ these statistics should converge onto each other.
In this section we illustrate the differences and similarities between these scenarios for all three main symmetry classes ($\beta=1,2,4$) via numerical sampling of the random-matrix ensembles, and also compare to realistic model systems. For convenient characterization of the eigenvalue repulsion we employ the nearest-neighbor spacing distribution $P(s)$, as well as spacing distributions to more distant neighbors. As we will see, the local statistics of systems with a lead-transposing symmetry actually show a much [*weaker*]{} $N$ dependence than for systems with a lead-preserving symmetry. This feature could be anticipated by (but also goes beyond) the absence of weak localization corrections in the one-point function (discussed in Sec.\[sec:3conv\]).
Random-matrix theory
--------------------
![(Color online) Probability density $P(s)$ of transmission-eigenvalue spacings for systems with a lead-transposing symmetry, obtained from $10^4$ random matrices with $N=50$. Smooth curves: Spacing probability density (\[eq:wignersup\]) for superpositions of eigenvalues of two independent sequences from the standard circular ensembles. The inset shows the Wigner distributions (\[eqn:wignerdistribution\]) from standard random-matrix theory and the Poisson distribution (\[eq:poisson\]) for uncorrelated eigenvalues. \[fig2\]](fig4.eps){width="0.9\columnwidth"}
![(Color online) Probability densities of spacings $s_n$ to the first, second and third neighboring transmission eigenvalue for the random-matrix ensembles of systems with a lead-transposing symmetry (solid curves) or a lead-preserving symmetry (dashed curves). In the left panels the number of transport channels $N=4$, while in the right panels $N=100$. Top panels: orthogonal symmetry class ($\beta=1$). Middle panels: unitary symmetry class ($\beta=2$). Bottom panels: symplectic symmetry class ($\beta=4$). For each ensemble, the results represent a sample of $10^4$ realizations. \[fig4\]](fig5.eps){width="\columnwidth"}
We start with the characterization of the level statistics within the various random-matrix ensembles. Let us first consider the case of a lead-transposing symmetry with a relatively large number of transport channels, for which we expect that the local statistics is close to that of a superposition of two independent level sequences. Starting point of the numerical computations is Eq. (\[ttdagger\]), where the matrix $Q=S_+S_-^\dagger$ is drawn from the appropriate Dyson ensemble. In order to obtain the nearest-neighbor spacing distribution $P(s)$, we unfold the eigenvalue sequences to a mean local spacing $\bar s\equiv 1$ [@mehta-2004; @haake-2001]. Figure \[fig2\] shows the resulting spacing distributions for $N=50$. For this large number of open channels we find that the numerical histograms indeed match the predictions from the superposition of two independent level sequences \[solid curves; see Eq. (\[eq:wignersup\])\].
For comparison, the inset in Fig. \[fig2\] shows the standard Wigner distributions (\[eqn:wignerdistribution\]), as well as the Poisson distribution (\[eq:poisson\]). In the Poisson distribution the eigenvalue spacing density is maximal at $s=0$; for larger $s$ the probability density decreases monotonically. For the Wigner distributions the most likely eigenvalue spacing occurs at a finite value of $s$; for $s\to 0$, the distributions decay algebraically $\propto s^\beta$, while for $s\to\infty$ they decay as a Gaussian. The distributions in the main panel combine the partial absence of level repulsion for small $s$ \[with $P(s=0)=1/2$\] with the Gaussian decay of the Wigner distributions for large $s$.
For large $N$, virtually identical results are obtained for the conventional case of a lead-preserving symmetry. This is demonstrated in detail in Fig. \[fig4\], which also shows the spacing distributions to the second and third-nearest neighbor. Here, solid curves are for a lead-transposing symmetry, and dashed curves are for a lead-preserving symmetry (corresponding to a superposition of independent level sequences from the appropriate Dyson ensemble). For $N=100$ (right panels), dashed and solid curves lie on top of each other and are practically indistinguishable. This clearly supports the convergence of the local statistics of both cases for large $N$.
The left panels in Fig. \[fig4\] show the level-spacing distributions for $N=4$. In this case, the results for a lead-transposing symmetry are distinctively different from those for a lead-preserving symmetry. Interestingly, the nearest-neighbor spacing distribution for a lead-transposing symmetry is very similar for small and large $N$; the distribution for $N=4$ is already well approximated by Eq.(\[eq:wignersup\]). In comparison, the nearest-neighbor spacing distribution for a lead-preserving symmetry shows a much stronger $N$-dependence.
Comparison to model systems
---------------------------
, averaged over energies in the range $N=5-14$, and the lead-transposing symmetric stadium billiard of Fig.\[fig1\](e), with $N=5,6$. (b) The same for open quantum kicked rotators with $N=12$. In both panels, the solid curves show the Wigner distribution (\[eqn:wignerdistribution\]) with $\beta=1$ and the prediction of random-matrix theory for systems with a lead-transposing symmetry \[which can be safely approximated by Eq. (\[eq:wignersupa\])\]. \[fig3\]](fig6.eps){width="\columnwidth"}
In order to validate that realistic quantum systems can indeed be described by random matrix theory (on which all previous considerations are based), we compare our predictions with numerical results for such systems. In particular, we present results of numerical computations for quantum billiards, which model a lateral quantum dot, and for the open kicked rotator, which is based on an efficient quantum map. We focus on systems in the orthogonal symmetry class ($\beta=1$) and contrast systems with a lead-transposing symmetry to systems without any spatial symmetry.
The quantum billiards are derived from the stadium geometry, with leads positioned to either break or conserve the reflection symmetry about the vertical center line \[see Figs.\[fig1\](b,e)\]. The computations are performed using a modular recursive Green’s function method [@RTWTB00; @RAB07], with energies that permit $5\leq N\leq 14$ open channels in each of the two leads. As shown in Fig. \[fig3\](a), the eigenvalue spacing distribution agrees well with the predictions of random-matrix theory, both in presence and in absence of a lead-transposing symmetry.
The open quantum kicked rotator [@TTSB03; @JSB03; @OKG03] is defined by the scattering matrix $$S=P[e^{-i\varepsilon}-F(1-P^T P)]^{-1}FP^T,$$ where $\varepsilon$ is the quasi-energy, $$F_{nm}=(iM)^{-1/2}
e^{\frac{i\pi}{M}(m-n)^2-\frac{iMK}{4\pi}(\cos\frac{2\pi
n}{M}+\cos\frac{2\pi m}{M})}$$ is the $M\times M$-dimensional Floquet operator of the kicked rotator, and $P$ is an $2N\times M$-dimensional matrix which projects the internal Hilbert space onto the openings. We assume that $M$ is even and $M\gg N$. The reflection symmetry of the closed system is manifested in the symmetry $F_{nm}=F_{M-n,M-m}$, and the lead-transposing symmetry of the open system is present when in addition $P_{nm}=P_{2N-n,M-m}$.
Figure \[fig3\](b) shows the spacing distributions obtained for kicked rotators with symmetrical and asymmetrical lead placement and $N=12$. The data represents 6600 realizations which are generated by varying the quasienergy $\varepsilon\in [0,2\pi)$, the kicking strength $K\in[10,15]$, and the internal dimension $M\in[498,502]$. Again, we find good agreement with random-matrix theory, including the reduced eigenvalue repulsion in the lead-symmetric case.
The results in this section reveal clear signatures of staggered level repulsion in realistic systems with a lead-transposing symmetry (and $\beta=1$). It is worth emphasizing that the applicability of this statistical concept \[embodied in the random-matrix results Eq. (\[eq:result\])\] does not rely on any pre- or postprocessing or -selection of the transmission eigenvalues in the model systems (as there is no intrinsic property of the transmission eigenvalues or their associated scattering wave functions – such as a parity – that could be used to divide these eigenvalues into two sets).
Summary and Conclusions\[sec:5\]
================================
We analyzed the transport in open systems with a lead-transposing or a lead-preserving symmetry via the complete joint probability density of transmission eigenvalues, obtained in random-matrix theory.
For a lead-preserving symmetry, the standard concept of desymmetrization reduces the problem to the investigation of independent non-symmetric variants of the system. For a lead-transposing symmetry, however, the transport characteristics only arise as a collective property of the symmetry-reduced variants of the system. We still found that both types of symmetry result in a similar reduction of level repulsion, so that transmission eigenvalues can approach each other closely. For a large number of transport channels $N$, the local eigenvalue statistics for both types of symmetry indeed become indistinguishable.
Our main analytical results concern a detailed explanation of these features for systems which also exhibit time-reversal and spin-rotation invariance (the orthogonal symmetry class, with symmetry index $\beta=1$). In this case, the transmission eigenvalue statistics of systems with a lead-transposing or lead-preserving symmetry find a common natural interpretation as a staggered superposition of two independent level sequences. In such a superposition the eigenvalues alternate between the sequences when they are ordered by magnitude. The joint probability densities for the two types of symmetry only differ in one-point weight factors. For lead-preserving symmetries these weight factor incorporate $1/N$ corrections for quantities such as the ensemble-averaged conductance, while these corrections are absent for a lead-transposing symmetry. This results in differences of the local eigenvalue statistics when $N$ is small, but becomes insignificant when $N$ is large.
While we concentrated on systems with discrete spatial symmetries, our results can also be applied for discrete symmetries of different origin (e.g., arising from internal degrees of freedom) that yield equivalent constraints on the scattering matrix.
We gratefully acknowledge assistance with the billiard computations by Florian Aigner, as well as useful discussions with Eugene Bogomolny, Piet Brouwer, Victor Gopar, Jon Keating, and Martin Zirnbauer. This work was supported by the European Commission, Marie Curie Excellence Grant MEXT-CT-2005-023778. S.R. wishes to thank the Max-Kade foundation and the W.M. Keck foundation for support.
[99]{}
C. W. J. Beenakker, Rev. Mod. Phys. **69**, 731 (1997).
F. J. Dyson, J. Math. Phys. **3**, 140 (1962).
A. Altland and M. R. Zirnbauer, Phys. Rev. B **55**, 1142 (1997).
Y. M. Blanter and M. B[ü]{}ttiker, Phys. Rep. **336**, 1 (2000).
M. L. Mehta, *Random Matrices*, 3rd ed. (Elsevier, 2004).
F. Haake, *Quantum signatures of Chaos*, 2nd ed. (Springer, Berlin, 2001).
J. P. Keating and J. M. Robbins, J. Phys. A **30**, L177 (1997).
V. Gopar, M. Martínez, P. Mello, and H. Baranger, J. Phys. A **29**, 881 (1996).
H. U. Baranger and P. A. Mello, Phys. Rev. B **54**, R14297 (1996).
H. Schanze, H.-J. St[ö]{}ckmann, M. [Mart[í]{}nez-Mares]{}, and C. H. Lewenkopf, Phys. Rev. E **71**, 016223 (2005).
V. A. Gopar, S. Rotter, and H. Schomerus, Phys. Rev. B **73**, 165308 (2006).
S. Rotter, J.-Z. Tang, L. Wirtz, J. Trost, and J. Burgdörfer, Phys. Rev. B **62**, 1950 (2000).
S. Rotter, F. Aigner, and J. Burgdörfer, Phys. Rev. B **75**, 125312 (2007).
J. [Tworzydło]{}, A. Tajic, H. Schomerus, and C. W. J. Beenakker, Phys. Rev. B **68**, 115313 (2003).
P. Jacquod, H. Schomerus, and C. W. J. Beenakker, Phys. Rev. Lett. **90**, 207004 (2003).
A. Ossipov, T. Kottos, and T. Geisel, Europhys. Lett. **62**, 719 (2003).
P. J. Forrester and E. M. Rains, in: P. M. Bleher and A. R. Its, editors, *Random Matrix Models and its Applications*, vol 40 of Mathematical Sciences Research Institute Publications (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2001) p 171-208.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'Measurements of the exchange stiffness $D$ and the exchange constant $A$ of Yttrium Iron Garnet (YIG) films are presented. The YIG films with thicknesses from 0.9$\mu$m to 2.6$\mu$m were investigated with a microwave setup in a wide frequency range from 5 to 40GHz. The measurements were performed when the external static magnetic field was applied in-plane and out-of-plane. The method of Schreiber and Frait [@frait], based on the analysis of the perpendicular standing spin wave (PSSW) mode frequency dependence on the applied out-of-plane magnetic field, was used to obtain the exchange stiffness $D$. This method was modified to avoid the influence of internal magnetic fields during the determination of the exchange stiffness. Furthermore, the method was adapted for in-plane measurements as well. The results obtained using all methods are compared and values of *D* between $(5.18\pm0.01) \cdot 10^{-17}$T$\cdot$m$^2$ and $(5.34\pm0.02) \cdot 10^{-17}$T$\cdot$m$^2$ were obtained for different thicknesses. From this the exchange constant was calculated to be $A=(3.65 \pm 0.38)$pJ/m.'
address:
- '$^1$Fachbereich Physik and Landesforschungszentrum OPTIMAS, Technische Universität Kaiserslautern, 67663 Kaiserslautern, Germany'
- '$^2$Department of Physics and Astronomy, MINT Center, University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, Alabama 35487, USA'
- '$^3$INNOVENT e.V. Technologieentwicklung, 07745 Jena, Germany'
author:
- 'S Klingler$^1$, A V Chumak$^1$, T Mewes$^2$, B Khodadadi$^2$, C Mewes$^2$, C Dubs$^3$, O Surzhenko$^3$, B Hillebrands$^1$, A Conca$^1$'
title: Measurements of the exchange stiffness of YIG films by microwave resonance techniques
---
Introduction
============
In order to employ the degree of freedom of the spin in future information technology, materials with low Gilbert damping and long spin-wave propagation distances are needed for data transport. Yttrium Iron Garnet (YIG) is a material which fulfills the aforesaid requirements. New technologies employing YIG are being developed and new physical phenomena were investigated. Logic operations with spin waves in YIG waveguides [@Khitun; @Schneider; @Klingler], data-buffering elements [@Chumak2012] and magnon transistors [@Chumak] are only a few examples for the latest technology progress. Especially, YIG films of nanometer thickness [@Jungfleisch; @pirro; @Fert; @Wu1; @Wu2; @Hahn] are of large importance since they allow for the realization of nano- and microstructures [@Chumak; @pirro; @Hahn2014; @Florin] and an enhancement of spin-transfer-torque related effects [@Hahn; @Kajiwara]. In this context the material parameters of YIG are of crucial importance for its application potential.
In a magnetic system, the exchange interaction contributes strongly to the energy of the system. From a classical point of view, this interaction is responsible for the parallel alignment of adjacent spins, thus, it strongly influences the spin-wave characteristics. The strength of the exchange interaction is given by the exchange stiffness $D$, but the existing approaches for its measurement are often influenced by internal magnetic fields depending consequently on crystal anisotropies and the saturation magnetization. Thus, methods are required for the exact determination of the exchange stiffness without the uncertainties added by the aforementioned parameters. Here, such a method is presented and compared to the results obtained by commonly used data evaluation methods. Firstly, the classical approach of Schreiber and Frait [@frait] is used for the determination of the exchange stiffness when the external static magnetic field is applied out-of-plane. Secondly, the method is modified to avoid any influence of the anisotropy fields and the saturation magnetization in order to achieve highly-precise values for $D$. Thirdly, the method of Schreiber and Frait is adapted and used for in-plane measurements. All values of $D$ obtained by using the different methods are compared and, then, values of the exchange constant $A$ are calculated for our YIG samples.
Theory
======
The precessional motion of the magnetization in an effective magnetic field is described by the Landau-Lifshitz and Gilbert equation [@Landau-Lifshitz]. The effective magnetic field depends on various parameters, such as the applied static and time dependent magnetic fields ($\mu_0 H_{0}$ and $\mu_0 h(t)$, respectively), anisotropy fields (the cubic anisotropy field $\mu_0 H_\mathrm{c}$, the uniaxial out-of-plane $\mu_0 H_\mathrm{u\perp}$ and in-plane $\mu_0 H_\mathrm{u\parallel}$ anisotropy fields), as well as the exchange field $\mu_0 H_\mathrm{ex}=Dk^2$ which describes the exchange interaction in the investigated material. Here, $D=\frac{2A}{M_\mathrm{S}}$ is the exchange stiffness, $A$ the exchange constant and $M_\mathrm{S}$ the saturation magnetization. The wavevector $k$ is the wavevector of perpendicular standing spin-waves which is quantized over the sample thickness. Under the assumption of perfect pinning of the spins at the sample surface $k$ is defined by $k=n\pi/d$ [@frait], where $n$ is the mode number. The case $n=0$ corresponds to the classical case of ferromagnetic resonance.
The resonant precession frequency for cubic crystals is presented in reference [@Bobkov]. For the case when the static magnetic field is applied in-plane one obtains $$\label{klingler:eq:kittel_ip}
\left( \frac{\omega_\parallel}{|\gamma|}\right)^2 = \mu_0^2\left(H_\mathrm{0}+H_\mathrm{ex}\right) \left(H_\mathrm{0}+H_\mathrm{ex}+ M_\mathrm{S}- H_\mathrm{u\perp}-H_\mathrm{c} \right).$$ This equation is valid if the magnetization of the sample points along the $\langle110\rangle$-axis of the crystal. If the static magnetic field is applied out-of-plane the frequency is given by $$\label{klingler:eq:kittel_oop}
\frac{\omega_\perp}{|\gamma|}=\mu_0 \left(H_\mathrm{0} + H_\mathrm{ex} - M_\mathrm{S}+ H_\mathrm{u\perp}-\frac{4}{3} H_\mathrm{c}+H_\mathrm{u\parallel}\right).$$ Here, $\omega_\perp$ and $\omega_\parallel$ are the applied microwave frequencies, $\gamma$ is the gyromagnetic ratio and $\mu_0 H_0$ is the applied static magnetic field.
Samples and Experimental Setup
==============================
[@cccc]{} & Thickness & Growth rate & Lattice misfit\
& $d$($\mu$m) & $\nu$($\mu$m/min)& $\Delta a^\perp/a_\mathrm{GGG}\,(10^{-4})$\
E1 & $2.59\pm0.01$ & 0.52 & $+5.33\pm0.07$\
E2 & $1.59\pm0.02$ & 0.32 & $+7.68\pm0.02$\
E3 & $0.903\pm0.003$ & 0.18 & $+8.72\pm0.03$\
The YIG films were grown by liquid phase epitaxy (LPE) on (111)-oriented Gadolinium Gallium Garnet (GGG) substrates. Due to the difference in the lattice parameters of Czochralski-grown GGG (a$_\mathrm{GGG}=12.383\,$Å) and pure YIG (a$_\mathrm{YIG}=12.376\,$Å) [@Wang] the films exhibit a room temperature lattice misfit $\Delta a^{\perp}=a_\mathrm{GGG}-a_\mathrm{YIG}$ which results in strained epitaxial films. This strain is one of the main factors defining the uniaxial anisotropy fields $\mu_0 H_\mathrm{u\perp}$ and $\mu_0 H_\mathrm{u\parallel}$. In the case of LPE growth of garnet films incorporation of lead ions from the PbO solvent plays an important role in adjusting the film misfit [@Hergt]. Therefore, the misfit essentially depends on growth parameters (growth temperature, growth rate, etc.). For this reason, the growth rate $\nu$ was varied to obtain (Y$_{1-x}$Pb$_x$)$_3$Fe$_5$O$_{12}$ films ($0.005\leq x\leq 0.015$ [@DubsExplain]) with reduced lattice misfits. In Tab. \[dubs:samples\] important material parameters of the samples are shown. It can be seen that the lattice misfit increases with decreasing growth rate. The film thickness $d$ was measured by a prism coupler technique, and the YIG/GGG lattice misfit values were determined by X-ray diffraction. Then, the samples were cut in sizes of $3 \times 3$mm$^2$ for microwave studies.
For measuring the exchange stiffness, a waveguide microwave resonance setup was used. An electromagnet is used to apply external fields up to $\mu_0 H_{dc}<1650\,$mT$\pm 0.1$mT, where a low-amplitude ($\mu_0 H_{ac}=0.1\,$mT) rf-frequency ($f\ll1\,$MHz) modulation field is used by a lock-in amplifier as reference signal. The scan of a Lorentzian absorption peak with the modulation field results in an output voltage which has the form of the derivative of the original signal. A microwave field with a power of $10\,$dBm is applied in a wide frequency range from 5GHz to 40GHz with a rotatable coplanar waveguide (CPW) so that the angle between the field and the sample surface can be varied from 0$^\circ$ to 360$^\circ$. For the in-plane measurements the external magnetic field is applied along the edges of the sample which is positioned in the middle of the CPW. In all measurements the frequency is fixed and the field is swept.
Determination of exchange stiffness
===================================
Method of Schreiber and Frait
-----------------------------
A typical dependence of the lock-in signal on the applied static field from the out-of-plane measurements is shown in Fig. \[klingler:fig:spectrum\](a). The ferromagnetic resonance ($n=0$) can be found at the highest field values, whereas the thickness modes are located at lower field values. In any case mainly resonances with an even mode number are observed. This effect can be understood with the assumption of “perfect pinning”, since in this case, only the even modes absorb energy from the homogeneous antenna field [@Kittel1958]. The experimental observation of odd PSSWs can be caused by small microwave inhomogeneities across the film thickness.
In the classical approach of Schreiber and Frait the exchange stiffness is determined in the out-of-plane configuration using Eq. (\[klingler:eq:kittel\_oop\]). Here, the anisotropy fields and the saturation magnetization are absorbed in the effective magnetization $M_\mathrm{eff,\perp}$. Then, the resonance field for a certain frequency is defined by: $$\begin{gathered}
\label{eq:exchange}
\mu_0 H_\mathrm{0}^\mathrm{res}(n)=\mu_0 M_\mathrm{eff,\perp}+\frac{\omega_\perp}{|\gamma|}-D \frac{\pi^2}{d^2}n^2\text{, where}\\
\label{eq:exchange2}
M_\mathrm{eff, \perp}=M_\mathrm{S} -H_\mathrm{u\perp}+\frac{4}{3}H_\mathrm{c}-H_\mathrm{u\parallel} \end{gathered}$$
In a plot where the resonance field is drawn over the square of the mode number $n^2$, the exchange stiffness can be extracted with the slope of a linear function, where the $y$-intercept delivers information about the effective magnetization. The presence of resonances with odd mode numbers introduces some ambiguity regarding the identification of the modes. However, the mode intensity together with the $n^2$-dependence of the resonance field shift enables a consistent identification, as can be seen in Fig \[klingler:fig:spectrum\](b). Here, the resonance fields of sample E2 are shown for different frequencies. The slopes of the linear functions are the same for all measurements and the $y$-intercepts are different due to the use of different excitation frequencies. In the performed measurements no deviations from the linear functions were detected which would occur for small $n$ due influence of the surface anisotropy. Thus, the assumption of perfect pinning is justified. From the slope the exchange stiffness values from all samples are extracted, which are presented in the left column of Tab. \[klingler:tab:results\]. The average value for samples E1-E3 is $D=(5.32 \pm 0.07)\times10^{-17}\,\text{T}\cdot \text{m}^2$. With the shown method, the slope and the effective magnetization are optimized together during the fitting process, i.e. the residuum is minimized. The optimization of both parameters at the same time leads to a mutual influence of the parameters. This effect is clearly visible in the size of the error bars, if compared to the modified method which is presented in the next section.
[@cccc]{} &\
[Sample ]{} &*out-of-plane$^\dagger$* & *out-of-plane$^*$* &*in-plane*\
& & &\
E1& $5.33 \pm 0.09$ & $5.18 \pm 0.01$ & $5.29 \pm 0.04$\
E2 & $5.32 \pm 0.09$ & $5.34 \pm 0.02$ & $5.30 \pm 0.02$\
E3 & $5.29 \pm 0.05$ & $5.31 \pm 0.02$ & $5.40 \pm 0.02$\
Modified method of Schreiber and Frait
--------------------------------------
As shown before, the method of Schreiber and Frait requires several parameters to be taken into account in order to obtain the exchange stiffness. Here, a method which is completely independent on assumptions for the anisotropy fields and the saturation magnetization is presented. For this the ferromagnetic resonance field $\mu_0 H_0^{\mathrm{res}}(0)$ is subtracted from the resonance fields of the higher modes $\mu_0 H_0^{\mathrm{res}}(n\neq0)$ in order to determine the exchange field $\mu_0 H_\mathrm{ex}$ of the thickness modes. Since the resonance field of the ferromagnetic resonance contains all information about the anisotropy fields and $M_\mathrm{S}$, as can be seen in Eq. (\[eq:exchange2\]), the exchange field only depends on $D$: $$\label{eq:exchange_contribution}
\mu_0 H_\mathrm{ex}=\mu_0 H_\mathrm{0}^\mathrm{res}(n)-\mu_0 H_\mathrm{0}^\mathrm{res}(0)=D \frac{\pi^2}{d^2}n^2$$ In Fig. \[klingler:fig:highermodes-fmr\] the exchange fields are shown as a function of $n^2$. One can see that the measured exchange fields for different frequencies collapse in a point for each mode number. This indicates that the exchange fields are independent on any external parameter. Furthermore, all collapsed data points lie on a linear function with $H_\mathrm{ex}(0)=0$. This data can now be analyzed using a simple linear fit with no offset, i.e. only one fitting parameter is used. Thus, any mutual influence of parameters is avoided which is the reason for a significantly reduced statistical error. The results are shown in the middle column of Tab. \[klingler:tab:results\]. All values are in the same range as obtained with the former method. However, it is visible that the exchange stiffness of sample E1 is significantly smaller that the others. This difference can be understood by a larger saturation magnetization for sample E1 than for samples E2 and E3 as shown below. In comparison to the method of Schreiber and Frait, the error is decreased by a factor of up to 9 due to the avoided influence of the effective magnetization during the data evaluation. This allows for the identification of the exchange stiffness with a high accuracy.
Method for in-plane measurements
--------------------------------
Classically the method of Schreiber and Frait is used for the determination of the exchange stiffness in out-of-plane configuration. Here, the method is adapted for the use in in-plane configuration. A sample spectrum of the in-plane measurements is shown in Fig. \[klingler:fig:spectrum2\](a). It is slightly modified in comparison to the out-of-plane spectrum. The resonances are shifted to smaller field values due to decreased demagnetizing effects. In the in-plane case, the former methods cannot be used for data evaluation since $\omega_\parallel$ is not linearly dependent on the static field in Eq. (\[klingler:eq:kittel\_ip\]). However, the former procedure can be applied to the pure exchange field of the PSSWs. For this we propose the following steps.
Firstly, Eq. (\[klingler:eq:kittel\_ip\]) must be rewritten in a way which is convenient for the fitting process: $$\omega_\mathrm{\parallel}=|\gamma|\mu_0\sqrt{\left( H_0+ H_\mathrm{ex}\right)\left(H_0+H_\mathrm{ex}+ M_\mathrm{eff, \parallel}\right)}.$$ Here, the different field contributions, including the saturation magnetization, are summarized in $M_\mathrm{eff, \parallel}= M_\mathrm{S}-H_\mathrm{u\perp}-H_\mathrm{c}$. Now the effective magnetization is obtained by fitting the $n=0$-mode (FMR mode).
Secondly, the same equation is used to obtain the exchange field $\mu_0 H_\mathrm{ex}$ of the higher PSSW modes ($n \neq 0$). For this, the obtained value of $M_\mathrm{eff,\parallel}$ is used as a constant during the data evaluation process. The resulting exchange fields $\mu_0 H_\mathrm{ex}$ of the PSSW modes depend on the square of a mode number which is unknown at first. As in the case of the out-of-plane measurements there is an ambiguity regarding the identification of the mode number $n$ for each observed mode. The identification procedure of the mode numbers is shown next.
Thirdly, the exchange fields of the modes are varied manually over the presumed mode numbers (see Fig. \[klingler:fig:spectrum2\](b)). As first indicator, the peak height of the resonance can be used to determine whether a mode is an even mode or not. To proove the mode numbering a graphical feedback can be obtained by plotting $\mu_0 H_\mathrm{ex}(n)$ over $n^2$, where a wrong mode numbering would be directly visible. If the exchange field follows a linear function, as shown in Fig. \[klingler:fig:spectrum2\](b), the exchange stiffness is given by the slope of this function.
For all three samples the values of the exchange stiffnesses are shown in the right column of Tab. \[klingler:tab:results\]. They are in the same range with the other methods which supports the value of this method. However, the data evaluation is much more complicated and the systematic uncertainties are increased in comparison to the other methods.
Determination of the exchange constant
======================================
[@cccc]{} &\
Sample &*out-of-plane$^\dagger$* & *out-of-plane$^*$*& *in-plane*\
& & &\
E1 & $3.64 \pm 0.40$ & $3.65 \pm 0.38$ & $3.71 \pm 0.39$\
E2 & $3.64 \pm 0.43$ & $3.65 \pm 0.38$ & $3.63 \pm 0.38$\
E3 & $3.76 \pm 0.44$ & $3.66 \pm 0.37$ & $3.73 \pm 0.40$\
For the determination of the exchange constant $A=D M_\mathrm{S}/ 2$ of our YIG samples, the saturation magnetization $M_\mathrm{S}$ must be known. Vibrating sample magnetometry (VSM) was used to define $M_\mathrm{S}$ and values of 141kA/m, 136kA/m and 137kA/m for samples E1, E2 and E3, respectively, are found with an accuracy of $10\,\%$. The large error is due to the error in volume determination of the YIG films. The results obtained for $A$ using different methods of the definition of $D$ are shown in Tab. \[klingler:tab:exchange\_constants\]. One can see that all values agree within the error bars. However, only the proposed out-of-plane$^*$ method gives practically the same value for all samples. This is due to the increased accuracy in the definition of the exchange stiffness. The exchange constant of the YIG films is determined to be $(3.65 \pm 0.38) \,$pJ/m, which is the average value of the out-of-plane$^*$ method. The presented result is in good agreement with the values obtained by other groups [@hoekstra]. Finally, one can state that the YIG films have the same material characteristics independent on the lattice mismatch and thickness, which speaks for the high quality of the YIG films (see Tab. \[dubs:samples\]).
Conclusion
==========
Different methods were developed and compared to estimate the exchange stiffness $D$ from the microwave absorption spectra. Firstly, the method of Schreiber and Frait [@frait] was used to estimate $D$ of the out-of-plane magnetized sample. The method was shown to be influenced by anisotropy fields and the saturation magnetization choice. Therefore, the exchange stiffnesses $D$ were accompanied with appreciable errors which resulted in different values for the exchange constant $A$. This problem was solved with the proposed method by avoiding additional fit parameters including anisotropy fields by preliminary extraction of the pure exchange field contributions \[see Eq. (\[eq:exchange\_contribution\])\]. The method was demonstrated to give more accurate results which is the reason for the similar values of the exchange constant $A$. The modified method is recommended for determination of the exchange stiffness in general. Finally, the former method of was adapted for the in-plane configuration. The in-plane estimates of the exchange stiffness $D$ were found to agree well with those obtained in the out-of-plane configuration. However, because of the nonlinear dependence of the PSSW mode frequency versus $n^2$, an evaluation of the in-plane measurement data was more complicated and resulted in a similar spread of the exchange constant $A$ as in the original method of Schreiber and Frait [@frait].
Finally, it was also proven that the exchange constant in thin YIG films remain nearly independent of the YIG/GGG lattice misfit and a value of $A=(3.65 \pm 0.38)$pJ/m was extracted.
Acknowledgements
================
We thank the *Nano Structuring Center* in Kaiserslautern for technical support. Part of this work was supported by NSF-CAREER Grant $\#0952929$ and by EU-FET grant InSpin 612759. The measurements were performed during the annual MINT Summer Internship Program of the University of Alabama.\
Schreiber F and Frait Z 1996 [*Phys. Rev. B*]{} [**54**]{} 6473
Khitun A, Bao M and Wang K L 2008 [*IEEE Transactions on Magnetism*]{} [**44**]{} [2141]{}
Schneider T, Serga A A, Leven B, Hillebrands B, Stamps R L and Kostylev M P 2008 [*Appl. Phys. Lett.*]{} [**92**]{} [022505]{}
Klingler S, Pirro P, Brächer T, Leven B, Hillebrands B, Chumak A V 2014 Design of a spin-wave majority gate employing mode selection arXiv:1408.3235 \[cond-mat.mtrl-sci\] Chumak A V, Vasyuchka V I, Serga A A, Kostylev M P, Tiberkich V S and Hillebrands B 2012 [*Phys. Rev. Lett.*]{} [**108**]{} [257207]{}
Chumak A V, Serga A A and Hillebrands B 2014 [*Nat. Commun.*]{} [**5**]{} 4700
Jungfleisch M B, Chumak A V, Kehlberger A, Lauer V, Kim D H, Onbasli M C, Ross C A, Kl[ä]{}ui M and Hillebrands B 2013 Thickness and power dependence of the spin-pumping effect in Y$_3$Fe$_5$O$_12$/Pt heterostructures measured by the inverse spin Hall effect arXiv:1308.3787 \[cond-mat.mes-hall\].
Pirro P, Br[ä]{}cher T, Chumak A V, L[ä]{}gel B, Dubs C, Surzhenko O, Görnert P, Leven B and Hillebrands B 2014 [*Appl. Phys. Lett.*]{} [**104**]{} [012402]{}
d’Allivy Kelly O, Anane A, Bernard R, Ben Youssef J, Hahn C, Molpeceres A H, Carretero C, Jacquet E, Deranlot C, Bortolotti P, Lebourgeois R, Mage J C, de Loubens G, Klein O, Cros V and Fert A 2013 [*Appl. Phys. Lett.*]{} [**103**]{} [082408]{}
Liu T, Chang H, Vlaminck V, Sun Y, Kabatek M, Hoffmann A, Deng L and Wu M 2014 [*J. Appl. Phys.*]{} [**115**]{} [17A501]{}
Sun Y, Chang H, Kabatek M, Song Y-Y, Wang Z, Jantz M, Schneider W, Wu M, Montoya E, Kardasz B, Heinrich B, te Velthuis S G E, Schultheiss H and Hoffmann A 2013 [*Phys. Rev. Lett.*]{} [**111**]{} [106601]{}
Hahn C, de Loubens G, Klein O, Viret M, Naletov V V and Ben Youssef J 2013 [*Phys. Rev. B*]{} [**87**]{} [174417]{}
Hahn C, Naletov V V, de Loubens G, Klein O, d’Allivy Kelly O, Anane A, Bernard R, Jacquet E, Bortolotti P, Cros V, Prieto J L and Muñoz M 2014 [*Appl. Phys. Lett.*]{} [**104**]{} [152410]{}
Ciubotaru F, Chumak A V, Grigoryeva N Y, Serga A A and Hillebrands B 2012 [*J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys.*]{} [**45**]{} [255002]{}
Kajiwara Y, Harii K, Takahashi S, Ohe J, Uchida K, Mizuguchi M, Umezawa H, Kawai H, Ando K, Takanashi K, Maekawa S and Saitoh E 2010 [*Nature*]{} [**464**]{} [262]{}
Landau L and Lifshitz E 1935 [*Phys. Z. Sowjetunion*]{} [**169**]{} [14]{}
Bobkov V B, Zavuslyak I V and Romanyuk V F 2003 [*J. Commun. Technol. & El.*]{} [**48**]{} [196]{}
Wang H, Du C, Hammel C and Yang F 2013 Strain-tunable magnetocrystalline anisotropy in epitaxial Y$_3$Fe$_5$O$_{12}$ thin films arXiv:1311.0238 \[cond-mat.mtrl-sci\]
Hergt R, Pfeiffer H, G[ö]{}rnert P, Wendt M, Keszei B and Vandlik J 1987 [*Phys. Stat. Sol. (a)*]{} [**104**]{} [769]{}
Pb contents in formular units were estimated from the lattice misfit by comparison with literature data [@Sure].
Kittel 1958 [*Phys. Rev.*]{} [**110**]{} [1295]{}
Hoekstra B. 1978 *Spin wave resonsance studies of inhomogeneous La,Ga:YIG epitaxial films*, Dissertation
Sure S 1995, *Herstellung magnetischer Granatfilme durch Fl[ü]{}ssigphasen-Epitaxie f[ü]{}r Anwendungen in der Integrierten Optik*, Dissertation
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
author:
- |
M. G. J. VAN DEN BRAND\
CWI\
J. HEERING\
CWI\
P. KLINT\
CWI and University of Amsterdam
- |
P. A. OLIVIER\
CWI
title: 'Compiling Language Definitions: The [ASF+SDF]{} Compiler'
---
This research was supported in part by the Telematica Instituut under the [*Domain-Specific Languages*]{} project. Parts of this article emphasizing memory management issues have appeared in preliminary form in [S. Jähnichen]{} (ed.), Compiler Construction (CC ’99), vol. 1575 of [*Lecture Notes in Computer Science*]{}, Springer-Verlag, 1999, pp. 198–213.\
Authors’ addresses: M. G. J. van den Brand, Department of Software Engineering, CWI, Kruislaan 413, 1098 SJ Amsterdam, The Netherlands; email: [email protected]; J. Heering, Department of Software Engineering, CWI, Kruislaan 413, 1098 SJ Amsterdam, The Netherlands; email: [email protected]; P. Klint, Department of Software Engineering, CWI, Kruislaan 413, 1098 SJ Amsterdam, The Netherlands; email: [email protected]; P. A. Olivier, Department of Software Engineering, CWI, Kruislaan 413, 1098 SJ Amsterdam, The Netherlands; email: [email protected].
Introduction {#sec:INTRO}
============
[ASF+SDF]{} [@BHK89; @DHK96] is the metalanguage of the [ASF+SDF]{} Meta-Environment [@Kli93.meta], an interactive environment for the development of domain-specific and general purpose programming languages, covering parsing, typechecking, translation, transformation, and execution of programs.
[SDF]{} [@HHKR89.update], the syntax definition component of [ASF+SDF]{}, is a BNF-like formalism for defining the lexical, context-free and abstract syntax of languages. The implementation of [SDF]{} is beyond the scope of this article. Suffice it to say, its implementation supports interactive syntax development and fully general context-free parsing by means of scanner and parser generators that are both lazy (just-in-time) and incremental [@HKR90; @HKR92.igls; @HKR94]. [SDF]{} is currently being superseded by SDF2 [@Visser:97], whose main feature is a very close integration of lexical and context-free syntax. This is reflected in its implementation by the use of scannerless parsing.
The semantics definition component of [ASF+SDF]{}, which is an outgrowth of the algebraic specification formalism [ASF]{} [@BHK89], uses rewrite rules to describe the semantics of languages. Such semantics may be static (typechecking) or dynamic. The latter may have an interpretive or translational character, it may include program transformations, and so on. These are all described in terms of rewrite rules whose left- and right-hand sides are sentences in the language defined by the [SDF]{}-part of the language definition.
Rewriting is the simplification of algebraic expressions or terms everybody is familiar with. It is ubiquitous in (computer) algebra as well as in algebraic semantics and algebraic specification. It is also important in functional programming, program transformation and optimization, and equational theorem proving. Useful theoretical surveys of rewriting are [@Klo92; @DJ90], but we assume only a basic understanding of rewrite systems on the part of the reader. In addition to regular rewrite rules, [ASF+SDF]{} features conditional rewrite rules, associative (flat) lists, and default rules. These will be explained below.
[ASF+SDF]{} is more expressive than attribute grammars, which it includes as the subclass of definitions that are non-circular primitive recursive schemes (NPRSs) [@CF82]. This is the natural style for most typecheckers and translators. Using this correspondence, has transferred incremental evaluation methods originally developed for attribute grammars to NPRS-style [ASF+SDF]{} definitions.
[ASF+SDF]{}’s main application areas are
- Definition of domain-specific languages
- Generation of program analysis and transformation tools
- Production of software renovation tools
- General specification and prototyping.
Table \[table:APPS\] gives details and further references.
[|p[12cm]{}|]{}
**Domain-Specific Languages**\
- Risla [@BDKKM96; @DK98] (financial product specification)
- Box [@BV96] (prettyprinting)
- EURIS [@GKV95] (railroad safety)
- Action Semantics [@Deu94.thesis] (programming language semantics)
- Dahl [@Moo97] (dataflow analysis)
- Manifold [@RT92], ToolBus [@TB-SCP98] (coordination languages)
- ALMA-0 [@AptEtAl:98] (backtracking and search)
\
**Program Analysis**\
- Typechecking of Pascal [@DHK96 Chapter 2]
- Typechecking and execution of CLaX [@DT92.anim; @DT97.slice]
- Type inference, object identification, and documentation for Cobol [@BSV00; @DM98.types; @DK98.iwpc; @DK99]
\
**Program Transformation**\
- Interactive program transformation for Clean [@BEGMOP95] and Prolog [@Bru96]
- Automatic program transformation for C++ [@DineshEtAl:98]
\
**Software Renovation**\
- Description of the multiplicity of languages and dialects encountered in software renovation applications such as Cobol (including embedded languages like SQL and CICS) [@BKV96b; @BKV97b; @DKV99]
- Automatic program transformation for restructuring of Cobol programs (including embedded languages like SQL and CICS) [@BSV97a; @BSV98.goto; @SSV99]
- Derivation of language descriptions from compilers and on-line manuals [@SV99; @SellinkVerhoef:00]
\
**Specification and Prototyping of New Applications and Tools**\
- PIM [@Fie92; @BDFH97] (compiler toolkit)
- $\mu$CRL [@Hil96] (proof checking and simulation toolkit)
- Components of the [ASF+SDF]{} Meta-Environment itself [@BKMO97] (including a parser generator, a prettyprinter generator, and the [ASF+SDF]{} compiler described in this article)
\
The effectiveness of the tools generated by the [ASF+SDF]{} Meta-Environment is critically dependent on the quality of the rewriting implementation. The original interpretive implementation left room for improvement. Its author, inspired by earlier rewrite compilation work of , sketched a more efficient compilational scheme [@Dik:89] that ultimately served as a basis for the compiler described here.
We describe the current [ASF+SDF]{} compiler and compare its performance with that of other rewrite system and functional language compilers we were able to run, namely, Clean [@PlasmeijerVanEekelen:94; @SmetsersEtAL:91], Elan [@MoreauKirchner:98], Haskell [@PeytonJoneEtAl:93; @PeytonJones:96], Opal [@DidrichEtAl:94], and SML [@Appel:92].
The real-world character of [ASF+SDF]{} applications has important consequences for the compiler:
- It must be able to handle [ASF+SDF]{} definitions of up to 50000 lines. Disregarding layout and syntax declarations ([SDF]{}-parts), this corresponds to 10000 (conditional) rewrite rules.
- It must include optimizations for the major sources of inefficiency encountered in practice.
- It has to support separate compilation of [ASF+SDF]{} modules. For large language definitions, modularization and separate compilation are as important as for conventional programs.
This article is organized as follows: general compilation scheme (Sec. \[sec:GENSCHEME\]); major design considerations (Sec. \[sec:DESIGN\]); the [ASF+SDF]{} language (Sec. \[sec:ASFSDF\]); preprocessing (Sec. \[sec:PREPROC\]); code generation (Sec. \[sec:CODEGEN\]); postprocessing (Sec. \[sec:POSTPROC\]); benchmarking (Sec. \[sec:BM\]); conclusions and further work (Sec. \[sec:CONC\]). Related work is discussed at appropriate points throughout the text rather than in a separate section.
General Compilation Scheme {#sec:GENSCHEME}
==========================
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(400,280)(-150,-260)
(0,0)
(200,200) (0,0)[(70,30)]{} (0,0)[(0,0)[[ASF+SDF]{}]{}]{} (0,-15)[(0,-1)[30]{}]{} (10,-30)[Parsing]{}
(0,-60)
(200,200) (0,0)[(70,30)]{} (0,0)[(0,0)[[$\mu$ASF]{}]{}]{} (0,-15)[(0,-1)[30]{}]{} (10,-30)[ ]{}
(0,-120)
(200,200) (0,0)[(70,30)]{} (0,0)[(0,0)[[$\mu$ASF$^+$]{}]{}]{} (0,-15)[(0,-1)[30]{}]{} (10,-30)[ ]{}
(0,-180)
(200,200) (0,0) [(150,30)]{} (0,0) [(0,0)[C $+$ ATerm Library primitives]{}]{} (0,-15)[(0,-1)[30]{}]{} (10,-30)[ ]{}
(0,-240)
(200,200) (0,0)[(150,30)]{} (0,0)[(0,0)[C $+$ ATerm Library primitives]{}]{}
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Before we discuss the major design issues, it is useful for the reader to understand the general layout of the compiler as shown in Figure \[fig:CompLayoutRough\]. The following compiler phases can be distinguished:
- Parsing. Since the syntax of [ASF+SDF]{}-definitions is largely defined by their [SDF]{}-part, parsing them is a nontrivial two-pass process, which is beyond the scope of this article. Suffice it to say, this phase yields an abstract syntax representation of the input definition as usual. As indicated in the second box from the top, the parser’s output formalism is [$\mu$ASF]{}, an abstract syntax version of [ASF+SDF]{}.
- Preprocessing. This is performed on the [$\mu$ASF]{} representation, which is very close to the source level. Typical examples are detection of variable bindings (“assignments”) in conditions and introduction of [else]{}s for pairs of conditional rewrite rules with identical left-hand sides and complementary conditions. The output formalism of this phase is [$\mu$ASF$^+$]{}, a superset of [$\mu$ASF]{}.
- Code generation. The compiler generates C extended with calls to the *ATerm library*, a run-time library for term manipulation and storage. Each [$\mu$ASF]{} function is compiled to a separate C function. The right-hand side of a rewrite rule is translated directly to function calls if necessary. Term matching is compiled to a finite automaton. List matching code depends on the complexity of the pattern involved. A few special list patterns that do not need backtracking are eliminated by transforming them to equivalent term patterns in the preprocessing phase, but the majority is compiled to special code.
- Postprocessing. This is performed on the C code generated in the previous phase. A typical example is constant caching.
Major Design Considerations {#sec:DESIGN}
===========================
The design of the compiler was influenced by the experience gained in previous compiler activities within the [ASF+SDF]{} project itself [@Dik:89; @FokkinkEtAl:98; @Hen91; @Kamperman:96; @Walters:97] as well as in various functional language and Prolog compiler projects elsewhere. The surveys [@HartelEtAl:96] on functional language compilation and [@VanRoy:93] on Prolog compilation were particularly helpful.
In the following subsections we discuss the arguments in favor of generating C rather than native code, the choice of [ASF+SDF]{} as an implementation language for the compiler, some pitfalls in the areas of high-level transformations and abstract machine interfaces, the importance of a proper organization of term storage, and some issues related to separate compilation.
Choice of C as Target Language
------------------------------
Generating C code is an efficient way to achieve portability. Folk wisdom has it that C code is 2–3 times slower than native code, but this is not borne out by the “Pseudoknot” benchmark results reported in [@HartelEtAl:96 Table 9], where the best functional language and rewrite system compilers generate C code. The probable reason is that many C compilers perform sophisticated optimizations [@Muchnick:97], although this raises the issue of tuning the generated C code to the optimizations done by different C compilers. At least in our case, the fact that C is in some respects less than ideal as a compiler target [@PeytonJonesEtAl:98] does not invalidate these favorable observations.
Choice of [ASF+SDF]{} as Implementation Language
------------------------------------------------
Not unexpectedly, large parts of the compiler can be expressed very naturally in [ASF+SDF]{}, so it was decided to write the compiler in its own source language. Since the compiler is fairly large, self-compilation is an interesting benchmark.
Pitfalls in High-Level Transformations and Abstract Machine Interfaces—The Bottleneck Effect {#sec:PITFALLS}
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
High-level transformations have to be applied with extreme care, especially if their purpose is to simplify the compiler by reducing the number of different constructs that have to be handled later on. For instance, by first transforming conditional rewrite rules to unconditional ones or associative list matching to term matching, the compiler can be simplified considerably, but at the expense of a serious degradation in the performance of the generated code. Similarly, transformation of default rules (which can be applied only when all other rules fail) to sets of ordinary rewrite rules that catch the same cases would lead to very inefficient code. These transformations would perhaps be appropriate in a formal semantics of [ASF+SDF]{}, but in a compiler they cause a bottleneck whose effect is hard to undo at a later stage.
For this reason, our compiler does not generate code for the Abstract Rewrite Machine (ARM), which was originally developed for [ASF+SDF]{} and then used in the compiler for the equational programming language Epic [@FokkinkEtAl:98]. ARM is based on the notion of *minimal term rewriting system* (MTRS). An MTRS consists of unconditional rewrite rules in so-called *minimal form* [@FokkinkEtAl:98 Definition 3.1.1]. ARM thus requires a high-level transformation phase to simplify the rules that are not in this form and to eliminate the conditions (if any) [@FokkinkEtAl:98 p. 681]. Furthermore, ARM does not support list matching, so rules with lists have to be transformed to minimal rewrite rules as well. Although these transformations are possible, they have turned out to be counterproductive in the [ASF+SDF]{} compiler, and with C taking care of portability, ARM’s main purpose was lost. In fact, rather than breaking rules down into smaller ones, the [ASF+SDF]{} compiler tries to combine rules into larger ones as much as possible during preprocessing.
Our experience with ARM is not unique. Any fixed abstract machine interface is a potential bottleneck in the compilation process. The modularization advantage gained by introducing it may be offset by a serious loss in opportunities for generating efficient code. The factors involved in this trade-off have a qualitatively different character. The abstract machine interface facilitates *construction* and *verification* of the compiler, but possibly at the expense of the *performance of the generated code*. See the instructive discussion in on the pros and cons of the use of the Warren Abstract Machine (WAM) in Prolog compilers. Although the bottleneck effect is hard to describe in quantitative terms, it has to be taken seriously, the more so since the elegance of the abstract machine approach is not conducive to a thorough analysis of its performance in terms of overall compiler quality.
Of course, C also acts as an abstract machine interface, but, compared with ARM or other abstract machines, it is much less specialized and more flexible, acting proportionally less as a bottleneck. The compiler does not simply generate C, however, but C extended with calls to the ATerm library, a run-time library for term manipulation and storage (Sec. \[sec:TermLib\]). C cannot be changed, but the ATerm library can be adapted to prevent it from becoming an obstacle to further code improvement, should the need arise. We note, however, that the fact that the ATerm library interface is made available as an API to users outside the compiler makes it harder to adapt.
Although we feel these to be useful guidelines, they have to be applied with care. Their validity is not absolute, but depends on many details of the actual implementation under consideration. The compiler for the lazy functional language Clean [@PlasmeijerVanEekelen:94; @SmetsersEtAL:91], for instance, generates native code via an abstract graph rewriting machine, contravening several of our guidelines. Nevertheless, our benchmarks (Sec. \[sec:BM\]) show the Clean compiler and the [ASF+SDF]{} compiler to generate code with comparable performance.
Organization of Term Storage {#sec:TERMS}
----------------------------
[ASF+SDF]{} applications may involve rewriting of large terms ($> 10^6$ nodes). Usually, this requires constructing and matching many intermediate results and the proper organization of term storage becomes critical to the run-time performance of the term datatype provided by the ATerm library and, as a consequence, to the run-time performance of the generated code as a whole. Fortunately, intermediate results created during rewriting tend to have a lot of overlap. This suggests use of a space saving scheme where terms are created only when they do not yet exist. The various trade-offs involved in this choice are discussed in Sec. \[sec:TermLib\].
Separate Compilation {#sec:SEPCOMP}
--------------------
For large modularized language definitions, separate compilation is as important as it is for large modularized programs. Fully separate compilation of [ASF+SDF]{} modules is hard since the rewrite rules defining an [ASF+SDF]{} function may be scattered over several modules and each [ASF+SDF]{} function has to correspond to a single C function in the generated code for reasons of efficiency. Fortunately, the number of modules contributing to the definition of an [ASF+SDF]{} function is usually very small, so a useful approximation to separate compilation of [ASF+SDF]{} modules can still be obtained.
The [ASF+SDF]{} Language {#sec:ASFSDF}
========================
In addition to regular rewrite rules, [ASF+SDF]{} features conditional rewrite rules, associative (flat) lists, default rules, and simple modularization. In our discussion of these features we will emphasize issues affecting their compilation. A more detailed semantics by example of [$\mu$ASF]{}, which helped to answer the questions that emerged while the compiler was being written, is given by . For the use of [ASF+SDF]{} (including SDF) see [@DHK96].
Since we do not go into the syntax definition component [SDF]{}, we will use a running example written in [$\mu$ASF]{}, the abstract syntax (prefix notation only) of [ASF+SDF]{}. Consider the definition of a simple type environment in Figure \[fig:ENV\]. The functions and constants used in the rules are declared in the signature section, with their argument positions (if any) indicated by underscores. Although [ASF+SDF]{} is a many-sorted formalism, the sorts can be dispensed with after parsing and conversion to [$\mu$ASF]{}. The predefined list constructors [list]{} (conversion to single element list), [conc]{} (associative list concatenation), and [null]{} (the empty list) need not be declared.
Symbols starting with a capital are variables. These are first-order, i.e., they cannot have arguments, and need not be declared in the signature. List variables are prefixed with a “” if they can match the empty list or with a “[+]{}” if they cannot.
The predefined symbols used in the rules are listed in Table \[table:SYMBOLS\]. The example contains a single conditional rule with both a negative and a positive condition, and a single default rule .
With an appropriate user-defined syntax, the [ASF+SDF]{} version of rule would get the more natural look
[at-1] add (Id,Type1) to {(Id,Type2),Pair1*} = {(Id,Type1),Pair1*};
and similarly for the other rules. In the following sections we explain the various types of rules in more detail.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
module Type-environment
signature
nil-type {constructor};
pair(_,_) {constructor};
type-env(_) {constructor};
lookup(_,_);
add-to(_,_,_)
rules
[l-1] lookup(Id,type-env(conc(*Pair1,conc(pair(Id,Type),*Pair2))))
= Type;
[l-2] default: lookup(Id,Tenv)
= nil-type;
[at-1] add-to(Id,Type1,type-env(conc(pair(Id,Type2),*Pair1)))
= type-env(conc(pair(Id,Type1),*Pair1));
[at-2] Id1 != Id2 &
add-to(Id1,Type1,type-env(*Pair1)) == type-env(*Pair2)
==>
add-to(Id1,Type1,type-env(conc(pair(Id2,Type2),*Pair1)))
= type-env(conc(pair(Id2,Type2),*Pair2));
[at-3] add-to(Id,Type,type-env(null))
= type-env(list(pair(Id,Type)))
------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------- -----------------------------------
[=]{} left-to-right rewrite
[==]{} equality in positive condition
[!=]{} inequality in negative condition
[&]{} conjunction of conditions
[==>]{} implication
[default:]{} default rule flag
[list]{} conversion to single element list
[conc]{} associative list concatenation
[null]{} empty list
-------------- -----------------------------------
: The predefined symbols used in [$\mu$ASF]{} rewrite rules.[]{data-label="table:SYMBOLS"}
Conditional Rewrite Rules {#sec:CONDRULES}
-------------------------
We assume throughout that the terms being rewritten are ground terms, i.e., terms without variables. A rule is applicable to a redex if its left-hand side matches the redex and its conditions (if any) succeed after substitution of the values found during matching.
Negative conditions succeed if both sides are syntactically different after normalization. Otherwise they fail. They are not allowed to contain variables not already occurring in the left-hand side of the rule or in a preceding positive condition. This means both sides of a negative condition are ground terms at the time the condition is evaluated.
Positive conditions succeed if both sides are syntactically equal after normalization. Otherwise they fail. One side of a positive condition may contain one or more new variables not already occurring in the left-hand side of the rule or in a preceding positive condition. This means one side of a positive condition need not be a ground term at the time it is evaluated, but may contain existentially quantified variables. Their value is obtained by matching the side they occur in with the other side after the latter has been normalized. The side containing the variables is not normalized before matching.
Variables occurring in the right-hand side of the rule must occur in the left-hand side or in a positive condition, so the right-hand side is a ground term at the time it is substituted for the redex.
Consider rule in Fig. \[fig:ENV\] keeping the above in mind. Its application proceeds as follows:
1. Find a redex matching the left-hand side of the rule (if any). This yields values for the variables [Id1]{}, [Type1]{}, [Id2]{}, [Type2]{}, and [Pair1]{}.
2. Evaluate the first condition. This amounts to a simple syntactic inequality check of the two identifiers picked up in step 1. If the condition succeeds, evaluate the second one. Otherwise, the rule does not apply.
3. Evaluate the second condition. This is a positive condition containing the new list variable [Pair2]{} in its right-hand side. The value of [Pair2]{} is obtained by matching the right-hand side with the normalized left-hand side. Since [Pair2]{} is a list variable, this involves list matching, which is explained below. In this particular case, the match always succeeds.
4. Finally, replace the redex with the right-hand side of the rule after substituting the values of [Id2]{} and [Type2]{} found in step 1 and the value of [Pair2]{} found in step 3.
Lists {#sec:LISTS}
-----
[ASF+SDF]{} lists are associative (flat) and list matching is the same as string matching. Unlike a term pattern, a list pattern may match a redex in more than one way. This may lead to backtracking within the scope of the rule containing the list pattern in the following two closely related cases:
- A rewrite rule containing a list pattern in its left-hand side might use conditions to select an appropriate match from the various possibilities.
- A rewrite rule containing a list pattern with new variables in a positive condition (Sec. \[sec:CONDRULES\]) might use additional conditions to select an appropriate match from the various possibilities.
List matching may be used to avoid the explicit traversal of structures. Rule in Fig. \[fig:ENV\] illustrates this. It does not traverse the type environment explicitly, but picks an occurrence (if any) of the identifier it is looking for using two list variables [Pair1]{} and [Pair2]{} to match its context. The actual traversal code is generated by the compiler. In general, however, there is a price to be paid. While term matching is linear, string matching is NP-complete [@BenanavEtAl:85]. Hence, list matching is NP-complete as well. It remains an important source of inefficiency in the execution of [ASF+SDF]{} definitions [@Vinju99].
Default Rules {#sec:DEFAULTRULES}
-------------
A default rule has lower priority than ordinary rules in the sense that it can be applicable to a redex only if all ordinary rules are exhausted. In Fig. \[fig:ENV\], [lookup]{} uses default rule to return [nil-type]{} if rule fails to find the identifier it is looking for.
Constructors
------------
A (free) constructor is a function that does not occur at the outermost position in the left-hand side of a rewrite rule. A term consisting solely of constructors is in normal form. In [ASF+SDF]{} the rules defining a function may be scattered over many modules, so this is a global property. The [constructor]{} attribute supplies this information locally in a module, thus improving readability and facilitating separate compilation of modules. In Fig. \[fig:ENV\], the functions [nil-type]{}, [pair]{}, and [type-env]{} are declared as constructors. As mentioned before, the built-in list constructors [list]{}, [conc]{},[^1] and [null]{} need not be declared. Omitting constructor attributes is not a fatal error, but may result in less readable [ASF+SDF]{} definitions as well as less efficient code. Some of the compiler optimizations depend on constructor attributes being present in the [ASF+SDF]{} source.
Modules
-------
[ASF+SDF]{}’s only module operation is [import]{}.[^2] As mentioned in Sec. \[sec:SEPCOMP\], separate compilation of modules is an important design issue.
Rewriting Strategies {#sec:STRAT}
--------------------
[ASF+SDF]{} is a strict language based on innermost rewriting (call-by-value). With few exceptions, practical experience with [ASF+SDF]{} over the past ten years has shown innermost rewriting to be a good choice for several reasons:
- Most users are familiar with call-by-value from C and other imperative languages.
- It is consistent with the semantics of [ASF+SDF]{}’s default rules (Sec. \[sec:DEFAULTRULES\]).
- Its behavior is more predictable than that of other strategies, an important consideration when rewrite systems become large.
- No strictness annotations need to be added by the user to improve the quality of the code generated by the compiler. This is an advantage in view of the fact that “inserting these strictness annotations correctly can be a fine art” [@HartelEtAl:96 p. 651].
- It facilitates compilation to and interfacing with C and other imperative languages. In particular, it allows [ASF+SDF]{} functions to be mapped directly to C functions and intermediate results produced during term rewriting to be stored in an efficient way (Sec. \[sec:TermLib\]).
We also encountered cases (conditionals, for instance) where innermost rewriting proved unsatisfactory. In such cases, rewriting of specific function arguments can be delayed by annotating them with the [delay]{} attribute. See [@BergstraVandenBrand:00] for details.
Preprocessing {#sec:PREPROC}
=============
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(400,450)(-150,-430)
(0,0)
(200,200) (0,0)[(70,30)]{} (0,0)[(0,0)[[ASF+SDF]{}]{}]{} (0,-15)[(0,-1)[30]{}]{} (10,-30)[Parsing]{}
(0,-60)
(200,200) (0,0)[(70,30)]{} (0,0)[(0,0)[[$\mu$ASF]{}]{}]{} (0,-15)[(0,-1)[140]{}]{} (10,-149)[ ]{}
(0,-230)
(200,200) (0,0)[(70,30)]{} (0,0)[(0,0)[[$\mu$ASF$^+$]{}]{}]{} (0,-15)[(0,-1)[60]{}]{} (10,-62)[ ]{}
(0,-320)
(200,200) (0,0) [(150,30)]{} (0,0) [(0,0)[C $+$ ATerm Library primitives]{}]{} (0,-15)[(0,-1)[60]{}]{} (10,-55)[ ]{}
(0,-410)
(200,200) (0,0)[(150,30)]{} (0,0)[(0,0)[C $+$ ATerm Library primitives]{}]{}
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Figure \[fig:CompLayout\] is a refinement of Figure \[fig:CompLayoutRough\] showing the preprocessing steps as well as other actions performed in later phases of the compiler. The output language of the preprocessing phase is [$\mu$ASF$^+$]{}, which is [$\mu$ASF]{} with the additional constructs shown in Table \[table:ADDSYMBOLS\]. Their purpose will become clear later on when the preprocessing (Sec. \[sec:PREPROC\]) and code generation (Sec. \[sec:CODEGEN\]) are discussed. Some of them, like nested rules, the [else]{}-construct, and the assignment, might very well be added to [ASF+SDF]{} itself, but this remains to be done.
---------------------- --------------------------
[:=]{} assignment
[{ }]{} nesting of rules
[else]{} alternative
[list\_head]{} first element of list
[list\_tail]{} tail of list
[list\_last]{} last element of list
[list\_prefix]{} prefix of list
[not\_empty\_list]{} list-not-empty predicate
[t, f]{} true, false
---------------------- --------------------------
: Additional predefined symbols of [$\mu$ASF$^+$]{}.[]{data-label="table:ADDSYMBOLS"}
We now discuss the various preprocessing steps in more detail. As noted in Sec. \[sec:PITFALLS\], they have to be chosen judiciously to prevent them from becoming counterproductive, especially if their purpose is to reduce the number of different constructs that have to be handled by the code generator. Each step has to preserve the innermost rewriting strategy[^3] as well as the backtracking behavior of list matching.
Collection of Rules per Function {#sec:collect}
--------------------------------
As mentioned in Sec. \[sec:SEPCOMP\], fully separate compilation of [ASF+SDF]{} modules is hampered by the fact that the rewrite rules for a function can be scattered over several modules. Given a top module for which an executable has to be generated, the preprocessing phase starts by traversing the top module and all modules directly and indirectly imported by it, collecting the rewrite rules for each function declared in its signature, i.e., the rules whose left-hand side has the function as its outermost symbol. The rules collected for each function together with the corresponding function declaration from the signature are made into a new [$\mu$ASF]{} module.[^4] When a rewrite rule is changed, only the module containing the function actually affected is recompiled. This yields a useful approximation to separate compilation because the number of modules involved is usually limited ($< 100$) and the number of modules contributing to the definition of a function is usually very small. Still, the full specification has to be scanned for the rare cases a function is not completely defined in a single module, and a function attribute ruling this out would be a useful addition to [ASF+SDF]{}.
Linearization of Left-Hand Sides {#sec:LIN}
--------------------------------
A rewrite rule is *non-linear* if its left-hand side contains more than one occurrence of the same variable. Different occurrences of the same variable have to obtain the same value during matching, so non-linearity amounts to an implicit equality check. Non-linearities are eliminated by adding appropriate positive conditions. Innermost rewriting guarantees that these conditions do not cause spurious rewrite steps not done by the original non-linear match.[^5]
For example, rules and in Fig. \[fig:ENV\] are non-linear since variable [Id]{} occurs twice in their left-hand side. Rule would be transformed into
[at-1'] Id == Id1
==>
add-to(Id,Type1,type-env(conc(pair(Id1,Type2),*Pair1)))
= type-env(conc(pair(Id,Type1),*Pair1))
with new variable [Id1]{} not already occurring in the original rule, and similarly for .
Linearization has pros and cons. On the one hand, it simplifies the matching automaton and enables further transformations, especially the introduction of [else]{}s if there is a corresponding rule with a negative condition as is often the case (see below). The condition is implemented very efficiently as a pointer equality check as will be explained in Sec. \[sec:TermLib\]. On the other hand, in rare cases it may also cause inefficiencies. Consider, for instance, a rule [f(X,X,lp) = $\ldots$]{} with complicated list pattern [lp]{}. A straightforward implementation would first check the equality of the values obtained for the first two arguments of [f]{} before proceeding with the matching of [lp]{}. A straightforward implementation of the transformed rule\
[X == X1 ==> f(X,X1,lp) = $\ldots$]{}\
as currently generated by the compiler postpones the equality check and does a full match of [f(X,X1,lp)]{} first. This is inefficient if the full match succeeds with unequal values for [X]{} and [X1]{}.
Introduction of Assignments in Conditions
-----------------------------------------
As explained in Sec. \[sec:CONDRULES\], one side of a positive condition may contain variables that are uninstantiated at the time the condition is evaluated. Their value is obtained by matching the side they occur in with the other side after the latter has been normalized. The side containing the uninstantiated variables is not normalized before matching. To flag this case to the code generation phase, the [$\mu$ASF]{} equality is replaced by the [$\mu$ASF$^+$]{} assignment. If necessary, the left- and right-hand side of the original condition are interchanged.
Rule in Fig. \[fig:ENV\] is of this kind since its second condition contains the new list variable [Pair2]{}. It would be transformed into
[at-2'] Id1 != Id2 &
type-env(*Pair2) := add-to(Id1,Type1,type-env(*Pair1))
==>
add-to(Id1,Type1,type-env(conc(pair(Id2,Type2),*Pair1)))
= type-env(conc(pair(Id2,Type2),*Pair2)).
Elimination of Constructor Arguments from Left-Hand Sides {#sec:ELIMARG}
---------------------------------------------------------
Complex arguments consisting solely of constructors are eliminated from left-hand sides of rules and moved to assignment conditions. Let [f($\ldots$,ct,$\ldots$) = $\ldots$]{} be such a rule with complex constructor term [ct]{}. It is transformed to\
[X := ct ==> f($\ldots$,X,$\ldots$) = $\ldots$]{}.\
This transformation simplifies the matching automaton by replacing the matching of [ct]{} by a simple pointer equality check (this will become clear later). Since the value of [X]{} is not evaluated and [ct]{} is already in normal form, it does not introduce spurious rewrite steps not done by the original rule.
Simplification of Patterns in Assignment Conditions
---------------------------------------------------
If not already in the right form, assignment conditions will be broken up into several new assignment conditions in such a way that the patterns making up their left-hand sides consist of a single variable, a single constant, or a single function symbol with only variables as arguments. This transformation has no effect on the performance or even the structure of the corresponding matching automaton, but makes its generation easier.
Rule has an assignment condition whose left-hand side is already in the right form, so we give another example. The rule\
[g(h(a),Z) := k(X) ==> f(X,Y) = $\ldots$]{}\
is transformed into\
[g(H,Z) := k(X) & h(A) := H & a := A ==> f(X,Y) = $\ldots$]{}.\
In both the original and the transformed version, the instantiated right-hand side [k(X)]{} is normalized before the assignment is evaluated by matching with its left-hand side. Hence, the values obtained for [H]{} and [A]{} (if any) by matching must themselves be normal forms, and the second and third assignment cannot introduce spurious rewrite steps not done by the original assignment.
Simplification of List Patterns {#sec:SIMPLIST}
-------------------------------
To simplify the generation of list matching code, list patterns in the left-hand side of a rule or an assignment are brought in a standard form containing, apart from the list constructors [list]{} and [conc]{}, only variables and constants. Other more complicated subpatterns are replaced by new variables that are evaluated in new assignment conditions. This transformation preserves the backtracking behavior of list matching, but may occasionally cause inefficiencies similar to those that may be caused by linearization (Sec. \[sec:LIN\]).
Rule , for example, will be transformed into
[at-1''] pair(Id1,Type2) := P &
Id == Id1
==>
add-to(Id,Type1,type-env(conc(P,*Pair1)))
= type-env(conc(pair(Id,Type1),*Pair1))
and similarly for and .
List matching may cause backtracking, but list patterns containing only a single list variable or no list variables at all never do. In such cases, list matching can be eliminated using the [$\mu$ASF$^+$]{} list functions in Table \[table:ADDSYMBOLS\]. For example, is transformed into
[at-1'''] t := non_empty_list(*Pair) &
P := list_head(*Pair) &
*Pair1 := list_tail(*Pair) &
pair(Id1,Type2) := P &
Id == Id1
==>
add-to(Id,Type1,type-env(*Pair))
= type-env(conc(pair(Id,Type1),*Pair1)),
where [t]{} is the boolean value [true]{} (Table \[table:ADDSYMBOLS\]), and similarly for .
Combination of Rules with Identical Conditions
----------------------------------------------
Rules and resulting from the previous step have their left-hand side and first four conditions in common (up to renaming of variables). By factoring out the common elements after a suitable renaming of variables, they can be combined into the single nested rule
[at-1-2] t := non_empty_list(*Pair) &
P := list_head(*Pair) &
*Pair1 := list_tail(*Pair) &
pair(Id1,Type2) := P
==>
add-to(Id,Type1,type-env(*Pair)) =
{
Id == Id1
==>
type-env(conc(pair(Id,Type1),*Pair1));
Id != Id1 &
type-env(*Pair2) := add-to(Id,Type1,type-env(*Pair1))
==>
type-env(conc(pair(Id1,Type2),*Pair2))
},
where the accolades are in [$\mu$ASF$^+$]{}. The depth of nesting produced in this way may be arbitrarily large.
Introduction of [else]{} Cases {#sec:ELSE}
------------------------------
[$\mu$ASF$^+$]{} provides an [else]{} construct which is used to combine pairs of conditional rewrite rules with identical left-hand sides (up to renaming of variables) and complementary conditions. Introducing it in the result of the previous step yields
[at-1-2'] t := non_empty_list(*Pair) &
P := list_head(*Pair) &
*Pair1 := list_tail(*Pair) &
pair(Id1,Type2) := P
==>
add-to(Id,Type1,type-env(*Pair)) =
{
Id == Id1
==>
type-env(conc(pair(Id,Type1),*Pair1))
else
type-env(*Pair2) := add-to(Id,Type1,type-env(*Pair1))
==>
type-env(conc(pair(Id1,Type2),*Pair2))
}.
Code Generation {#sec:CODEGEN}
===============
The ATerm Library {#sec:TermLib}
-----------------
### Introduction {#introduction}
The compiler generates C extended with calls to the ATerm library, a run-time library for term manipulation and storage. In this section we discuss the ATerm library from the perspective of the compiler. For a broader viewpoint and further applications see [@VandenBrandEtAl:99; @VandenBrandEtAl:00].
Selected ATerm library functions are listed in Table \[table:ATermfunctions\]. Many of them correspond directly to predefined symbols of [$\mu$ASF]{} (Table \[table:SYMBOLS\]) and [$\mu$ASF$^+$]{} (Table \[table:ADDSYMBOLS\]). Examples of actual code using them is given in Sec. \[sec:MATCHING\] and Sec. \[sec:CONDSRHS\].
------------------------------ -----------------------------------------------------
[term\_equal(t1,t2)]{} Check if terms [t1]{} and [t2]{} are equal
[make\_list(t)]{} Create list with [t]{} as single element
[conc(l1,l2)]{} Concatenate lists [l1]{} and [l2]{}
[null()]{} Create empty list
[list\_head(l)]{} Get head of list [l]{}
[list\_tail(l)]{} Get tail of list [l]{}
[list\_last(l)]{} Get last element of list [l]{}
[list\_prefix(l)]{} Get prefix of list [l]{}
[not\_empty\_list(l)]{} Check if list [l]{} is empty
[is\_single\_element(l)]{} Check if list [l]{} has a single element
[slice(p1, p2)]{} Take slice of list starting at pointer [p1]{} and
ending at [p2]{}
[check\_sym(t,s)]{} Check if term [t]{} has outermost symbol [s]{}
[arg\_i(t)]{} Get [i]{}-th argument
[make\_nfi(s,t0,...,ti-1)]{} Construct normal form with outermost
symbol [s]{} and arguments [t0]{},$\ldots$,[ti-1]{}
------------------------------ -----------------------------------------------------
: Selected ATerm library functions.[]{data-label="table:ATermfunctions"}
### Term Storage {#sec:TermStorage}
The decision to store terms uniquely, which was briefly discussed in Sec. \[sec:TERMS\], is a major factor in the good run-time performance of the code generated by the compiler. If a term to be constructed during rewriting already exists, it is reused, thus guaranteeing maximal sharing. This strategy exploits the redundancy typically present in the terms built during rewriting. The sharing is transparent, so the compiler does not have to take precautions during code generation.
Maximal sharing of terms can only be maintained if the term construction functions [make\_nf0]{}, [make\_nf1]{}, $\ldots$ (Table \[table:ATermfunctions\]) check whether the term to be constructed already exists. This implies a search through all existing terms which must be very fast in order not to impose an unacceptable penalty on term construction. Using a hash function depending on the internal code of the function symbol and the addresses of its arguments, [make\_nf]{}$i$ can quickly search for a function application before constructing it. Hence, apart from the space overhead caused by the initial allocation of a hash table of sufficient size,[^6] the modest (but not negligible) time overhead at term construction time is one hash table lookup.
We get two returns on this investment. First, the amount of space gained by sharing terms is usually much larger than the space used by the hash table. This is useful in itself, but it also yields a substantial reduction in (real-time) execution time. Second, [term\_equal]{}, the equality check on terms, only has to check for pointer equality rather than structural equality. The compiler generates calls to [term\_equal]{} in the pattern matching and condition evaluation code. For the same reason, this storage scheme combines very well with memoization (Sec. \[sec:Memoization\]).
### Shared Terms vs. Destructive Updates
Shared terms cannot be modified without causing unpredictable side-effects, the more so since the ATerm library is not only used by compiler generated code but also by other components of the [ASF+SDF]{} Meta-Environment. Destructive updates would therefore cause unwanted side-effects throughout the system.
During rewriting by compiler generated code the immutability of terms causes no efficiency problems since they are created in a non-destructive way as a consequence of the innermost reduction strategy. Normal forms are constructed bottom-up and there is no need to perform destructive updates on a term once it has been constructed. Also, during normalization the input term itself is not modified but the normal form is constructed separately. Modification of the input term would result in graph rewriting instead of (innermost) term rewriting.
List operations like concatenation and slicing may become expensive, however, if they cannot simply modify one of their arguments. List concatenation, for instance, can only be performed using ATerm library primitives by taking the second list, successively prepending the elements of the first list to it, and returning the new list as a result.
The idea of subterm sharing is known in the Lisp community as *hash-consing* [@Alan:78]. Its success has been limited by the existence of the Lisp functions [rplaca]{} and [rplacd]{}, which modify a list destructively. HLisp (Hash Lisp) is a Lisp dialect supporting hash-consing at the language level [@TerashimaKanada:90]. It has two kinds of list structures: “monocopy” lists with maximal sharing and “multicopy” lists without maximal sharing. Before a destructive change is made to a monocopy list, it has to be converted to a multicopy list.
[ASF+SDF]{} does not have functions like [rplaca]{} and [rplacd]{}, and the ATerm library only supports the equivalent of HLisp monocopy lists. Although the availability of destructive updates would make the code for some list operations more efficient, such cases are relatively rare. This explains why the technique of subterm sharing can be applied more successfully in [ASF+SDF]{} than in Lisp.
Our positive experience with hash-consing in [ASF+SDF]{} refutes the theoretical arguments against its potential usefulness in the equational programming language Epic mentioned by . Also, while our experience seems to be at variance with observations made by in the context of SML, where sharing resulted in only slightly better execution speed and marginal space savings, both sharing schemes are actually rather different. In our scheme, terms are shared immediately at the time they are created, whereas delay the sharing of subterms until the next garbage collection. This minimizes the overhead at term construction time, but at the same time sacrifices the benefits (space savings and a fast equality test) of sharing terms that have not yet survived a garbage collection. The different usage patterns of terms in SML and [ASF+SDF]{} may also contribute to these seemingly contradictory observations.
### Garbage Collection
During rewriting, a large number of intermediate results is created, most of which will not be part of the end result and have to be reclaimed. There are basically three realistic alternatives for this. We will discuss their advantages and disadvantages in relation to the ATerm library. For an in-depth discussion of garbage collection in general and these three alternatives in particular, we refer the reader to .
Since ATerms do not contain cycles, reference counting is an obvious alternative to consider. Two problems make it unattractive, however. First, there is no portable and efficient way in C to detect when local variables are no longer in use. Second, the memory overhead of reference counting is large. Most ATerms can be stored in a few machine words, and it would be a waste of memory to add another word solely for the purpose of reference counting.
The other two alternatives are mark-compact and mark-sweep garbage collection. The choice of C as an implementation language is not compatible with mark-compact garbage collection since there is no portable and at the same time reliable way in C to find all local variables on the stack without help from the programmer. This means pointers to ATerms on the stack cannot be made to point to the new location of the corresponding terms after compactification. The usual solution is to “freeze” all objects that might be referenced from the stack, and only relocate objects that are not. Not being able to move all terms negates many of the advantages of mark-compact garbage collection such as decreased fragmentation and fast allocation.
The best alternative turns out to be mark-sweep garbage collection. It can be implemented efficiently in C, both in time and space, and with little or no support from the programmer [@Boehm:93]. We implemented this garbage collector from scratch, with many of the underlying ideas taken directly from ’s garbage collector, but tailored to the special characteristics of ATerms both to obtain better control over the garbage collection process as well as for reasons of efficiency.
Starting with the former, ATerms are always referenced from a hash table, even if they are no longer in use. Hence, the garbage collector should not scan this table for references. We also need enough control to remove an ATerm from the hash table when it is freed, otherwise the table would quickly fill up with unused term references.
As for efficiency, experience shows that typically very few ATerms are referenced from static variables or from generic datastructures on the heap. By providing a mechanism ([ATprotect]{}) to enable the user of the ATerm library to register references to ATerms that are not local (auto) variables, we are able to completely eliminate the expensive scan of the static data area and the heap.
We also have the advantage that almost all ATerms can be stored using only a few words of memory. This makes it convenient to base the algorithm used on only a small number of block sizes compared to a generic garbage collector that cannot make any assumptions about the sizes of the memory chunks that will be requested at run-time.
Matching {#sec:MATCHING}
--------
### Term Matching {#sec:termmatching}
After collecting the rules making up a function definition (Sec. \[sec:collect\]), the compiler transforms their left-hand sides into a deterministic finite automaton that controls the matching of the function call at run-time, an approach originally due to . For reasons of separate compilation, each generated C function has its own local matching automaton, unlike, for instance, the compiler for the Elan rewriting logic language [@MoreauKirchner:98], which generates a single large matching automaton.
The semantics of [ASF+SDF]{} does not prescribe a particular way to resolve ambiguous matches, i.e., more than a single left-hand side matching the same innermost redex, so the compiler is free to choose a suitable disambiguation strategy. To obtain a deterministic matching automaton it uses the specificity order defined in [@FokkinkEtAl:98 Definition 2.2.1]. Rewrite rules with more specific left-hand sides take precedence over rules whose left-hand sides are more general. Default rules correspond to “otherwise” cases in the automaton.
In the generated C code the matching automata are often hard to distinguish from the conditions of conditional rules, especially since the latter may have been generated in the preprocessing phase by the compiler itself to linearize or simplify left-hand sides.
The matching automata generated by the compiler are not necessarily optimal. We decided to keep the compiler simple, and take the suboptimal code for granted, especially since it usually does not make much difference. Consider the following two rules
f(a,b,c) = g(a)
f(X,b,d) = g(X),
where [a]{}, [b]{}, [c]{}, [d]{} are constants, and [X]{} is a variable. The compiler currently generates the following code in this case:
ATerm f(ATerm arg0, ATerm arg1, ATerm arg2) {
if term_equal(arg0,a) {
if term_equal(arg1,b) {
if term_equal(arg2,c) {
return g(a);
}
}
}
if term_equal(arg1,b) {
if term_equal(arg2,d) {
return g(arg0);
}
}
return make_nf3(fsym, arg0, arg1, arg2)
},
where [fsym]{} is a constant corresponding to the function name [f]{}. The generated matching automaton is straightforward. It checks the arguments of each left-hand side from left to right using the ATerm library function [term\_equal]{}, which does a simple pointer equality check (Sec. \[sec:TermStorage\]). If neither left-hand side matches, the appropriate normal form is constructed by ATerm library function [make\_nf3]{} (Table \[table:ATermfunctions\]).
Slightly better code could be obtained by dropping the left-to-right bias of the generated automaton[^7] and checking [arg1]{} rather than [arg0]{} first:
ATerm f(ATerm arg0, ATerm arg1, ATerm arg2) {
if term_equal(arg1,b) {
if term_equal(arg0,a) {
if term_equal(arg2,c) {
return g(a);
}
}
else if term_equal(arg2,d) {
return g(arg0);
}
}
return make_nf3(fsym, arg0, arg1, arg2)
}.
### List Matching {#sec:listmatching}
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ATerm set(ATerm arg0) {
ATerm tmp_0 = arg0; /* cursor in argument list */
ATerm tmp_1[2]; /* *Id0 (begin and end cursor) */
tmp_1[0] = tmp_0;
tmp_1[1] = tmp_0;
while(not_empty_list(tmp_0)) {
ATerm tmp_2[2]; /* *Id1 (begin and end cursor) */
ATerm tmp_3 = list_head(tmp_0); /* Id */
tmp_0 = list_tail(tmp_0);
tmp_2[0] = tmp_0;
tmp_2[1] = tmp_0;
while(not_empty_list(tmp_0)) {
ATerm tmp_4 = list_head(tmp_0); /* Id' */
tmp_0 = list_tail(tmp_0);
if(term_equal(tmp_3, tmp_4)) { /* Id = Id' */
return set(conc(slice(tmp_1[0], tmp_1[1]),
conc(tmp_3, conc(slice(tmp_2[0],tmp_2[1]), tmp_0))));
}
tmp_2[1] = list_tail(tmp_2[1]);
tmp_0 = tmp_2[1];
}
tmp_1[1] = list_tail(tmp_1[1]);
tmp_0 = tmp_1[1];
}
return make_nf1(setsym,arg0);
}
------------------------------------------------------------------------
As was pointed out in Sec. \[sec:SIMPLIST\], a few simple cases of list matching that do not need backtracking are transformed to ordinary term matching in the preprocessing phase. The other cases are translated to nested while-loops. These handle the (limited form of) backtracking that may be caused by condition failure (Sec. \[sec:LISTS\]).
Consider the [ASF+SDF]{} rule
[s-1] {Id0*,Id,Id1*,Id,Id2*} = {Id0*,Id,Id1*,Id2*},
which makes lists into sets by removing elements that occur more than once. Its [$\mu$ASF]{} representation would be
[s-1] set(conc(*Id0,conc(Id,conc(*Id1,conc(Id,*Id2))))) =
set(conc(*Id0,conc(Id,conc(*Id1,*Id2)))),
where [set]{} is some prefix representation of the user-defined accolade notation for sets used in the [ASF+SDF]{} rule, and [conc]{} is the predefined associative list concatenation of [$\mu$ASF]{}. Each application of picks up the leftmost pair of elements occurring more than once in variable [Id]{} and keeps only a single occurrence in its right-hand side. List variables [Id1]{}, [Id2]{}, and [Id3]{}, each of which can match the empty list, are used to pick up and transfer the context.
Since rule is nonlinear, it is first transformed to
[s-1'] Id == Id'
==>
set(conc(*Id0,conc(Id,conc(*Id1,conc(Id',*Id2))))) =
set(conc(*Id0,conc(Id,conc(*Id1,*Id2))))
by the preprocessor. The C code generated for rule is shown in Fig. \[fig:SETCODE\]. It consists of two nested while-loops, which try successive values for the three list variables. The various ATerm functions used in it are listed in Table \[table:ATermfunctions\]. The condition is checked in the body of the innermost loop.
Rule is applied as often as needed to reach a normal form containing each element only once, but each application is independent of the previous one, starting from the beginning of the set rather than at the position where the previous application left off. This leaves room for further optimization, but its implementation in sufficiently general form to be effective has turned out to be hard [@Vinju99].
Evaluation of Conditions and Right-Hand Sides {#sec:CONDSRHS}
---------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ATerm add_to(ATerm arg0, ATerm arg1, ATerm arg2)
{
ATerm tmp[6];
if (check_sym(arg2, extfun1_sym)) { /* arg2 = type-env(*Pair) */
ATerm atmp20 = arg_0(arg2);
if (not_empty_list(atmp20)) { /* t := non_empty_list(*Pair) */
tmp[0] = list_head(atmp20); /* P := list_head(*Pair) */
tmp[1] = list_tail(atmp20); /* *Pair1 := list_tail(*Pair) */
if (check_sym(tmp[0], extfun2_sym)) { /* pair(Id1,Type2) := P */
tmp[2] = arg_0(tmp[0]); /* Id1 */
tmp[3] = arg_1(tmp[0]); /* Type2 */
if (term_equal(arg0, tmp[2])) { /* Id == Id1 */
return (*extfun1)(conc((*extfun2)(arg0, arg1), tmp[1]));
}
else {
tmp[4] = add_to(arg0, arg1, (*extfun1)(tmp[1]));
/* tmp[4] = add-to(Id,Type1,type-env(*Pair1)) */
if (check_sym(tmp[4], extfun1_sym)) {
/* tmp[4] = type-env(*Pair) */
tmp[5] = arg_0(tmp[4]);
return (*extfun1)(conc((*extfun2)(tmp[2], tmp[3]), tmp[5]));
}
}
}
}
else {
return (*extfun1)(make_list((*extfun2)(arg0, arg1)));
}
}
return make_nf3(extfun1_sym, arg0, arg1, arg2);
}
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The code generated for rule (Sec. \[sec:ELSE\]) is shown in Fig. \[fig:ELSECODE\]. Before execution starts, [extfun1]{} and [extfun2]{} are linked dynamically to, respectively, C functions [type\_env]{} and [pair]{}. The reasons for doing this at run-time are explained in Sec. \[sec:DL\]. As in the previous example, the various ATerm functions used in the code are listed in Table \[table:ATermfunctions\]. The [$\mu$ASF$^+$]{} [else]{} of the rule corresponds to the first [else]{} in the C code.
Memoization {#sec:Memoization}
-----------
To obtain faster code, the compiler can be instructed to memoize explicitly given [ASF+SDF]{} functions. The corresponding C functions get local hash tables to store each set of arguments[^8] along with the corresponding result (normal form) once it has been computed. When called with a “known” set of arguments, the result is obtained from the memo table rather than recomputed. See also .
Maximal subterm sharing (hash-consing) as used in the ATerm library (Sec. \[sec:TermStorage\]) combines very well with memoization. Since memo tables tend to contain many similar terms (function calls), memo table storage is effectively reduced by sharing. Furthermore, the check whether a set of arguments is already in the memo table is a simple equality check on the corresponding pointers. There is currently no hard limit on the size of a memo table, so the issue of replacement of table entries does not (yet) arise.
Unfortunately, since its effects may be hard to predict, memoization is something of a “fine art”, not unlike adding strictness annotations to lazy functional programs. Memoization may easily become counterproductive if the memoized functions are not called with the same arguments sufficiently often, and finding the right subset of functions to memoize may require considerable experimentation and insight.
Dynamic Linking of [ASF+SDF]{} Function Identifiers {#sec:DL}
---------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------ ----------------------------------------------------
[register\_prod(prod, funptr, symbol)]{} Add C function pointer [funptr]{} and unique
symbol [symbol]{} generated for function with
[ASF+SDF]{} identifier [prod]{} to symbol table
[lookup\_func(prod]{}) Get C function pointer for function with
[ASF+SDF]{} identifier [prod]{}
[lookup\_sym(prod)]{} Get symbol for function with [ASF+SDF]{}
identifier [prod]{}
[lookup\_prod(symbol)]{} Return [ASF+SDF]{} identifier of symbol [symbol]{}
------------------------------------------ ----------------------------------------------------
: ATerm library functions used for dynamic linking.[]{data-label="table:DLfunctions"}
Because of the user-defined syntax, an [ASF+SDF]{} function identifier corresponds to an [SDF]{} grammar production (which is similar to a BNF rule). Mapping such rules to C function identifiers directly is not possible because of length and character set restrictions. To circumvent this problem, we adopted a dynamic linking approach for function identifiers in addition to the usual static linking.
More specifically, for each C file [M]{} the compiler maps [ASF+SDF]{}function identifiers (productions) to C function identifiers whose uniqueness is not guaranteed beyond the scope of [M]{}. This does not require global knowledge. The compiler also generates additional functions [register\_M]{} and [lookup\_M]{} for each C file [M]{}. These are executed before actual rewriting starts and perform the dynamic linking on the basis of the [ASF+SDF]{} function identifiers. For each function defined in [M]{}, [register\_M]{} stores the [ASF+SDF]{} identifier along with the corresponding unique C function pointer supplied by the preceding static linkage editing phase in a symbol table using ATerm function [register\_prod]{} (Table \[table:DLfunctions\]). For each external function called from [M]{}, [lookup\_M]{} then obtains a pointer from the symbol table on the basis of the [ASF+SDF]{} identifier using ATerm library function [lookup\_func]{}.
Postprocessing {#sec:POSTPROC}
==============
The quality of the generated C code is further improved by tail recursion elimination and constant caching. Not all C compilers are capable of tail recursion elimination, and no compiler known to us can do it if it has to produce code with symbolic debugging information, so the [ASF+SDF]{} compiler takes care of this itself. In principle, this optimization could also be done by the preprocessor if a while-construct were added to [$\mu$ASF$^+$]{}.
Constant caching is a restricted form of memoization. Unlike the latter, it is performed fully automatically on ground terms occurring in right-hand sides of rules or in conditions. These may be evaluated more than once during the evaluation of a term, but since their normal form is the same each time (no side-effects), they are recognized and transformed into constants. The first time a constant is encountered during evaluation, the associated ground term is normalized and the result is assigned to the constant. In this way, the constant acts as a cache for the normal form.
There are good reasons to prefer this hybrid compile-time/run-time approach to a compile-time only approach:
- The compiler would have to normalize the ground terms in question. Although a suitable [$\mu$ASF]{} interpreter that can be called by the compiler exists, such normalizations potentially require the full definition to be available. This is in conflict with the requirement of separate compilation.
- The resulting normal forms may be quite big, causing an enormous increase in code size.
Benchmarking {#sec:BM}
============
---------------------------- ------------------------------------------ -----------------
Type of language and
Language semantic characteristics Compiled to
[ASF+SDF]{} Language definition formalism C
$\bullet$ First-order
$\bullet$ Strict
$\bullet$ Conditional (both pos and neg)
$\bullet$ Default rules
$\bullet$ A-rewriting (lists)
Clean Functional language Native code via
[@PlasmeijerVanEekelen:94] $\bullet$ Higher-order ABC abstract
[@SmetsersEtAL:91] $\bullet$ Lazy graph rewriting
$\bullet$ Strictness annotations machine
$\bullet$ Polymorphic typing
Elan Rewriting logic language C
[@MoreauKirchner:98] $\bullet$ First-order
$\bullet$ Strategy specification
$\bullet$ AC-rewriting
Haskell Functional language C
[@PeytonJoneEtAl:93] $\bullet$ Higher-order
[@PeytonJones:96] $\bullet$ Lazy
$\bullet$ Strictness annotations
$\bullet$ Polymorphic typing
Opal Algebraic programming language C
[@DidrichEtAl:94] $\bullet$ Higher-order
$\bullet$ Strict
SML Functional language Native code
[@Appel:92] $\bullet$ Higher-order
$\bullet$ Strict
$\bullet$ Polymorphic typing
---------------------------- ------------------------------------------ -----------------
: \[table:LANGUAGES\] Languages used in the benchmarking of the [ASF+SDF]{} compiler.
Table \[table:LANGUAGES\] lists some of the semantic features of the languages used in the benchmarking of the [ASF+SDF]{} compiler. Modularization aspects are not included. Although the languages listed are all based on some form of rewriting, their authors do not use the same terminology to classify them as can be seen in the second column. At least to some extent, this reflects a difference in orientation and purpose.
Section \[sec:SmallBenchmarks\] gives results of three benchmarks comparing the compilers for the languages listed in Table \[table:LANGUAGES\]. Section \[sec:BigBenchmarks\] gives results for two large [ASF+SDF]{} definitions.
Three Small Benchmarks {#sec:SmallBenchmarks}
----------------------
All three benchmarks are based on the normalization of expressions ${2
^ n} \bmod 17$, with $17 \leq n \leq 23$, where the natural numbers involved are in successor representation (unary representation). They are synthetic benchmarks yielding rewrite intensive computations. The fact that there are much more efficient ways to compute these expressions is of no concern here, except that this makes it easy to validate the results. The sources are available in [@Olivier99].
Note that these benchmarks were primarily designed to evaluate specific implementation aspects, such as the effect of subterm sharing, lazy evaluation, and the like. They do not provide an overall comparison of the various systems. Also note that some systems failed to compute results for the full range $17 \leq n
\leq 23$. In those cases, the corresponding graph ends prematurely. The possibility to switch subterm sharing off was added to the [ASF+SDF]{} compiler only for the purpose of benchmarking. It is not a standard compiler option. Measurements were performed on a SUN ULTRA SPARC-5 (270 MHz) with 512 MB of memory.
### The [evalsym]{} Benchmark
The first benchmark is called [evalsym]{} and uses an algorithm that is CPU intensive, but does not use a lot of memory. The results are shown in Fig. \[evalsym-tlin\]. The differences between [ASF+SDF]{}, Clean, Haskell, and SML are small. Even in this case, maximal subterm sharing is effective in the sense that [ASF+SDF]{} without sharing performs less well, largely as a consequence of the less efficient evaluation of [term\_equal]{} (Sec. \[sec:TermStorage\]), but it does not yield a speed-up with respect to Clean, Haskell, and SML. This shows maximal subterm sharing to be an effective substitute for the sophisticated optimization techniques used by some of the other compilers. This is further confirmed by the following two benchmarks.
### The [evalexp]{} Benchmark
The second benchmark is called [evalexp]{} and is based on an algorithm that uses a lot of memory when a typical strict implementation is used. Using a lazy implementation, the amount of memory needed is relatively small.
Memory usage is shown in Figure \[evalexp-mlin\]. Clearly, strict implementations that do not use maximal subterm sharing cannot cope with the excessive memory requirements of this benchmark, but [ASF+SDF]{}and Clean (lazy) have no problems whatsoever.
Execution times are plotted in Figure \[evalexp-tlin\]. Only Clean (lazy) is faster than [ASF+SDF]{}, but the differences are small.
### The [evaltree]{} Benchmark
The third benchmark is called [evaltree]{} and is based on an algorithm that uses a lot of memory both with lazy and strict implementations. Figure \[evaltree-mlin\] shows that neither the lazy nor the strict implementations can cope with the memory requirements of this benchmark. [ASF+SDF]{} is the only one that scales up for $n > 20$. It can keep memory requirements at an acceptable level due to its maximal subterm sharing. The execution times are shown in Figure \[evaltree-tlin\].
Two Large [ASF+SDF]{} Definitions {#sec:BigBenchmarks}
---------------------------------
Table \[table:LargeDefs\] gives some statistics for two large [ASF+SDF]{} definitions whose performance is shown in Table \[table:LargeDefsPerf\]. The [ASF+SDF]{} compiler was written in [ASF+SDF]{}itself, so the top entry in the fourth column of Table \[table:LargeDefs\] gives the self-compilation time. The language Risla is a domain-specific language for loans, mortgages, and other financial products offered by banks [@BDKKM96; @DK98]. The expander is the first phase of the Risla implementation. It brings Risla specifications in normal form by eliminating their modular structure (if any) [@ADR95]. The C compilation times in the last column were obtained using SUN’s native C compiler with maximal optimizations.
Table \[table:LargeDefsPerf\] gives performance figures for the compiled versions both with and without maximal subterm sharing of ATerms (Sec. \[sec:TermStorage\]). The time obtained for the [ASF+SDF]{} compiler with sharing is, of course, again the self-compilation time.
---------------------- -------------- -------------- ----------- ------------------ -------------
Definition [ASF+SDF]{} [ASF+SDF]{} Generated [ASF+SDF]{} to C C
(rules) (lines) C code compilation compilation
(lines) time (s) time (s)
[ASF+SDF]{} compiler 1876 8699 85185 216 323
Risla expander 1082 7169 46787 168 531
---------------------- -------------- -------------- ----------- ------------------ -------------
: Size and compilation time for two large [ASF+SDF]{} definitions.[]{data-label="table:LargeDefs"}
Application Time (s) Memory (MB)
---------------------------------------- ---------- -------------
[ASF+SDF]{} compiler (with sharing) 216 16
[ASF+SDF]{} compiler (without sharing) 661 117
Risla expansion (with sharing) 9 8
Risla expansion (without sharing) 18 13
: Performance of two large [ASF+SDF]{} definitions with and without maximal subterm sharing.[]{data-label="table:LargeDefsPerf"}
Conclusions and Further Work {#sec:CONC}
============================
The [ASF+SDF]{} compiler generates high quality C code in a relatively straightforward way. The main factors contributing to its performance are the decisions to generate C code directly and to use a run-time term storage scheme based on maximal subterm sharing. Some possibilities for further improvement and extension are:
- Incorporation of additional preprocessing steps such as argument reordering during matching, evaluation of sufficiently simple conditions during matching in a dataflow fashion, i.e., as soon as the required values become available, and reordering of independent conditions.
- Optimization of repeated applications of a rule like rule in Sec. \[sec:listmatching\], or of successive applications of different rules by analyzing their left- and right-hand sides. Similarly, elimination of the redex search phase in some cases (“matchless rewriting”).
- Incorporation of other rewrite strategy options besides default rules and the [delay]{} attribute that are currently supported.
We would like to thank Hayco de Jong for his contribution to the implementation of the ATerm library, Jurgen Vinju for looking into the efficiency of list matching, Wan Fokkink for his useful remarks, and Pierre-Etienne Moreau for discussions on the compilation of term rewriting systems in general. The idea for the benchmark programs in Section \[sec:SmallBenchmarks\] is due to Jan Bergstra.
1978\. . McGraw-Hill.
1992\. . Cambridge University Press.
1993\. Hash-consing garbage collection. Tech. Rep. CS-TR-412-93, Princeton University.
, [Brunekreef, J. J.]{}, [Partington, V.]{}, [and]{} [ Schaerf, A.]{} 1998. Alma-0: An imperative language that supports declarative programming. [ *20*]{}, 1014–1066.
, [van Deursen, A.]{}, [and]{} [Res, M.]{} 1995. An algebraic specification of a language for describing financial products. In [*ICSE-17 Workshop on Formal Methods Application in Software Engineering*]{}, [M. Wirsing]{}, Ed. IEEE, 6–13.
, [Kapur, D.]{}, [and]{} [Narendran, P.]{} 1985. Complexity of matching problems. In [*Rewriting Techniques and Applications (RTA ’85)*]{}, [J.-P. Jouannaud]{}, Ed. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 202. Springer-Verlag, 417–429.
2000\. Syntax and semantics of a high-level intermediate representation of [ASF+SDF]{}. Tech. rep., CWI, Amsterdam. To appear.
, [Dinesh, T. B.]{}, [Field, J.]{}, [and]{} [ Heering, J.]{} 1997. Toward a complete transformational toolkit for compilers. [ *19,*]{} 5 (September), 639–684.
, [Heering, J.]{}, [and]{} [Klint, P.]{}, Eds. 1989. . ACM Press/Addison-Wesley.
1998\. The discrete time [ToolBus]{}—[A]{} software coordination architecture. [*31*]{}, 205–229.
1993\. Space efficient conservative garbage collection. [*28,*]{} 6 (June), 197–206. Proceedings of the 1991 Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation (PLDI ’91).
, [de Jong, H. A.]{}, [ Klint, P.]{}, [and]{} [Olivier, P. A.]{} 2000. Efficient annotated terms. [*30*]{}, 259–291.
, [van Deursen, A.]{}, [Klint, P.]{}, [Klusener, S.]{}, [and]{} [van der Meulen, E. A.]{} 1996. Industrial applications of [ASF+SDF]{}. In [*Algebraic Methodology and Software Technology (AMAST ’96)*]{}, [M. Wirsing]{} [and]{} [M. Nivat]{}, Eds. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 1101. Springer-Verlag.
, [Eijkelkamp, S. M.]{}, [ Geluk, D. K. A.]{}, [Meijer]{}, [Osborne, H. R.]{}, [and]{} [Polling, M. J. F.]{} 1995. Program transformations using [ASF+SDF]{}. In [*Proceedings of [ASF+SDF]{} ’95*]{}. Technical Report P9504. Programming Research Group, University of Amsterdam, 29–52.
, [Klint, P.]{}, [and]{} [Olivier, P. A.]{} 1999. Compilation and memory management for [ASF+SDF]{}. In [*Compiler Construction (CC ’99)*]{}, [S. Jähnichen]{}, Ed. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 1575. Springer-Verlag, 198–213.
, [Klint, P.]{}, [and]{} [Verhoef, C.]{} 1996. Core technologies for system renovation. In [*Theory and Practice of Informatics (SOFSEM ’96)*]{}, [K. G. Jeffery]{}, [J. Král]{}, [and]{} [M. Bartosek]{}, Eds. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 1175. Springer-Verlag, 235–255.
, [Klint, P.]{}, [and]{} [Verhoef, C.]{} 1997. Re-engineering needs generic programming language technology. [*32,*]{} 2, 54–61.
, [Kuipers, T.]{}, [ Moonen, L.]{}, [and]{} [Olivier, P. A.]{} 1997. Implementation of a prototype for the new [ASF+SDF]{} meta-environment. In [*Proceedings of the Second International Workshop on the Theory and Practice of Algebraic Specifications (ASF+SDF ’97)*]{}, [M. P. A. Sellink]{}, Ed. Electronic Workshops in Computing. Springer/British Computer Society.
, [Sellink, A.]{}, [and]{} [Verhoef, C.]{} 1998. Control flow normalization for [COBOL/CICS]{} legacy systems. In [*Euromicro Software Maintenance and Reengineering*]{}. IEEE Computer Society.
, [Sellink, M.]{}, [and]{} [Verhoef, C.]{} 1997. Reengineering [COBOL]{} software implies specification of underlying dialects. Tech. Rep. P9702, [U]{}niversity of [A]{}msterdam, [P]{}rogramming [R]{}esearch [G]{}roup.
, [Sellink, M.]{}, [and]{} [Verhoef, C.]{} 2000. Generation of components for software renovation factories from context-free grammars. [*36*]{}, 209–266.
1996\. Generation of formatters for context-free languages. [ *5*]{}, 1–41.
1996\. A transformation tool for pure [P]{}rolog programs. In [*Logic Program Synthesis and Transformation (LOPSTR ’96)*]{}, [J. P. Gallagher]{}, Ed. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 1207. Springer-Verlag, 130–145.
1982\. ttribute grammars and recursive program schemes [I]{} and [II]{}. [*17*]{}, 163–191 and 235–257.
1990\. Rewrite systems. In [*Handbook of Theoretical Computer Science, volume [B]{}*]{}, [J. van Leeuwen]{}, Ed. Elsevier Science Publishers, 243–320.
1994\. Executable language definitions: Case studies and origin tracking techniques. Ph.D. thesis, University of Amsterdam.
, [Heering, J.]{}, [and]{} [ Klint, P.]{}, Eds. 1996. . AMAST Series in Computing, vol. 5. World Scientific.
1998\. Little languages: Little maintenance? [*10*]{}, 75–92.
, [Klint, P.]{}, [and]{} [ Verhoef, C.]{} 1999. Research issues in the renovation of legacy systems. In [*Fundamental Approaches to Software Engineering (FASE ’99)*]{}, [J.-P. Finance]{}, Ed. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 1577. Springer-Verlag, 1–21.
1998\. Rapid system understanding: Two [COBOL]{} case studies. In [*Sixth International Workshop on Program Comprehension (IWPC ’98)*]{}, [S. Tilley]{} [and]{} [G. Visaggio]{}, Eds. IEEE Computer Society, 90–98.
1999\. Finding objects using cluster and concept analysis. In [*Proceedings 21st International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE ’99)*]{}. ACM. To appear.
1998\. Type inference for [COBOL]{} systems. In [*Proceedings 5th Working Conference on Reverse Engineering*]{}, [I. Baxter]{}, [A. Quilici]{}, [and]{} [C. Verhoef]{}, Eds. IEEE Computer Society, 220–230.
, [Fett, A.]{}, [Gerke, C.]{}, [Grieskamp, W.]{}, [ and]{} [Pepper, P.]{} 1994. Opal: Design and implementation of an algebraic programming language. In [*International Conference on Programming Languages and System Architectures*]{}, [J. Gutknecht]{}, Ed. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 782. Springer-Verlag, 228–244.
1989\. A fast implementation of the [A]{}lgebraic [S]{}pecification [F]{}ormalism. M.S. thesis, University of Amsterdam, Programming Research Group.
, [Haveraaen, M.]{}, [and]{} [Heering, J.]{} 1998. An algebraic programming style for numerical software and its optimization. Tech. Rep. SEN-R9844, CWI, Amsterdam. ACM CoRR E-print Server xxx.lanl.gov/abs/cs.SE/9903002.
1992\. Animators and error reporters for generated programming environments. Report [CS]{}-[R]{}9253, CWI, Amsterdam.
1997\. A slicing-based approach for locating type errors. In [*Proceedings USENIX Conference on Domain-Specific Languages*]{}.
1988\. . Addison-Wesley.
1992\. A simple rewriting semantics for realistic imperative programs and its application to program analysis. In [*Proc. ACM SIGPLAN Workshop on Partial Evaluation and Semantics-Based Program Manipulation*]{}. San Francisco, 98–107. Published as Yale University Technical Report YALEU/DCS/RR–909.
, [Kamperman, J. F. .]{}, [and]{} [ Walters, H. R.]{} 1998. Within [ARM]{}’s reach: Compilation of left-linear rewrite systems via minimal rewrite systems. [*20*]{}, 679–706.
, [Koorn, J. W. C.]{}, [and]{} [van Vlijmen, S. F. M.]{} 1995. The safety guaranteeing system at station [H]{}oorn-[K]{}ersenboogaard. In [*Proceedings of the Tenth Annual Conference on Computer Assurance (COMPASS ’95)*]{}. IEEE, 57–68.
1996\. Benchmarking implementations of functional languages with ‘[P]{}seudoknot’, a float-intensive benchmark. [*6*]{}, 621–655.
, [Hendriks, P. R. H.]{}, [Klint, P.]{}, [and]{} [ Rekers, J.]{} 1989. he syntax definition formalism [SDF]{} — [R]{}eference manual. [*24,*]{} 11, 43–75. Most recent version: ftp.cwi.nl/pub/gipe/reports/SDFManual.ps.Z.
, [Klint, P.]{}, [and]{} [Rekers, J.]{} 1990. ncremental generation of parsers. [*SE-16*]{}, 1344–1351.
, [Klint, P.]{}, [and]{} [Rekers, J.]{} 1992. Incremental generation of lexical scanners. [ *14*]{}, 490–520.
, [Klint, P.]{}, [and]{} [Rekers, J.]{} 1994. Lazy and incremental program generation. [ *16*]{}, 1010–1023.
1991\. Implementation of modular algebraic specifications. Ph.D. thesis, University of Amsterdam.
1996\. Experiments in specification re-engineering. Ph.D. thesis, University of Amsterdam.
1982\. Pattern matching in trees. [*29*]{}, 68–95.
1996\. . Wiley.
1996\. Compilation of term rewriting systems. Ph.D. thesis, University of Amsterdam.
1987\. A compiler for conditional term rewriting systems. In [*Rewriting Techniques and Applications (RTA ’87)*]{}, [P. Lescanne]{}, Ed. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 256. Springer-Verlag, 25–41.
1993\. A meta-environment for generating programming environments. [ *2*]{}, 176–201.
1992\. Term rewriting systems. In [*Handbook of Logic in Computer Science, volume 2*]{}, [S. Abramsky]{}, [D. Gabbay]{}, [and]{} [T. S. E. Maibaum]{}, Eds. Oxford University Press, 1–116.
1996\. Incremental typechecking. In [*Language Prototyping: An Algebraic Specification Approach*]{}, [A. van Deursen]{}, [J. Heering]{}, [and]{} [P. Klint]{}, Eds. AMAST Series in Computing, vol. 5. World Scientific, 199–248.
1997\. A generic architecture for data flow analysis to support reverse engineering. In [*Proceedings of the Second International Workshop on the Theory and Practice of Algebraic Specifications (ASF+SDF ’97)*]{}, [M. P. A. Sellink]{}, Ed. Electronic Workshops in Computing. Springer/British Computer Society.
1998\. A compiler for rewrite programs in associative-commutative theories. In [*Principles of Declarative Programming (PLILP ’98/ALP ’98)*]{}, [C. Palamidessi]{}, [H. Glaser]{}, [and]{} [K. Meinke]{}, Eds. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 1490. Springer-Verlag, 230–249.
1997\. . Morgan Kaufmann.
, [Walter, C. D.]{}, [and]{} [Eldridge, S. E.]{} 1997. Optimal left-to-right pattern-matching automata. In [*Algebraic and Logic Programming (ALP ’97/HOA ’97)*]{}, [M. Hanus]{}, [J. Heering]{}, [and]{} [K. Meinke]{}, Eds. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 1298. Springer-Verlag, 273–286.
1999\. Benchmarking of functional/algebraic language implementations. adam.wins.uva.nl/$\sim$olivierp/benchmark/.
1996\. Compiling [H]{}askell by program transformation: A report from the trenches. In [*Programming Languages and Systems (ESOP ’96)*]{}, [H. R. Nielson]{}, Ed. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 1058. Springer-Verlag, 18–44.
, [Hall, C. V.]{}, [Hammond, K.]{}, [ Partain, W. D.]{}, [and]{} [Wadler, P. L.]{} 1993. The [G]{}lasgow [H]{}askell compiler: A technical overview. In [*Proceedings of Joint Framework for Information Technology Technical Conference (JFIT), Keele*]{}. DTI/SERC, 249–257.
, [Nordin, T.]{}, [and]{} [Oliva, D.]{} 1998. `C–`: A portable assembly language. In [*Implementation of Functional Languages (IFL ’97)*]{}, [C. Clack]{}, [K. Hammond]{}, [and]{} [T. Davie]{}, Eds. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 1467. Springer-Verlag, 1–19.
1994\. Concurrent [CLEAN]{}—version 1.0—[L]{}anguage refence manual. Tech. rep., University of Nijmegen, Department of Computer Science. Draft.
1992\. Semantics of [M]{}anifold: [S]{}pecification in [ASF+SDF]{} and extension. Tech. Rep. CS-R9269, Centrum voor Wiskunde en Informatica (CWI), Amsterdam.
, [Sneed, H. M.]{}, [and]{} [Verhoef, C.]{} 1999. Restructuring of [COBOL/CICS]{} legacy systems. In [*Proceedings of the Third European Conference on Maintenance and Reengineering*]{}, [P. Nesi]{} [and]{} [C. Verhoef]{}, Eds. IEEE Computer Society, 72–82. adam.wins.uva.nl/$\sim$x/cics/cics.html.
1999\. Generation of software renovation factories from compilers. In [*International Conference on Software Maintenance (ICSM ’99)*]{}, [H. Yang]{} [and]{} [L. White]{}, Eds. IEEE Computer Society, 245–255. adam.wins.uva.nl/$\sim$x/com/com.html.
2000\. Development, assessment, and reengineering of language descriptions. In [*Fouth European Conference on Software Maintenance and Reengineering*]{}, [J. Ebert]{} [and]{} [C. Verhoef]{}, Eds. IEEE Computer Society. adam.wins.uva.nl/$\sim$x/cale/cale.html.
, [Nöcker, E.]{}, [van Groningen, J.]{}, [and]{} [Plasmeijer, M. J.]{} 1991. Generating efficient code for lazy functional languages. In [*Functional Programming and Computer Architecture (FPCA ’91)*]{}, [J. Hughes]{}, Ed. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 524. Springer-Verlag, 592–617.
1990\. —[I]{}ts concept, implementation and applications. [*13,*]{} 3, 265–275.
1993\. The wonder years of sequential [P]{}rolog implementation. [*19/20*]{}, 385–441.
1999\. Optimizations of list matching in the [ASF+SDF]{} compiler. M.S. thesis, University of Amsterdam, Programming Research Group. www.cwi.nl/$\sim$jurgenv/.
1997\. Syntax definition for language prototyping. Ph.D. thesis, University of Amsterdam. www.cs.uu.nl/$\sim$visser/publications/ftp/Vis97.thesis.ps.gz.
1997\. pic and [ARM]{}—[U]{}ser’s guide. Tech. Rep. SEN-R9724, CWI, Amsterdam.
[^1]: The associativity of [conc]{} is taken care of by list matching, otherwise it is a free constructor.
[^2]: The parameterization and renaming operations of [ASF]{} [@BHK89] are not available in the current implementation of [ASF+SDF]{}.
[^3]: Function arguments annotated with the [delay]{} attribute (Sec. \[sec:STRAT\]) have to be taken into account as well, but will be ignored in this article for the sake of readability.
[^4]: For reasons of efficiency, constructor functions (which can never occur at the outermost position of a left-hand side) are not made into separate modules. Instead, the constructors defined in a module are kept together and made into a single new module.
[^5]: Non-linearities involving function arguments annotated with the [delay]{} attribute are not allowed.
[^6]: Hash table overflow is not fatal, but causes allocation of a larger table followed by rehashing.
[^7]: discuss optimization of the matching automaton under a left-to-right constraint.
[^8]: Function arguments annotated with the [delay]{} attribute need not be in normal form when stored in the memo table.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
****
0.8truecm
**Hyperfine Structure and Zeeman Splitting**
0.3truecm
**in Two-Fermion Bound-State Systems**
0.6truecm
Andrei G. Terekidi$^{a }$, Jurij W. Darewych$^{b }$, Marko Horbatsch$^{c}$
0.5truecm
*Department of Physics and Astronomy, York University, Toronto, Ontario, M3J 1P3, Canada*
*$^{a }[email protected], $^{b}[email protected],$^{c}[email protected]*
1.6truecm
**Abstract**
A relativistic wave equation for bound states of two fermions with arbitrary masses which are exposed to a magnetic field is derived from quantum electrodynamics. The interaction kernels are based upon the generalized invariant $\widetilde{\mathcal{M}}\mathcal{\,}$-matrices for inter-fermion and fermion-field interactions. As an application we calculate the energy corrections in a weak homogeneous $\mathbf{B}$ field to obtain the Zeeman splitting of the hyperfine structure (HFS) and $g$-factors in the lowest order (*i.e.* to $O\left( \alpha^{4}\right) )$. Landé $g$-factors are presented for several of the first excited states of hydrogen, muonium, and muonic-hydrogen.
0.6truecm
**[1. Introduction]{}**
0.4truecm
The relativistic treatment of energy levels of two-fermion atomic systems (including atomic hydrogen, hydrogen-like ions, helium-3 ion, muonium, muonic-hydrogen), as well as their fine structure (FS) and hyperfine structure (HFS) in an external uniform magnetic field (Zeeman effect), is an important problem. The theoretical knowledge of energy spectra and transition frequencies provides a test of two-body bound-state QED \[1\]. One can then obtain information about the character of the coupling in the system, the gyromagnetic ratios of the bound particles, the magnetic moments \[2\], the mass ratio \[2-5\], and fundamental physical constants such as the Rydberg constant $R_{\infty}$, and the fine structure constant $\alpha$ \[6\]. The Zeeman effect in the HFS can be used as a diagnostic tool for solar photospheric magnetic fields \[7\], fusion research and plasma physics, where the magnetic field is applied to control the shape and position of the plasma \[8\].
In the lowest-order approximation the linearly dependent part of the energy splitting for a two-fermion system placed in a weak static magnetic field $\mathbf{B}$ can be written as \[1,9-11\]$$\Delta E_{F,m_{J},j_{1},\ell,s_{1},I}^{ext}=\left( \mu_{B1}g_{1}+\mu
_{B2}g_{2}\right) Bm_{F},$$ where $F$, $m_{J}$, $j_{1}$, $\ell$, $s_{1}$, $I$ are quantum numbers, which characterize the system: $s_{1}$ and $I$ are the spins of the first and second particle respectively, $\ell$ and $j_{1}$ represent the orbital and total angular momentum quantum numbers of the first particle. The total angular momentum of the system is denoted by the quantum number $F=j_{1}+I,$ $j_{1}+I-1,...,\left\vert j_{1}-I\right\vert $. The projection of the total angular momentum on the $\mathbf{B}$ direction is $m_{F}=-F,-F+1,...F-1,F$. The Bohr magnetonsfor the two particles are defined as $\displaystyle\mu_{B1}=Q_{1}\hbar/2m_{1}c$, and $\mu
_{B2}=-Q_{2}\hbar/2m_{2}c$, where $Q_{1}$, $Q_{2}>0$). Usually, in our notation $m_{1}$ and $m_{2}$ correspond to the light and heavy particle respectively. Assuming that the energy-level splitting (1) is much smaller then the HFS splitting, $\Delta E^{ext}<<\Delta E^{HFS}$, the Landé ($g$-) factors $g_{1}$ and $g_{2}$ take the form \[9-11\]$$g_{1}=g_{j_{1}}\frac{F\left( F+1\right) +j_{1}\left( j_{1}+1\right)
-I\left( I+1\right) }{2F\left( F+1\right) },$$ where$$g_{j_{1}}=1+\left( g_{s_{1}}-1\right) \frac{j_{1}\left( j_{1}+1\right)
+s_{1}\left( s_{1}+1\right) -\ell\left( \ell+1\right) }{2j_{1}\left(
j_{1}+1\right) },$$ and$$g_{2}=g_{s_{2}}\frac{F\left( F+1\right) -j_{1}\left( j_{1}+1\right)
+I\left( I+1\right) }{2F\left( F+1\right) }.$$ Here $g_{s_{1}}$ and $g_{s_{2}}$ are the intrinsic spin magnetic moments of the constituent particles. According to the Dirac theory a free particle at rest has $g_{s}=2$. In QED $g_{s}$ is corrected by the anomaly, which to lowest order is given by the Schwinger correction. For bound particles the intrinsic moment can be expressed as $$g_{s_{1,2}}=2+\bigtriangleup g_{s_{1,2}}^{REL}+\bigtriangleup g_{s_{12}}^{QED},$$ where the terms $\bigtriangleup g^{REL}$, $\bigtriangleup g^{QED}$ represent the relativistic \[9,12,13\], and QED corrections respectively (cf. the review \[14\]). There is also an additional higher-order contribution to (1), $\bigtriangleup g_{1,2}^{HFS}\mu_{B1,2}Bm_{F}$, which is caused by the hyperfine structure (HFS) \[15\].
The $g$-factors (2) and (4) are not symmetrical, because they were obtained under the assumption that the orbital motion of the heavy particle can be neglected. In hydrogen the nucleus contributes a fraction of $m_{1}/\left(
m_{1}+m_{2}\right) \approx5\times10^{-4}$ to the orbital angular momentum, while for muonic hydrogen this fraction is $\approx0.1$. The relativistic and QED corrections in (5) can be comparable with the orbital angular momentum effects of the heavy particle. Recent high-precision measurements of the $g$-factor in hydrogen-like systems have reached an accuracy of about $5\times10^{-9}$ \[16,17\]. Thus, it is desirable to obtain a more general result for the $g$-factor in order to overcome the shortcomings of Eqs. (2,4). It will be shown that this is particularly important for excited states.
In this work we present an analysis of the HFS of a two-fermion system in an external magnetic field based upon a reformulation of QED and the variational Hamiltonian formalism developed earlier \[18-20\]. A relativistic two-fermion wave equation for arbitrary fermion masses is, thus, derived from first principles. A solution of this equation permits, in principle, to obtain all QED energy corrections to any order of the coupling constant \[18\]. In the present paper we extend the method to derive the integral wave equation in momentum space for the case where a uniform weak magnetic field is present. We calculate the Zeeman splitting of the HFS energy levels to $O\left(
\alpha^{4}\right) $ for all quantum states and unrestricted values for the fermion masses. We obtain a novel result for the $g$-factor, Eqs. (38-41), and demonstrate that it coincides with Eqs. (2-4) in the case of $m_{2}>>m_{1}$, as long as the intrinsic moment of $m_{1}$ is restricted to the Dirac value $g_{s}=2$.
The modification of the wave equations due to the external magnetic field is presented in Section 2. In Section 3 we provide the classification of the quantum states, and a partial-wave decomposition of the momentum-space equations. Section 4 contains expressions for the Zeeman energy splittings of the HFS levels, and the $g$-factor results. Numerical values for the Landé factors are compared with data from Eqs. (2,4) for various excited states of hydrogen, muonium and muonic hydrogen. In most expressions we use natural units $\hbar= c = 1$. 1.6truecm
**[2. Bound-State Variational Wave Equation]{}**
0.4truecm
For two-fermion systems without external fields wave equations were derived in \[18-19\] on the basis of a modified QED Lagrangian \[21-22\]. With this Lagrangian a simple Fock-space trial state $$\left\vert \psi_{trial}\right\rangle =\underset{s_{1}s_{2}}{\sum}\int
d^{3}\mathbf{p}_{1}d^{3}\mathbf{p}_{2}F_{s_{1}s_{2}}(\mathbf{p}_{1},\mathbf{p}_{2})b_{\mathbf{p}_{1}s_{1}}^{\dagger}D_{\mathbf{p}_{2}s_{2}}^{\dagger}\left\vert 0\right\rangle ,$$ sufficed to obtain HFS levels correct to fourth order in the fine-structure constant. Here $b_{\mathbf{q}_{1}s_{1}}^{\dagger}$ and $D_{\mathbf{q}_{2}s_{2}}^{\dagger}$ are creation operators for a free fermion of mass $m_{1}$ and an (anti-)fermion of mass $m_{2}$ respectively, and $\left\vert
0\right\rangle $ is the trial vacuum state such that $b_{\mathbf{q}_{1}s_{1}}\left\vert 0\right\rangle =D_{\mathbf{q}_{2}s_{2}}\left\vert 0\right\rangle
=0$.
As discussed in section 3 below, the four adjustable functions $F_{s_{1}s_{2}}$ must be chosen so that the trial state (17) is an eigenstate of the relativistic total angular momentum operator, its projection, and parity (as well as charge conjugation for the case $m_{1}=m_{2}$ such as positronium).
A variational principle is invoked to obtain a momentum-space wave equation for the amplitudes \[18\]: $$\begin{aligned}
0 & =\sum_{s_{1}s_{2}}\int d^{3}\mathbf{p}_{1}d^{3}\mathbf{p}_{2}\left(
\omega_{p_{1}}+\Omega_{p_{2}}-E\right) F_{s_{1}s_{2}}(\mathbf{p}_{1},\mathbf{p}_{2})\delta F_{s_{1}s_{2}}^{\ast}(\mathbf{p}_{1},\mathbf{p}_{2})\\
& -\frac{m_{1}m_{2}}{\left( 2\pi\right) ^{3}}\underset{\sigma_{1}\sigma
_{2}s_{1}s_{2}}{\sum}\int\frac{d^{3}\mathbf{p}_{1}d^{3}\mathbf{p}_{2}d^{3}\mathbf{q}_{1}d^{3}\mathbf{q}_{2}}{\sqrt{\omega_{p_{1}}\omega_{q_{1}}\Omega_{p_{2}}\Omega_{q_{2}}}}\nonumber\\
& \times F_{\sigma_{1}\sigma_{2}}(\mathbf{q}_{1},\mathbf{q}_{2})\left(
-i\right) \widetilde{\mathcal{M}}_{s_{1}s_{2}\sigma_{1}\sigma_{2}}\left(
\mathbf{p}_{1},\mathbf{p}_{2},\mathbf{q}_{1}\mathbf{,q}_{2}\right) \delta
F_{s_{1}s_{2}}^{\ast}(\mathbf{p}_{1},\mathbf{p}_{2}),\nonumber\end{aligned}$$ where $\omega_{p_{1}}^{2}=\mathbf{p}_{1}^{2}+m_{1}^{2}$ and $\Omega_{p_{1}}^{2}=\mathbf{p}_{1}^{2}+m_{2}^{2}$. The interaction is governed by the generalized invariant $\mathcal{M}$-matrix $\widetilde{\mathcal{M}}_{s_{1}s_{2}\sigma_{1}\sigma_{2}}\left( \mathbf{p}_{1},\mathbf{p}_{2},\mathbf{q}_{1}\mathbf{,q}_{2}\right) $. It has the form $$\mathcal{M}_{s_{1}s_{2}\sigma_{1}\sigma_{2}}^{\left( 1\right) }\left(
\mathbf{p}_{1},\mathbf{p}_{2},\mathbf{q}_{1}\mathbf{,q}_{2}\right)
\equiv\mathcal{M}_{s_{1}s_{2}\sigma_{1}\sigma_{2}}^{ope}\left( \mathbf{p}_{1},\mathbf{p}_{2},\mathbf{q}_{1}\mathbf{,q}_{2}\right) +\mathcal{M}_{s_{1}s_{2}\sigma_{1}\sigma_{2}}^{ext}\left( \mathbf{p}_{1},\mathbf{p}_{2},\mathbf{q}_{1}\mathbf{,q}_{2}\right) ,$$ where $\mathcal{M}_{s_{1}s_{2}\sigma_{1}\sigma_{2}}^{ope}\left(
\mathbf{p}_{1},\mathbf{p}_{2},\mathbf{q}_{1}\mathbf{,q}_{2}\right) $ is the usual invariant matrix element, corresponding to the one-photon exchange Feynman diagram \[19-20\].
The element $\mathcal{M}_{s_{1}s_{2}\sigma_{1}\sigma_{2}}^{ext}$ represents the interaction with a given external classical field $A_{\mu}^{ext}$$$\begin{aligned}
& \mathcal{M}_{s_{1}s_{2}\sigma_{1}\sigma_{2}}^{ext}\left( \mathbf{p}_{1},\mathbf{p}_{2},\mathbf{q}_{1}\mathbf{,q}_{2}\right) \\
& =i\left( 2\pi\right) ^{3/2}\left(
\begin{array}
[c]{c}\frac{\sqrt{\Omega_{\mathbf{p}_{2}}\Omega_{q_{2}}}}{m_{2}}A_{\mu}^{ext}(\mathbf{p}_{1}-\mathbf{q}_{1})\overline{u}\left( \mathbf{p}_{1},s_{1}\right) \left( -iQ_{1}\right) \gamma^{\mu}u\left( \mathbf{q}_{1},\sigma_{1}\right) \delta_{s_{2}\sigma_{2}}\\
+\frac{\sqrt{\omega_{\mathbf{p}_{1}}\omega_{\mathbf{q}_{1}}}}{m_{1}}A_{\mu
}^{ext}(\mathbf{q}_{2}-\mathbf{p}_{2})\overline{V}\left( \mathbf{p}_{2},\sigma_{2}\right) \left( -iQ_{2}\right) \gamma^{\mu}V\left(
\mathbf{q}_{2},s_{2}\right) \delta_{s_{1}\sigma_{1}}\end{array}
\right) .\nonumber\end{aligned}$$
The Ansatz (6) can not accommodate processes that include the emission or absorption of real, physical (as opposed to virtual) photons. Such radiative processes could be included by generalizing the trial state. Here we limit ourselves to the form (6), *i.e.*, the effects of radiative decay or absorption of radiation are ignored in the present work.
In order to obtain the Lande factors we evaluate the $\mathcal{M}_{s_{1}s_{2}\sigma_{1}\sigma_{2}}^{ext}$ matrix (9) in a stationary uniform magnetic field $\mathbf{B}=B\mathbf{\hat{z}}$. The vector potential can be chosen as$$A_{1}^{ext}\left( \mathbf{x}\right) =-\frac{1}{2}yB,\;\;\ \ \;A_{2}^{ext}\left( \mathbf{x}\right) =\frac{1}{2}xB,\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ A_{0}^{ext}\left( \mathbf{x}\right) =A_{3}^{ext}\left( \mathbf{x}\right) =0.$$ The inverse Fourier transform of the non-zero components yields$$A_{1}^{ext}(\mathbf{k})=\frac{\left( 2\pi\right) ^{3/2}iB}{2}\delta\left(
k_{x}\right) \frac{d\delta\left( k_{y}\right) }{dk_{y}}\delta\left(
k_{z}\right) ,\ \ \ \ A_{2}^{ext}(\mathbf{k})=\mathbf{-}\frac{\left(
2\pi\right) ^{3/2}iB}{2}\frac{d\delta\left( k_{x}\right) }{dk_{x}}\delta\left( k_{y}\right) \delta\left( k_{z}\right) .$$ Using the semi-relativistic expansion$$\begin{aligned}
\overline{u}\left( \mathbf{p}_{1},s_{1}\right) \gamma^{1}u\left(
\mathbf{q}_{1},\sigma_{1}\right) & =\frac{1}{2m_{1}c}\varphi_{s_{1}}^{\dagger}\left( i\left[ \overrightarrow{\mathbf{\sigma}}_{1}\times\left(
\mathbf{p}_{1}-\mathbf{q}_{1}\right) \right] +\mathbf{q}_{1}+\mathbf{p}_{1}\right) _{1}\varphi_{\sigma_{1}},\\
\overline{u}\left( \mathbf{p}_{1},s_{1}\right) \gamma^{2}u\left(
\mathbf{q}_{1},\sigma_{1}\right) & =\frac{1}{2m_{1}c}\varphi_{s_{1}}^{\dagger}\left( i\left[ \overrightarrow{\mathbf{\sigma}}_{1}\times\left(
\mathbf{p}_{1}-\mathbf{q}_{1}\right) \right] +\mathbf{q}_{1}+\mathbf{p}_{1}\right) _{2}\varphi_{\sigma_{1}},\nonumber\end{aligned}$$ where $\varphi_{1}^{\dagger}=[1\ 0]$, $\varphi_{2}^{\dagger}=[0\ 1]$,and $\left( \omega_{p_{1}}\omega_{q_{1}}\right) ^{1/2}\simeq m_{1}$, and a similar expansion for anti-particle spinors we obtain$$\begin{aligned}
& \mathcal{M}_{s_{1}s_{2}\sigma_{1}\sigma_{2}}^{ext}\left( \mathbf{p}_{1},\mathbf{p}_{2},\mathbf{q}_{1}\mathbf{,q}_{2}\right) \\
& =\frac{\left( 2\pi\right) ^{3/2}}{2c}\left(
\begin{array}
[c]{c}\frac{Q_{1}}{m_{1}}A_{j}^{ext}(\mathbf{p}_{1}-\mathbf{q}_{1})\varphi_{s_{1}}^{\dagger}\left( i\left[ \overrightarrow{\mathbf{\sigma}}_{1}\times\left(
\mathbf{p}_{1}-\mathbf{q}_{1}\right) \right] +\mathbf{q}_{1}+\mathbf{p}_{1}\right) _{j}\varphi_{\sigma_{1}}\delta_{s_{2}\sigma_{2}}\\
+\frac{Q_{2}}{m_{2}}A_{j}^{ext}(\mathbf{q}_{2}-\mathbf{p}_{2})\chi_{\sigma
_{2}}^{\dagger}\left( i\left[ \overrightarrow{\mathbf{\sigma}}_{2}\times\left( \mathbf{p}_{2}-\mathbf{q}_{2}\right) \right] +\mathbf{q}_{2}+\mathbf{p}_{2}\right) _{j}\chi_{s_{2}}\delta_{s_{1}\sigma_{1}}\end{array}
\right) ,\nonumber\end{aligned}$$ where $\chi_{1}^{\dagger}=[0\ 1]$, $\chi_{2}^{\dagger}=-[1\ 0]$, and $j=1,2$. It is straightforward to show that$$\left( \mathbf{q}_{1}\right) _{j}\ A_{j}^{ext}(\mathbf{p}_{1}-\mathbf{q}_{1})=-\frac{\left( 2\pi\right) ^{3/2}B}{2}\widehat{L}_{1z}\left(
\mathbf{q}_{1}\right) \delta\left( \mathbf{p}_{1}-\mathbf{q}_{1}\right) ,$$ and$$\begin{aligned}
& A_{j}^{ext}(\mathbf{p}_{1}-\mathbf{q}_{1})\varphi_{s_{1}}^{\dagger}\left(
i\left[ \overrightarrow{\mathbf{\sigma}}_{1}\times\left( \mathbf{p}_{1}-\mathbf{q}_{1}\right) \right] +\mathbf{q}_{1}+\mathbf{p}_{1}\right)
_{j}\varphi_{\sigma_{1}}\\
& =-\left( 2\pi\right) ^{3/2}B\left( \varphi_{s_{1}}^{\dagger}\sigma
_{1z}\varphi_{\sigma_{1}}+\delta_{s_{1}\sigma_{1}}\widehat{L}_{1z}\left(
\mathbf{q}_{1}\right) \right) \delta^{3}\left( \mathbf{p}_{1}-\mathbf{q}_{1}\right) ,\nonumber\end{aligned}$$ where $\widehat{L}_{1z}\left( \mathbf{q}_{1}\right) $ is the $z$-component of the angular momentum operator of the particle with mass $m_{1}$$$\widehat{L}_{1z}\left( \mathbf{q}_{1}\right) =-i\left( q_{1x}\frac
{\partial}{\partial q_{1y}}-q_{1y}\frac{\partial}{\partial q_{1x}}\right) .$$ Taking $\varphi_{s_{1}}$ to be the eigenstates of the spin operator $\widehat{S}_{1z}=\frac{1}{2}\widehat{\sigma}_{1z}$, and using a similar procedure for the second particle, we obtain$$\begin{aligned}
& \mathcal{M}_{s_{1}s_{2}\sigma_{1}\sigma_{2}}^{ext}\left( \mathbf{p}_{1},\mathbf{p}_{2},\mathbf{q}_{1}\mathbf{,q}_{2}\right) \\
& =-\frac{\left( 2\pi\right) ^{3}B}{2c}\left(
\begin{array}
[c]{c}\frac{Q_{1}}{m_{1}}\left( 2\varphi_{s_{1}}^{\dagger}\widehat{S}_{1z}\varphi_{\sigma_{1}}+\delta_{s_{1}\sigma_{1}}\widehat{L}_{1z}\left(
\mathbf{q}_{1}\right) \right) \delta_{s_{2}\sigma_{2}}\delta^{3}\left(
\mathbf{p}_{1}-\mathbf{q}_{1}\right) \\
-\frac{Q_{2}}{m_{2}}\left( 2\chi_{\sigma_{2}}^{\dagger}\widehat{S}_{2z}\chi_{s_{2}}+\delta_{\sigma_{2}s_{2}}\widehat{L}_{2z}\left( \mathbf{q}_{2}\right) \right) \delta_{s_{1}\sigma_{1}}\delta^{3}\left( \mathbf{p}_{2}-\mathbf{q}_{2}\right)
\end{array}
\right) ,\nonumber\end{aligned}$$ or$$\begin{aligned}
& \mathcal{M}_{s_{1}s_{2}\sigma_{1}\sigma_{2}}^{ext}\left( \mathbf{p}_{1},\mathbf{p}_{2},\mathbf{q}_{1}\mathbf{,q}_{2}\right) \\
& =-\left( 2\pi\right) ^{3}B\left(
\begin{array}
[c]{c}\mu_{B1}\left( 2\tilde{m}_{\sigma_{1}}+\widehat{L}_{1z}\left( \mathbf{q}_{1}\right) \right) \delta^{3}\left( \mathbf{p}_{1}-\mathbf{q}_{1}\right)
\\
-\mu_{B2}\left( 2\tilde{m}_{\sigma_{2}}+\widehat{L}_{2z}\left(
\mathbf{q}_{2}\right) \right) \delta^{3}\left( \mathbf{p}_{2}-\mathbf{q}_{2}\right)
\end{array}
\right) \delta_{s_{2}\sigma_{2}}\delta_{s_{1}\sigma_{1}},\nonumber\end{aligned}$$ where the spin projection quantum numbers $\tilde{m}_{\sigma}$ can take the values $\pm1/2$. The quantities $\mu_{B1}$ and $\mu_{B2}$ are the Bohr magnetons" defined in the previous section. As expected, a unit of spin interacts with a magnetic field twice as strongly as a unit of orbital angular momentum.
By going to the next order in the expansion of the invariant $\mathcal{M}$ matrix one can obtain self-energy corrections, which lead to divergent loop integrals that have to be cured by charge renormalization. The vertex term modifies the Dirac value of the magnetic moment by a factor $\left(
1+k\right) $, where $k$ is the anomaly (Schwinger correction). This factor can be included in our calculation by a replacement $2 \tilde m_{\sigma_{1}}$ and $2 \tilde m_{\sigma_{2}}$ in Eq. (18) by $g_{s_{1}}\tilde m_{\sigma
_{1}}$ and $g_{s_{2}}\tilde m_{\sigma_{2}}$ respectively, where $g_{s_{1,2}}/2=1+k_{1,2}$. The anomaly is the lowest-order QED correction to the $g$ factor $\bigtriangleup g_{s_{12}}^{QED}=2k_{1,2}$ in Eq. (5).
0.8truecm
**[3. Partial-wave decomposition and radial wave equations]{}**
0.4truecm
The present work is an extension of Ref. \[18\], in which the partial-wave decomposition of the wave equation has been provided. The external magnetic field is treated as a first-order perturbation which implies that the quantum labels for the eigenstates do not change. The restrictions on the magnetic field strength to justify a perturbative treatment of Eq.(18) are$$B\lesssim\min\left[ \frac{\alpha^{4}m_{r}c^{2}}{\mu_{B1}},\frac{\alpha
^{4}m_{r}c^{2}}{\mu_{B2}}\right] ,$$ where $\alpha=Q_{1}Q_{2}/4\pi$, and $m_{r}=m_{1}m_{2}/\left( m_{1}+m_{2}\right) $ is the reduced mass. A more explicit restriction on $B$ will be presented in Section 4.
As outlined in Ref. \[18\] the trial state (6) is taken to be an eigenstate of total linear momentum $\widehat{\mathbf{P}}$, total angular momentum squared $\widehat{\mathbf{J}}^{2}$, its projection $\widehat{J}_{3}$, and parity $\widehat{\mathcal{P}}$. It is natural to work in the rest frame, where the total linear momentum vanishes. In this frame the adjustable functions take the form $F_{s_{1}s_{2}}(\mathbf{p}_{1},\mathbf{p}_{2})=\delta\left(
\mathbf{p}_{1}+\mathbf{p}_{2}\right) F_{s_{1}s_{2}}(\mathbf{p}_{1})$, where $F_{s_{1}s_{2}}(\mathbf{p}_{1})$ (using $\mathbf{p}_{1} \equiv\mathbf{p}$) can be written as $$F_{s_{1}s_{2}}(\mathbf{p})=\sum_{\ell_{s_{1}s_{2}}}\sum_{m_{s_{1}s_{2}}}f_{s_{1}s_{2}}^{\ell_{s_{1}s_{2}}m_{s_{1}s_{2}}}\left( p\right)
Y_{\ell_{s_{1}s_{2}}}^{m_{s_{1}s_{2}}}(\widehat{\mathbf{p}}),$$ and $Y_{\ell_{s_{1}s_{2}}}^{m_{s_{1}s_{2}}}(\widehat{\mathbf{p}})$ are the usual spherical harmonics. Here and henceforth we will use the notation $p=\left\vert \mathbf{p}\right\vert $ etc., while four-vectors will be written as $p^{\mu}$. The orbital indices $\ell_{s_{1}s_{2}}$and $m_{s_{1}s_{2}}$ and the radial functions $f_{s_{1}s_{2}}^{\ell_{s_{1}s_{2}}m_{s_{1}s_{2}}}\left(
p\right) $ depend on the spin variables $s_{1}$ and $s_{2}$. In the rest frame, the operators $\widehat{L}_{1z}\left( \mathbf{q}\right) $ and $\widehat{L}_{2z}\left( \mathbf{q}\right) $ can be expressed in terms of the orbital angular momentum operator, $\widehat{L}_{z}\left( \mathbf{q}\right) $, of the relative motion: $$\widehat{L}_{1z}\left( \mathbf{q}\right) =\frac{m_{2}}{m_{1}+m_{2}}\widehat{L}_{z}\left( \mathbf{q}\right) ,\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\widehat{L}_{2z}\left( -\mathbf{q}\right) =\frac{m_{1}}{m_{1}+m_{2}}\widehat{L}_{z}\left( \mathbf{q}\right) .$$
The substitution of the partial-wave expansion (20) into the rest-frame form of Ansatz (6) leads to two categories of relations among the adjustable functions $F_{s_{1}s_{2}}(\mathbf{p})$:
0.4truecm
*(i) The spin-mixed (quasi-singlet and quasi-triplet) states*
In this case we have $\ell_{s_{1}s_{2}}\equiv\ell=J$, and the general solution under the condition of well-defined $\widehat{\mathbf{P}}$, $\widehat{\mathbf{J}}^{2}$, $\widehat{J}_{3}$, and $\widehat{\mathcal{P}}$ can be expressed with the help of Dirac $\Gamma$ matrices as \[18\] $$F_{s_{1}s_{2}}\left( \mathbf{p}\right) =\overline{u}_{\mathbf{p}s_{1}}\Gamma_{m_{s_{1}s_{2}}}^{J\left( sg\right) }\left( \widehat{\mathbf{p}}\right) V_{-\mathbf{p}s_{2}}f_{J}^{\left( sg\right) }(p)+\overline
{u}_{\mathbf{p}s_{1}}\Gamma_{m_{s_{1}s_{2}}}^{J\left( tr\right) }\left(
\widehat{\mathbf{p}}\right) V_{-\mathbf{p}s_{2}}f_{J}^{\left( tr\right)
}(p).$$ Here $f_{J}^{\left( sg\right) }(p)$ and $f_{J}^{\left( tr\right) }(p)$ are radial functions to be determined. They represent the contributions of spin-singlet and spin-triplet states, *i.e.*, the total spin is not conserved in general.
0.4truecm
*(ii) The* $\ell$-*mixed triplet states*
These states occur for $\ell_{s_{1}s_{2}}\equiv\ell=J\mp1$. Their radial decomposition can be written as$$F_{s_{1}s_{2}}\left( \mathbf{p}\right) =\overline{u}_{\mathbf{p}s_{1}}\Gamma_{m_{s_{1}s_{2}}}^{J-1}\left( \widehat{\mathbf{p}}\right)
V_{-\mathbf{p}s_{2}}f_{J-1}(p)+\overline{u}_{\mathbf{p}s_{1}}\Gamma
_{m_{s_{1}s_{2}}}^{J+1}\left( \widehat{\mathbf{p}}\right) V_{-\mathbf{p}s_{2}}f_{J+1}(p).$$ The system in these states is characterized by $J,$ $m_{J},$ and $\mathcal{P}=(-1)^{J}$, and $\ell$ is not a good quantum number. The two radial functions $f_{J-1}(p)$ and $f_{J+1}(p)$ correspond to the cases $\ell=J-1$ and $\ell=J+1$. Mixing of this type occurs only for principal quantum number $n \ge3$.
From the variational method we obtain a system of coupled radial equations expressed in matrix form as $$\left( \omega_{p}+\Omega_{p}-E\right) \mathbb{F}\left( p\right)
=\frac{m_{1}m_{2}}{\left( 2\pi\right) ^{3}}\int\frac{q^{2}dq}{\sqrt
{\omega_{p}\omega_{q}\Omega_{p}\Omega_{q}}}\mathbb{K}\left( p,q\right)
\mathbb{F}\left( q\right) ,$$ where $\omega_{p}^{2}=\mathbf{p}^{2}+m_{1}^{2}$ and $\Omega_{p}^{2}=\mathbf{p}^{2}+m_{2}^{2}$, and $q=\left\vert \mathbf{q}\right\vert $ as already mentioned. Here $\mathbb{F}\left( p\right) $ and $\mathbb{K}\left(
p,q\right) $ are matrices composed of radial functions and kernels respectively. The kernel matrix $\mathbb{K}=\mathbb{K}^{ope}+\mathbb{K}^{ext}$ is made up of one-photon-exchange and external-field parts. Explicit expressions for $\mathbb{K}^{ope}$ can be found in Ref.\[18\], while the external-field contributions are calculated in this work.
For the spin-mixed states the two-component Fock-space amplitude is given as $$\mathbb{F}\left( p\right) =\left[
\begin{array}
[c]{c}f_{J}^{\left( sg\right) }(p)\\
f_{J}^{\left( tr\right) }(p)
\end{array}
\right] .$$ The equations imply a mixing of spin and radial variables, and the radial equations are usually coupled. We apply a unitary transformation with rotation angle $\beta$ to the spin part of function (22) to diagonalize the kernel-matrix. The diagonalization can be carried out for arbitrary $p$ and $q$ (cf. Eq. (55) in the Appendix), and defines a new quasi-spin basis $$\left\vert s_{1},s_{2},\ell,\widetilde{s},J,m_{J}\right\rangle =C_{1}\left\vert s_{1},s_{2},\ell,S=0,J,m_{J}\right\rangle +C_{2}\left\vert
s_{1},s_{2},\ell,S=1,J,m_{J}\right\rangle ,$$ where $\ell=J$, $S$ is the total spin of the system, and $\widetilde{s}=0$ for quasi-singlet and $\widetilde{s}=1$ for quasi-triplet states. The coefficients used to express the new basis states in terms of the previously defined singlet and triplet states are found to be $C_{1}=\sqrt{\left( 1+\xi\right)
/2}$, $C_{2}=-\sqrt{\left( 1-\xi\right) /2}$, for the quasi-singlet states, and $C_{1}=\sqrt{\left( 1-\xi\right) /2}$, $C_{2}=\sqrt{\left(
1+\xi\right) /2}$ for the quasi-triplet states. Here the rotation angle $\beta$ has been replaced for convenience according to $\tan{2\beta}=\sqrt{1-\xi^{2}}/\xi$.
The quasi-singlet and quasi-triplet states are both characterized by the same quantum numbers $J$, $m_{J}$ and $\mathcal{P}=(-1)^{J+1}$, and they mix the states given in the $LS$ coupling representation. The states are labeled for convenience not by the quasi-spin $z$-projection $t_{3}=\mp1/2$, but rather by $\widetilde{s}=t_{3}+1/2$, which takes on the values of $0,1$. In the Appendix the kernels for spin-mixed states are given explicitly in order to solve for the angle $\beta$, *i.e.*, to determine the $\xi$-values.
In the limit $m_{2}>>m_{1}$ the total angular momenta of the first and the second particles are $j_{1}=\ell_{1}\pm1/2$, $j_{2}=s_{2}=1/2$, where $\ell_{1}=\ell$. In this case $j_{1}$ can be used as a good quantum number, and the role of the indices $\tilde s_{s}$, $\tilde s_{t}$ are played by $j_{1}=\ell_{1}+1/2$ and $j_{1}=\ell_{1}-1/2$ respectively. In this case the coefficients $C_{1}$ and $C_{2}$ reduce to C-G coefficients $$C_{1,2}=\left( -1\right) ^{1/2+1/2+\ell_{1}+j_{1}}\sqrt{\left( 2S+1\right)
\left( 2j_{1}+1\right) }\left\{
\begin{array}
[c]{ccc}1/2 & 1/2 & S\\
\ell_{1} & \ell_{1} & j_{1}\end{array}
\right\} .$$ Note that the one-body limit corresponds to the $j_{1}j_{2}$ coupling representation, which can not be used in the general case of arbitrary masses since $j_{1}$ and $j_{2}$ are not independent (they are related through the common angular momentum $\ell$). For positronium the quasi-states become true singlet ($C_{2}=0$) and triplet ($C_{1}=0$) states with different charge conjugation quantum numbers.
We now proceed to calculate the kernels $\mathcal{K}_{mn}^{ext}\left(
p,q\right) $ associated with the classical external field $A_{\mu}^{ext}$. Using Eq. (9) for $\mathcal{M}_{s_{1}s_{2}\sigma_{1}\sigma_{2}}^{ext}$ taken in the rest frame, we obtain$$\begin{aligned}
& \mathcal{K}_{mn}^{ext}\left( p,q\right) =-\frac{\left( \pi/2\right)
^{3/2}}{N\left( m_{1}m_{2}\right) ^{2}}\int d^{3}\widehat{\mathbf{p}}d^{3}\widehat{\mathbf{q}}\\
& \times Tr\left(
\begin{array}
[c]{c}Q_{1}\sqrt{\Omega_{q}\Omega_{q}}A_{\mu}^{ext}(\mathbf{p}-\mathbf{q})\left(
\gamma^{\lambda}q_{\lambda}+m_{1}\right) \gamma^{\mu}\left( \gamma^{\lambda
}q_{\lambda}+m_{1}\right) \Gamma^{n}\left( \widehat{\mathbf{q}}\right)
\left( \gamma^{\lambda}\widetilde{q}_{\lambda}-m_{2}\right) \Gamma^{\prime
m}\left( \widehat{\mathbf{p}}\right) \\
-Q_{2}\sqrt{\omega_{p}\omega_{p}}A_{\mu}^{ext}(\mathbf{q}-\mathbf{p})\left(
\gamma^{\lambda}q_{\lambda}+m_{1}\right) \Gamma^{n}\left( \widehat
{\mathbf{q}}\right) \left( \gamma^{\lambda}\widetilde{q}_{\lambda}-m_{2}\right) \gamma^{\mu}\left( \gamma^{\lambda}\widetilde{q}_{\lambda
}-m_{2}\right) \Gamma^{\prime m}\left( \widehat{\mathbf{p}}\right)
\end{array}
\right) ,\nonumber\end{aligned}$$ where $q=\left( \omega_{p},\mathbf{q}\right) $, and $\widetilde{q}=\left(
\Omega_{q},-\mathbf{q}\right) $. The $\Gamma$ -matrices correspond to the various $J^{\mathcal{P}}$ states. The evaluation of these kernels would allow one to obtain all relativistic corrections to the $g$-factor (5), however this is a formidable task. To determine the lowest-order effect it is sufficient to use the nonrelativistic limit ($q^{2}/m^{2}<<1$). In this case the kernels (28) take the form$$\begin{aligned}
& \mathcal{K}_{mn}^{ext}\left( p,q\right) =-\frac{\left( \pi/2\right)
^{3/2}}{N}\int d^{3}\widehat{\mathbf{p}}d^{3}\widehat{\mathbf{q}}\\
& \times Tr\left(
\begin{array}
[c]{c}Q_{1}A_{\mu}^{ext}(\mathbf{p}-\mathbf{q})\left( \gamma^{0}+I\right)
\gamma^{\mu}\left( \gamma^{0}+I\right) \Gamma^{n}\left( \widehat
{\mathbf{q}}\right) \left( \gamma^{0}-I\right) \Gamma^{\prime m}\left(
\widehat{\mathbf{p}}\right) \\
-Q_{2}A_{\mu}^{ext}(\mathbf{q}-\mathbf{p})\left( \gamma^{0}+I\right)
\Gamma^{n}\left( \widehat{\mathbf{q}}\right) \left( \gamma^{0}-I\right)
\gamma^{\mu}\left( \gamma^{0}-I\right) \Gamma^{\prime m}\left(
\widehat{\mathbf{p}}\right)
\end{array}
\right) .\nonumber\end{aligned}$$ These are evaluated for a stationary uniform magnetic field (10). The results are given separately for the two types of states:
*(i) The spin-mixed states* ($\ell
=J,\;\ J\geq1,\;\mathcal{P}=(-1)^{J+1}$)
In contrast to $\mathbb{K}^{\left( ope\right) }\left( p,q\right)
$ the kernel matrix $\mathbb{K}^{\left( ext\right) }\left( p,q\right) $ is not diagonal in the basis of the quasi-singlet $\left\vert sg_{q}\right\rangle
$ and quasi-triplet $\left\vert tr_{q}\right\rangle $ states, and can be written as $$\begin{aligned}
& \mathcal{K}_{11}^{\left( ext\right) }\left( p,q\right) \\
& =-\frac{\left( 2\pi\right) ^{3}}{2c}\left(
\begin{array}
[c]{c}\frac{Q_{1}}{m_{1}}\left( \left( 1-\frac{1-\xi}{2J\left( J+1\right)
}\right) \frac{m_{2}}{m_{1}+m_{2}}+\frac{g_{s_{1}}}{2}\left( \frac{1-\xi
}{2J\left( J+1\right) }-2\frac{\left\vert m_{1}-m_{2}\right\vert }{m_{1}+m_{2}}\xi\right) \right) \\
-\frac{Q_{2}}{m_{2}}\left( \left( 1-\frac{1-\xi}{2J\left( J+1\right)
}\right) \frac{m_{1}}{m_{1}+m_{2}}+\frac{g_{s_{2}}}{2}\left( \frac{1-\xi
}{2J\left( J+1\right) }-2\frac{\left\vert m_{1}-m_{2}\right\vert }{m_{1}+m_{2}}\xi\right) \right)
\end{array}
\right) Bm_{J},\nonumber\end{aligned}$$$$\begin{aligned}
& \mathcal{K}_{22}^{\left( ext\right) }\left( p,q\right) \\
& =-\frac{\left( 2\pi\right) ^{3}}{2c}\left(
\begin{array}
[c]{c}\frac{Q_{1}}{2m_{1}c}\left( \left( 1-\frac{1+\xi}{2J\left( J+1\right)
}\right) \frac{m_{2}}{m_{1}+m_{2}}+\frac{g_{s_{1}}}{2}\left( \frac{1+\xi
}{2J\left( J+1\right) }+2\frac{\left\vert m_{1}-m_{2}\right\vert }{m_{1}+m_{2}}\xi\right) \right) \\
-\frac{Q_{2}}{2m_{2}c}\left( \left( 1-\frac{1+\xi}{2J\left( J+1\right)
}\right) \frac{m_{1}}{m_{1}+m_{2}}+\frac{g_{s_{2}}}{2}\left( \frac{1+\xi
}{2J\left( J+1\right) }+2\frac{\left\vert m_{1}-m_{2}\right\vert }{m_{1}+m_{2}}\xi\right) \right)
\end{array}
\right) Bm_{J},\nonumber\end{aligned}$$$$\begin{aligned}
\mathcal{K}_{12}^{\left( ext\right) }\left( p,q\right) & =\mathcal{K}_{21}^{\left( ext\right) }\left( p,q\right) \\
& =-\frac{\left( 2\pi\right) ^{3}}{2c}\left(
\begin{array}
[c]{c}\frac{Q_{1}}{m_{1}}\left( \frac{\xi}{\sqrt{J\left( J+1\right) }}\frac{g_{s_{1}}}{2}+2\left( \frac{m_{1}-m_{2}}{m_{1}+m_{2}}\right) ^{2}\xi^{2}\left( 1-\frac{g_{s_{1}}}{2}\right) \right) \\
-\frac{Q_{2}}{m_{2}}\left( \frac{\xi}{\sqrt{J\left( J+1\right) }}\frac{g_{s_{2}}}{2}+2\left( \frac{m_{1}-m_{2}}{m_{1}+m_{2}}\right) ^{2}\xi^{2}\left( 1-\frac{g_{s_{2}}}{2}\right) \right)
\end{array}
\right) Bm_{J}.\nonumber\end{aligned}$$ Thus, it couples the system (24).
0.2truecm
*(ii) The pure triplet and* $\ell$*-mixed states* ($\ell=J\mp1,\;\ J\geq1,\;\mathcal{P}=(-1)^{J}$)
The system (24) can not be decoupled for these states, and the matrix $\mathbb{K}^{\left( ope\right) }\left( p,q\right) $ is not diagonal \[19\]. The magnetic part of the kernel is, however, diagonal$$\mathbb{K}^{\left( ext\right) }\left( p,q\right) =-\frac{\left(
2\pi\right) ^{3}}{2c}\left( \frac{Q_{1}}{m_{1}}-\frac{Q_{2}}{m_{2}}\right)
\left[
\begin{array}
[c]{cc}1 & 0\\
0 & 1
\end{array}
\right] Bm_{J}.$$ All kernels $\mathbb{K}^{\left( ext\right) }$ vanish in the case of equal masses and opposite charges ($Q_{1}=Q_{2}$), as occurs in the positronium case, where magnetic effects appear only in $O\left( B^{2}\right) $ \[23\].
0.8truecm
**[4. HFS to ]{}**$O\left( \alpha^{4}\right) $ **[order in a magnetic field ]{}**
0.4truecm
To obtain results for energy levels to $O\left( \alpha^{4}\right) $ we solve the radial equations (24) perturbatively using hydrogen-like radial functions (non-relativistic Schrödinger form $f_{n,J,m_{J}}^{Sch}\left( p\right)
$) in momentum space \[9\]. The energy eigenvalues can be calculated from the matrix equation, which follows from (24)$$\begin{aligned}
E\int p^{2}dp\mathbb{F}^{\dagger}\left( p\right) \mathbb{F}\left( p\right)
& =\int p^{2}dp\left( \omega_{p}+\Omega_{p}\right) \mathbb{F}^{\dagger
}\left( p\right) \mathbb{F}\left( p\right) \\
& -\frac{m_{1}m_{2}}{\left( 2\pi\right) ^{3}}\int_{0}^{\infty}\frac
{p^{2}dp}{\sqrt{\omega_{p}\Omega_{p}}}\int_{0}^{\infty}\frac{q^{2}dq}{\sqrt{\omega_{q}\Omega_{q}}}\mathbb{F}^{\dagger}\left( p\right)
\mathbb{K}\left( p,q\right) \mathbb{F}\left( q\right) ,\nonumber\end{aligned}$$ If the system (24) has been decoupled, or the contribution of nondiagonal elements of the $\mathbb{K}\left( p,q\right) $ matrix with given radial functions in (34) is zero, Eq. (34) immediately gives the perturbative solution for the energy levels. As shown in Ref. \[19\], the contribution of the nondiagonal elements $\mathcal{K}_{12}^{ope}$ and $\mathcal{K}_{21}^{ope}$ in Eq. (34) to order $O\left( \alpha^{4}\right) $ is zero for the $\ell$-mixing states. Thus, in the present scheme the energy corrections for $\ell$-mixing states can be calculated independently for $\ell=J-1$ and $\ell=J+1$ states. As a result, all triplet states with $\ell=J\mp1$ can be treated as pure states. In the case of spin-mixed states the kernel matrix $\mathbb{K}^{ope}$ has been diagonalized in the basis of quasi-states (26), however the magnetic part of the interaction gives rise to the non-diagonal terms (32). Since we are solving the system (34) perturbatively, we can use a new basis $\left\vert ext\right\rangle =C_{1}^{\prime}\left\vert sg_{q}\right\rangle
+C_{2}^{\prime}\left\vert tr_{q}\right\rangle $ which mixes the quasi-states with arbitrary constants $C_{1}^{\prime}$ and $C_{2}^{\prime}$. This leads to a two-level problem with the solution $E_{n,J,m_{J}}=\left( H_{11}+H_{22}\right) /2\pm\left( \left( \left( H_{11}-H_{22}\right) /2\right)
^{2}+H_{12}H_{21}\right) ^{1/2}$, where $H_{11}=H_{11}^{ope}+H_{11}^{ext}$, $H_{22}=H_{22}^{ope}+H_{22}^{ext}$, $H_{12}=H_{21}=H_{12}^{ext}=H_{21}^{ext}$. In our case $\left\vert H_{11}-H_{22}\right\vert >>H_{12}H_{21}$, because the difference $\left\vert H_{11}-H_{22}\right\vert $ is of the order of the fine structure which dominates over the hyperfine splitting and the magnetic perturbation $H_{12}$. Therefore, we can approximate $E_{n,J,m_{J}}\approx
H_{11},\ H_{22}$.
The results are presented in the form$$\Delta E_{n,J,m_{J}}=E_{n,J,m_{J}}-\left( m_{1}+m_{2}\right) +\frac{\left(
Z\alpha\right) ^{2}m_{r}}{2n^{2}}=\Delta E_{n,J}\left( \alpha^{4}\right)
+\Delta E_{J,m_{J}}^{ext},$$ where $Q_{2}=Z Q_{1}$. The energy corrections $\Delta E_{n,J}\left(
\alpha^{4}\right) $ due to the kernels $\mathbb{K}^{\left( ope\right)
}\left( p,q\right) $ were obtained previously \[19\]. The corrections $\Delta
E_{n,J}\left( \alpha^{4}\right) $ contain spin-spin interactions that lead to the HFS which is illustrated in Fig. 1 for the low-lying excited states. A detailed analysis of the HFS to $O\left( \alpha^{4}\right) $ is provided in \[19\]. We note that the HFS of the $1S_{1/2}$ and $2S_{1/2}$ states is obtained in agreement with the known Fermi splittings \[9\], *i.e.*, $\Delta E_{HFS}\left( 1S_{1/2}\right) =\left( Z\alpha
\right) ^{4}m_{r}\left( 8m_{r}/3M\right) $, and $\Delta E_{HFS}\left(
2S_{1/2}\right) = \left( Z\alpha\right) ^{4}m_{r}\left( m_{r}/3M\right)
$, where $M=m_{1}+m_{2}$. The HFS of states with $\ell>0$, however, is more complicated \[19\]. In standard spectroscopic notation it has the form $$\begin{aligned}
\Delta E_{HFS}\left( n,\ell,s_{s}\right) & \equiv\Delta E_{n,J=\ell
+1}-\Delta E_{n,J=\ell,s_{s}}\\
& =\frac{\left( Z\alpha\right) ^{4}m_{r}}{n^{3}}\frac{1}{2\ell+1}\left(
\frac{2\ell+1-\xi^{-1}}{4\ell\left( \ell+1\right) }+\frac{2m_{r}}{M}\frac
{1}{2\ell+3}\right) ,\nonumber\end{aligned}$$$$\begin{aligned}
\Delta E_{HFS}\left( n,\ell,s_{t}\right) & \equiv\Delta E_{n,J=\ell,s_{t}}-\Delta E_{n,J=\ell-1}\\
& =\frac{\left( Z\alpha\right) ^{4}m_{r}}{n^{3}}\frac{1}{2\ell+1}\left(
\frac{2\ell+1-\xi^{-1}}{4\ell\left( \ell+1\right) }+\frac{2m_{r}}{M}\frac
{1}{2\ell-1}\right) ,\nonumber\end{aligned}$$ where the quantity $\xi$ is defined by Eq. (56), but with the quantum number $J$ replaced by $\ell$. The formulae (36) and (37) are valid for all quantum numbers $n$, $\ell$ and for any mass values $m_{1}, m_{2}$. The weak external field further splits the energy levels. Eqs. (36) and (37) give excellent agreement with experiment for the HFS \[19\].
The energy corrections $\Delta E_{J,m_{J}}^{ext}$ remove the degeneracy with respect to the $m_{J}$ quantum number. The solution of Eq. (34) in the above-made approximation can be written in the form of Eq. (1) for all states.
For all *pure states* ($\ell=J\mp1$) we obtain the following results:
for $\ell=J-1$:$$g_{1,2}=1-\frac{m_{1,2}}{m_{1}+m_{2}}\frac{J-1}{J}+\left( \frac{g_{s_{1,2}}}{2}-1\right) \frac{1}{J},$$ for $\ell=J+1$:$$g_{1,2}=1-\frac{m_{1,2}}{m_{1}+m_{2}}\frac{J+2}{J+1}-\left( \frac{g_{s_{1,2}}}{2}-1\right) \frac{1}{J+1} .$$
For *spin–mixed* states $\ell=J\neq0$ the solution of Eq. (34), as mentioned, reduces to a standard two-energy level problem. The diagonal elements of the kernel matrix give the first-order Zeeman splitting (in $O\left( B\right) $) in the quasi-spin representation (26), which was used to derive the HFS energies (36) and (37). Note that the non-diagonal elements give a contribution to higher-order Zeeman splitting corrections.
To first order in the magnetic field strength we obtain the Landé factors to be$$g_{1}=\frac{m_{2}}{m_{1}+m_{2}}\left( 1-\frac{1\pm\xi}{2J\left( J+1\right)
}\right) +\frac{g_{s_{1}}}{2}\left( \frac{1\pm\xi}{2J\left( J+1\right)
}\pm2\frac{\left\vert m_{1}-m_{2}\right\vert }{m_{1}+m_{2}}\xi\right) ,$$$$g_{2}=\frac{m_{1}}{m_{1}+m_{2}}\left( 1-\frac{1\mp\xi}{2J\left( J+1\right)
}\right) +\frac{g_{s_{2}}}{2}\left( \frac{1\mp\xi}{2J\left( J+1\right)
}\mp2\frac{\left\vert m_{1}-m_{2}\right\vert }{m_{1}+m_{2}}\xi\right) ,$$ where the upper sign is taken for $sg_{q}$ and lower sign for $tr_{q}$ states respectively. Our expressions (40-41) are symmetrical with respect to the masses of the two particles. Obviously all these first-order Zeeman corrections, $\Delta E_{J,m_{J}}^{ext}$, vanish for the positronium case ($m_{1}=m_{2}=m_{e},$ $Z=1$), as expected. The intrinsic factors $g_{s_{1,2}}$ associated with the spins of the individual particles can include QED corrections.
In the case when $m_{2}>>m_{1}$ our general results agree with the result from Eqs. (2,4) in which the orbital motion of the heavy particle is ignored. It is only in this limit (as discussed below Eq. (27)), that the total angular momenta of the individual particles are not related through the common angular momentum $\ell$, and can be written as $j_{1}=\ell\pm1/2$, and $j_{2}=1/2$. In $j_{1}$-$j_{2}$ coupling, the eigenstates are taken to be the eigenstates of the operators $\widehat{\mathbf{j}}_{1}^{2}=\left( \widehat{\mathbf{L}}+\widehat{\mathbf{s}}_{1}\right) ^{2}$, $\widehat{\mathbf{j}}_{2}^{2}=\widehat{\mathbf{s}}_{2}^{2}$, $\widehat{\mathbf{J}}^{2}$, and $\widehat{J}_{z}$, and are designated as $\left\vert j_{1}j_{2}Jm_{J}\right\rangle $ in contrast to the spin-mixed $\left\vert LsJm_{J}\right\rangle $ and pure states $\left\vert LSJm_{J}\right\rangle $ which diagonalize the expectation value of the Hamiltonian to order $O\left(
\alpha^{4}\right) $. To facilitate the comparison we make the following replacement of quantum numbers: $F\rightarrow J$, $J\rightarrow j_{1}$, $L\rightarrow\ell_{1}=\ell$, $S\rightarrow s_{1}$, $I\rightarrow s_{2}$. It follows that for all pure states $\ell=J\mp1$, formulae (38-39) and (2-4) give the same result, namely, $$g_{1}=1+\left( \frac{g_{s_{1}}}{2}-1\right) \frac{1}{J},\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ g_{2}=\frac{g_{s_{2}}}{2}\frac{1}{J},$$ for $\ell=j_{1}-1/2\overset{or}{=}J-1$ and $$g_{1}=1-\left( \frac{g_{s_{1}}}{2}-1\right) \frac{1}{J+1},\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ g_{2}=-\frac{g_{s_{2}}}{2}\frac{1}{J+1}$$ for $\ell=j_{1}+1/2\overset{or}{=}J+1$.
In the limit $m_{2}>>m_{1}$ the energy levels of spin-mixed states $\Delta
E_{J,m_{J}}^{ext\left( sg_{q}\right) }$ and $\Delta E_{J,m_{J}}^{ext\left(
tr_{q}\right) }$ reduce to $\Delta E_{j_{1}=\ell+1/2,J,m_{J}}^{ext}$ and $\Delta E_{j_{1}=\ell-1/2,J,m_{J}}^{ext}$ respectively, and the Landé factors given by (40-41) take the form $$g_{1}=\frac{2J+3}{2J+1}+\left( \frac{g_{s_{1}}}{2}-1\right) \frac{1}{J},\ \ \ \ g_{2}=-\frac{1}{J+1}-\left( \frac{g_{s_{2}}}{2}-1\right)
\frac{1}{J+1},$$ and for $\ell=j_{1}+1/2\overset{or}{=}J\ $($tr_{q}$)$$g_{1}=\frac{2J-1}{2J+1}-\left( \frac{g_{s_{1}}}{2}-1\right) \frac{1}{J+1},\ \ \ \ \ \ g_{2}=\frac{1}{J}+\left( \frac{g_{s_{2}}}{2}-1\right)
\frac{1}{J}$$ for $\ell=j_{1}-1/2\overset{or}{=}J\ $($sg_{q}$). Here the decoupling angle $\beta$ is given by $\xi\approx1/\left( 2\ell+1\right) $ in the $m_{2}>>m_{1}$ case.
Formula (4) gives a similar result for the second particle, but for the lighter particle Eq. (2) yields$$g_{1}=\frac{2J+3}{2J+1}+\left( \frac{g_{s_{1}}}{2}-1\right) \frac
{2J+3}{\left( 2J+1\right) \left( J+1\right) }$$ for ($sg_{q}$) states, and$$g_{1}=\frac{2J-1}{2J+1}-\left( \frac{g_{s_{1}}}{2}-1\right) \frac
{2J-1}{J\left( 2J+1\right) }$$ for ($tr_{q}$) states. This result agrees with (44-45) only in the particular case of $g_{s_{1}}=2$. Note that most theoretical and experimental results are concerned with $nS_{1/2}\left( J=1\right) $ states for which the mass ratiocorrection in (38) disappears. Thus our results will be most useful for $\ell>0$ states.
In Tables 1-3 we present results of our calculations of the $g$-factors for the first excited states in hydrogen, muonium, and muonic hydrogen respectively. Only states with non-zero total angular momentum are included. Eqs. (40-41) are used for the spin-mixed states $P_{1/2\left( J=1\right) }$, $P_{3/2\left( J=1\right) }$, $D_{3/2\left( J=2\right) }$, $D_{5/2\left(
J=2\right) }$, Eq. (38) is used for the pure state $P_{3/2\left( J=2\right)
}$.
0.4truecm
**Table 1.** $g$-factors for the electron ($g_{1}$) and proton ($g_{2}$) respectively in excited atomic hydrogen states. Results from the present calculation, Eqs. (38,40) for electrons, are compared with Eq. (2) in the top half of the table. For protons the bottom half displays the present results from Eqs.(38,41) in comparison with Eq. (4). Each row contains in the upper part the Landé factor where the intrinsic $g_{s}$-value is corrected for the anomaly (see text), while the numbers below are based upon the Dirac value $g_{s}=2$.
0.2truecm
$\begin{tabular}
[c]{||c|r|r|r|r|r||}\hline
$pe\^[-]{}$ & $P\_[1/2( J=1) ]{}$ & $P\_[3/2( J=1) ]{}$ &
$P\_[3/2( J=2) ]{}$ & $D\_[3/2( J=2) ]{}$ & $D\_[5/2( J=2) ]{}$\\\hline
$g\_[1]{}$ using Eqs.~(38), (40) & $
\[c\][c]{}0.33237\
0.33296
$ & $
\[c\][c]{}1.66740\
1.66622
$ & $
\[c\][c]{}1.00032\
0.99973
$ & $
\[c\][c]{}0.59912\
0.59951
$ & $
\[c\][c]{}1.40008\
1.39949
$\\\hline
$g\_[1]{}$ using Eq.~(2) & $
\[c\][c]{}0.33294\
1/3
$ & $
\[c\][c]{}1.66765\
5/3
$ & $
\[c\][c]{}1.00059\
1
$ & $
\[c\][c]{}0.59965\
3/5
$ & $
\[c\][c]{}1.39945\
7/5
$\\\hline
$g\_[2]{}$ using Eqs.~(38), (41) & $
\[c\][c]{}1.79321\
1.00036
$ & $
\[c\][c]{}-0.89597\
-0.49955
$ & $
\[c\][c]{}0.89670\
0.50027
$ & $
\[c\][c]{}0.89691\
0.50049
$ & $
\[c\][c]{}-0.59711\
-0.33283
$\\\hline
$g\_[2]{}$ using Eq.~(4) & $
\[c\][c]{}1.79285\
1
$ & $
\[c\][c]{}-0.89642\
-1/2
$ & $
\[c\][c]{}0.89642\
1/2
$ & $
\[c\][c]{}0.89642\
1/2
$ & $
\[c\][c]{}-0.59762\
-1/3
$\\\hline
\end{tabular}
\ $
0.4truecm
**Table 2.** Same as in Table 1, but for muonium. The Landé factor for the electron is $g_{1}$, and for the muon it is $g_{2}$.
0.2truecm
$\begin{tabular}
[c]{||c|r|r|r|r|r||}\hline
$\^[+]{}e\^[-]{}$ & $P\_[1/2( J=1) ]{}$ & $P\_[3/2( J=1) ]{}$
& $P\_[3/2( J=2) ]{}$ & $D\_[3/2( J=2) ]{}$ &
$D\_[5/2( J=2) ]{}$\\\hline
$g\_[1]{}$ using Eqs.~(38), (40) & $
\[c\][c]{}0.329451\
0.33004
$ & $
\[c\][c]{}1.66392\
1.66274
$ & $
\[c\][c]{}0.99818\
0.99759
$ & $
\[c\][c]{}0.59527\
0.59566
$ & $
\[c\][c]{}1.39610\
1.39551
$\\\hline
$g\_[1]{}$ using Eq.~(2) & $
\[c\][c]{}0.33294\
1/3
$ & $
\[c\][c]{}1.66765\
5/3
$ & $
\[c\][c]{}1.0006\
1
$ & $
\[c\][c]{}0.59965\
3/5
$ & $
\[c\][c]{}1.39945\
7/5
$\\\hline
$g\_[2]{}$ using Eqs.~(38), (41) & $
\[c\][c]{}1.00434\
1.00320
$ & $
\[c\][c]{}-0.49657\
-0.49598
$ & $
\[c\][c]{}0.50299\
0.50241
$ & $
\[c\][c]{}0.50491\
0.50433
$ & $
\[c\][c]{}-0.32923\
-0.32884
$\\\hline
$g\_[2]{}$ using Eq.~(4) & $
\[c\][c]{}1.00117\
1
$ & $
\[c\][c]{}-0.50058\
-1/2
$ & $
\[c\][c]{}0.50058\
1/2
$ & $
\[c\][c]{}0.50058\
1/2
$ & $
\[c\][c]{}-0.33372\
-1/3
$\\\hline
\end{tabular}
$
0.4truecm
**Table 3.** Same as in Table 1, but for muonic hydrogen. The Landé factor for the muon is $g_{1}$, and for the proton it is $g_{2}$.
0.2truecm
$\begin{tabular}
[c]{||c|r|r|r|r|r||}\hline
$p\^[+]{}\^[-]{}$ & $P\_[1/2( J=1) ]{}$ & $P\_[3/2( J=1) ]{}$
& $P\_[3/2( J=2) ]{}$ & $D\_[3/2( J=2) ]{}$ &
$D\_[5/2( J=2) ]{}$\\\hline
$g\_[1]{}$ using Eqs.~(38), (40) & $
\[c\][c]{}0.26707\
0.26765
$ & $
\[c\][c]{}1.58232\
1.58116
$ & $
\[c\][c]{}0.95019\
0.94960
$ & $
\[c\][c]{}0.50961\
0.51000
$ & $
\[c\][c]{}1.30580\
1.30521
$\\\hline
$g\_[1]{}$ using Eq.~(2) & $
\[c\][c]{}0.33295\
1/3
$ & $
\[c\][c]{}1.66764\
5/3
$ & $
\[c\][c]{}1.00058\
1
$ & $
\[c\][c]{}0.59965\
3/5
$ & $
\[c\][c]{}1.39946\
7/5
$\\\hline
$g\_[2]{}$ using Eqs.~(38), (41) & $
\[c\][c]{}1.85425\
1.06317
$ & $
\[c\][c]{}-0.80664\
-0.41198
$ & $
\[c\][c]{}0.94682\
0.55040
$ & $
\[c\][c]{}0.98584\
0.58982
$ & $
\[c\][c]{}-0.50225\
-0.23836
$\\\hline
$g\_[2]{}$ using Eq.~(4) & $
\[c\][c]{}1.79285\
1
$ & $
\[c\][c]{}-0.89642\
-1/2
$ & $
\[c\][c]{}0.89642\
1/2
$ & $
\[c\][c]{}0.89642\
1/2
$ & $
\[c\][c]{}-0.59762\
-1/3
$\\\hline
\end{tabular}
$
0.4truecm
Our calculations (given to five digits after the decimal point) are to be compared with the ($m_{2}\rightarrow\infty$) results (2-4). Upper values for each $g$-factor have taken into account the following anomalous magnetic moment values: $g_{e}/2=1.00118$, $g_{p}/2=1.792847$ $g_{\mu
}/2=1.001166$ \[1,9,14\]. The intrinsic proton anomaly reflects the fact that it is not a fundamental particle, while in the case of electrons and muons the lowest-order radiative correction was included. The lower values in each row were calculated with $g_{s_{1,2}}=2$. We used the following values for the mass ratios: $m_{p}/m_{e}\approx1836.15267$ and $m_{\mu}/m_{e}\approx
206.76828$ \[1,9,14\].
For the case of muonium we find that the deviations between the present results and those obtained from the one-body limit are in the few-percent range. The muon as the heavier of the two particles acquires a systematically increased Landé factor, while the values are always lowered for the electron.
For muonic hydrogen the effects are more pronounced, and range from 3 to 25 % for the states shown in Table 3. Only those results which take the anomalous magnetic moment of the proton into account should be considered as physically relevant. The systematics are similar to those shown in Table 2 for muonium, with the largest decrease in the Landé factor observed for the muon in the $P_{1/2(J=1)}$ state (-25 %), while the largest increase (19 %) for the proton $g$-value occurs in the $D_{5/2(J=2)}$ state.
For atomic hydrogen the effect is smallest due to the small $e/p$ mass ratio. Given that atomic spectroscopy is far more advanced in hydrogen than in muonic atoms one should not neglect these corrections. For the two above-mentioned states which are most affected we observe about 0.1 % deviations in the electron and proton Landé factors respectively.
As mentioned above, our results are applicable only in low magnetic fields, such that the hyperfine energy splitting exceeds the Zeeman splitting, namely$$B<<\frac{\Delta E_{HFS}\left( n,\ell\right) }{\mu_{B}^{\ast}g}.$$ Thus, formula (48), for $2P_{3/2}$ states, requires that $B<<300\ $gauss for muonium and $B<<100\ $gauss for hydrogen.
0.8truecm
**[5. Conclusion]{}**
0.4truecm
We have used the Hamiltonian variational method in reformulated QED to derive relativistic stationary-state equations for two-fermion systems in an external magnetic field. These equations can include interactions to any order of the coupling constant, at least in principle. The classification of the states follows naturally from the conserved quantum numbers which appear in the trial state (6). For given total angular momentum $J$ there are, in general, coupled equations, both for mixed-spin states, and for triplet mixed-$\ell$ states (cf. Eq. (24)). We present explicit forms for the kernels (momentum-space potentials) for the case of a constant, weak external magnetic field.
We solved the radial equations perturbatively to obtain the Zeeman splitting of the HFS to order $O\left( \alpha^{4}\right) $, and calculated the $g$-factors for the system of two bound fermions. Our results are applicable to all states (*i.e.* for all quantum numbers) and any fermion masses. In the limit $m_{2}>>m_{1}$ our formulae reproduce the well-known $g$-factor result. For the spin-mixed states, however, Eq. (2) is found to be not exact if the intrinsic magnetic moment is different from the Dirac value $g_{s_{1}}=
2$.
0.8truecm
[[**[Acknowledgment]{}**]{} ]{}
[0.4truecm ]{}
The financial support of the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada is gratefully acknowledged.
0.8truecm
**[Appendix. One-photon exchange kernels for the spin-mixed states to order ]{}**${\Large \alpha}^{4}$
0.4truecm
We use the notation $z=\left( p^{2}+q^{2}\right) /2pq$, and $\mathrm{Q}_{J}(z)$ is the Legendre function of the second kind \[24\]. The contributions of the various terms to the kernel are as follows ($\ell=J\ (J\geq
1),\;\mathcal{P}=(-1)^{J+1}$):
*(i)* orbital term$$\begin{aligned}
\mathcal{K}_{11}^{\left( orb\right) }\left( p,q\right) & =\mathcal{K}_{22}^{\left( orb\right) }\left( p,q\right) =\frac{2\pi Q_{1}Q_{2}}{pq}\mathrm{Q}_{J}(z)\\
& +\frac{\pi Q_{1}Q_{2}}{2m_{1}m_{2}}\left( \left( \frac{m_{1}}{m_{2}}+\frac{m_{2}}{m_{1}}-\left( J-1\right) \right) \left( \frac{p}{q}+\frac{q}{p}\right) \mathrm{Q}_{J}(z)+2\left( J+1\right) \mathrm{Q}_{J+1}(z)\right) ,\nonumber\end{aligned}$$ *(ii)* spin-orbit interaction$$\mathcal{K}_{11}^{\left( s-o\right) }\left( p,q\right) =0,$$$$\mathcal{K}_{12}^{\left( s-o\right) }(p,q)=-\frac{\pi Q_{1}Q_{2}}{2m_{1}m_{2}}\left\vert \frac{m_{1}}{m_{2}}-\frac{m_{2}}{m_{1}}\right\vert
\frac{2\sqrt{J\left( J+1\right) }}{2J+1}\left( \mathrm{Q}_{J+1}\left(
z\right) -\mathrm{Q}_{J-1}\left( z\right) \right) ,$$$$\mathcal{K}_{22}^{\left( s-o\right) }(p,q)=-\frac{\pi Q_{1}Q_{2}}{2m_{1}m_{2}}\left( \frac{m_{1}}{m_{2}}+\frac{m_{2}}{m_{1}}+4\right)
\frac{1}{2J+1}\left( \mathrm{Q}_{J+1}\left( z\right) -\mathrm{Q}_{J-1}\left( z\right) \right) ,$$ *(iii)* spin-spin interaction$$\mathcal{K}_{11}^{\left( s-s\right) }\left( p,q\right) =0,$$$$\mathcal{K}_{22}^{\left( s-s\right) }(p,q)=\frac{\pi Q_{1}Q_{2}}{m_{1}m_{2}}\frac{1}{2J+1}\left( \mathrm{Q}_{J+1}\left( z\right) -\mathrm{Q}_{J-1}\left( z\right) \right) .$$ The diagonalization condition $$\tan2\beta\left( \mathcal{K}_{22}\left( p,q\right) -\mathcal{K}_{11}\left(
p,q\right) \right) =2\mathcal{K}_{12}\left( p,q\right) .$$ determines the parameters $\beta$ and $\xi$.:$$\tan2\beta=2\left\vert \frac{m_{1}-m_{2}}{m_{1}+m_{2}}\right\vert
\sqrt{J\left( J+J\right) },$$ and$$\xi=\left( 4\left( \frac{m_{1}-m_{2}}{m_{1}+m_{2}}\right) ^{2}J\left(
J+1\right) +1\right) ^{-1/2}.$$ Therefore, we obtain the diagonalized kernels for the quasi-states$$\begin{aligned}
& \mathcal{K}^{\left( sg_{q}\right) },\mathcal{K}^{\left( tr_{q}\right)
}\\
& =\mathcal{K}_{11}^{\left( orb\right) }+\frac{\xi\pm1}{\sqrt{1-\xi^{2}}}\mathcal{K}_{12}^{\left( s-o\right) }\nonumber\\
& =\frac{2\pi Q_{1}Q_{2}}{pq}\mathrm{Q}_{J}(z)\nonumber\\
& +\frac{\pi Q_{1}Q_{2}}{2m_{1}m_{2}}\left( \left( \frac{m_{1}}{m_{2}}+\frac{m_{2}}{m_{1}}-\left( J-1\right) \right) \left( \frac{p}{q}+\frac{q}{p}\right) \mathrm{Q}_{J}(z)+2\left( J+1\right) \mathrm{Q}_{J+1}(z)\right) \nonumber\\
& -\frac{\pi Q_{1}Q_{2}}{2m_{1}m_{2}}\frac{\xi\pm1}{\xi\left( 2J+1\right)
}\left( \mathrm{Q}_{J+1}\left( z\right) -\mathrm{Q}_{J-1}\left( z\right)
\right) .\nonumber\end{aligned}$$ 0.2truecm
[0.8truecm ]{}
[[**[References]{}**]{} ]{}
[0.4truecm ]{}
1\. V. W. Hughes and G. zu Putlitz, in *Quantum Electrodynamics*, edited by T. Kinoshita (World Scientific, Singapore, 1990), p. 822.
2\. W. Liu, M. G. Boshier, S. Dhawan, O. van Dyck, P. Egan, X. Fei, M. GrossePerdekamp, V. W. Hughes, M. Janousch, K. Jungmann, D. Kawall, F.G. Mariam, C. Pillai, R. Prigl, G. zuPutlitz, I. Reinhard, W. Schwarz, P. A. Thompson, and K. A. Woodle, Phys. Rev. Lett. **82**, 711 (1999).
3\. D. E. Casperson, T. W. Crane, A. B. Denison, P.O. Egan, V.W. Hughes, F. G. Mariam, H. Orth, H. W. Reist, P. A. Souder, R. D. Stambaugh, P. A. Thompson, and G. zuPutlitz, Phys. Rev. Lett. **38**, 956 (1977).
4\. F. G. Mariam, W. Beer, P.R. Bolton, P. O. Egan, C. J. Gardner, V. W. Hughes, D. C. Lu, P. A. Souder, H. Orth, J. Vetter, U. Moser, and G. zuPutlitz, Phys. Rev. Lett. **49**, 993 (1982).
5\. V. Meyer, S. N. Bagayev, P. E. G. Baird, P. Bakule, M. G. Boshier, A. Breitruck, S. L. Cornish, S. Dychkov, G. H. Eaton, A. Grossman, D. Hubl, V. W. Hughes, K. Jungmann, I. C. Lane, Y.-W. Liu, D. Lucas, Y. Matyugin, J. Merkel, G. zuPutlitz, I. Reinhard, P. G. H. Sandars, R. Santra, P. V. Schmidt, C. A. Scott, W. T. Toner, M. Towrie, K. Trager, C. Wasser, L. Willmann, and V. Yakhontov, Phys. Rev. Lett. **84**, 1136 (2000).
6\. V. W. Hughes and T. Kinoshita, Rev. Mod. Phys. **71**, S133 (1999).
7\. A. Lopez Ariste, S. Tomczyk, R. Casini, Astrophysical Journal, **580**, 519 (2002).
8\. R. C. Isler, Plasma Phys. Control. Fusion **36**, 171 (1994).
9\. H. A. Bethe and E. E. Salpeter, *Quantum Mechanics of One- and Two-Electron Atoms* (Springer, 1957).
10\. M. Mizushima, *Quantum Mechanics of Atomic Spectra and Atomic Structure* (W. A. Benjamin, 1970). p.331.
11\. G. K. Woodgate, *Elementary atomic structure* (Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1980).
12\. G. Breit, Nature, 122, 649 (1928).
13\. S. A. Zapryagaev, Opt. Spectrosc. **47**, 9 (1979).
14\. S. G. Karshenboim, arXiv:hep-ph/0509010 v1 (2005).
15\. D. L. Moskovkin, N. S. Oreshkina, V. M. Shabaev, T. Beier, G. Plunien, W. Quint, and G. Soff, Phys. Rev. A **70**, 032105 (2004).
16\. N. Hermanspahn, H. Häffner, H. J. Kluge, W. Quint, S. Stahl, J Verdú, and G. Werth, Phys. Rev. Lett. **84**, 427 (2000).
17\. J. Verdú, S. Djekić, H. Haffner, S. Stahl, T. Valenzuela, M. Vogel, G. Werth, H. J. Kluge, W. Quint, Phys. Rev. Lett. **92**, 093002 (2004).
18\. A. G. Terekidi, J. W. Darewych, M. Horbatsch, arXiv: hep-th/0604078 (2006); Can. J. Phys. in press (2007).
19\. A. G. Terekidi, J. W. Darewych, Journal of Mathematical Physics **46**, 032302 (2005).
20\. A. G. Terekidi, J. W. Darewych, Journal of Mathematical Physics **45**, 1474 (2004).
21\. J. W. Darewych, Annales Fond. L. de Broglie (Paris) **23**, 15 (1998).
22\. J. W. Darewych, in *Causality and Locality in Modern Physics*, G Hunter et al. (eds.), p. 333, (Kluwer, 1998).
23\. V. B. Berestetskii, E. M. Lifshitz, L. P. Pitaevskii, *Relativistic Quantum Theory* (Pergamon Press, 1971). p.287.
24\. G. Arfken and H. Weber, *Mathematical Methods for Physicists* (Academic Press, 2001), p.805.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'We show that the distortion of the $(2,q)$-torus knot is not bounded linearly from below.'
author:
- Luca Studer
title: 'Note on the distortion of $(2,q)$-torus knots'
---
Introduction
============
The notion of distortion was introduced by Gromov [@GLP]. If $\gamma$ is a rectifiable simple closed curve in ${\mathbf{R}}^3$, then its distortion $\delta$ is defined as
$$\begin{aligned}
\delta(\gamma) = \sup_{v,w \in \gamma} \frac{d_{\gamma} (v,w)}{|v-w|},\end{aligned}$$
where $d_{\gamma}(v,w)$ denotes the length of the shorter arc connecting $v$ and $w$ in $\gamma$ and $| \cdot |$ denotes the euclidean norm on ${\mathbf{R}}^3$. For a knot $K$, its distortion $\delta(K)$ is defined as the infimum of $\delta(\gamma)$ over all rectifiable curves $\gamma$ in the isotopy class $K$. Gromov [@Gr] asked in 1983 if every knot $K$ has distortion $\delta (K) \leq 100$. The question was open for almost three decades until Pardon gave a negative answer. His work [@Pa] presents a lower bound for the distortion of simple closed curves on closed PL embedded surfaces with positive genus. Pardon showed that the minimal intersection number of such a curve with essential discs of the corresponding surface bounds the distortion of the curve from below. In particular for the $(p,q)$-torus knot he obtained the following bound.
Let $T_{p,q}$ denote the $(p,q)$-torus knot. Then $$\begin{aligned}
\delta(T_{p,q}) \geq \frac{1}{160} \min(p,q).\end{aligned}$$
By considering a standard embedding of $T_{p,p+1}$ on a torus of revolution one obtains $\delta(T_{p,p+1})\leq const \cdot p$, hence for $q=p+1$ Pardons result is sharp up to constants.
An alternative proof for the existence of families with unbounded distortion was given by Gromov and Guth [@GG]. In both works the answer of Gromovs question was obtained by an estimate of the conformal length, which is up to a constant a lower bound for the distortion of rectifiable closed curves. However the conformal length is in general not a good estimate for the distortion. For example one finds easily an embedding of the $(2,q)$-torus knot with conformal length $\leq 100$ and distortion $\geq q$ by looking at standard embeddings on a torus of revolution with suitable dimensions. In particular neither Pardon’s nor Gromov and Guth’s arguments yield lower bounds for $\delta(T_{2,q})$. While Pardon writes that surely $\lim_{q \to \infty} \delta(T_{2,q})= \infty$ and that there are to his knowledge no known embeddings of $T_{2,q}$ with sublinear distortion [@Pa] \[p.2\], Gromov and Guth [@GG] write that the distortion of $T_{2,q}$ appears to be $q$ up to constants \[p.33\]. In this article we show that the growth rate of $\delta(T_{2,q})$ is in fact sublinear in $q$.
\[T1\] Let $q \geq 50$. Then $\delta(T_{2,q}) \leq 7q/\log q$. In particular the distortion of the $(2,q)$-torus knot is not bounded linearly from below.
acknowledgments
===============
Most thank is owed to Sebastian Baader and Pierre Dehornoy for their inspiring introduction to the topic. I would like to thank John Pardon for useful comments on the presented example and Peter Feller, Filip Misev, Johannes Josi and Livio Liechti for many mathematical discussions. I also thank Paul Frischknecht for the pictures.
Proof
=====
In order to prove Theorem \[T1\] we need to give for every odd integer $q\geq 50$ an embedding $\gamma$ of the $(2,q)$-torus knot with distortion smaller or equal to $7q/\log q$. The idea is to use a logarithmic spiral. Let $S$ be a logarithmic spiral of unit length starting at its center $0\in {\mathbf{R}}^3$ and ending at some $u \in {\mathbf{R}}^3$. An elementary calculation shows that its distortion is equal to $1/|u|$. For another path $\alpha \subset {\mathbf{R}}^3$ of unit length and diameter $\leq 2 |u|$ with endpoints $\{v,w\} = \partial \alpha$ we get $$\begin{aligned}
\delta(\alpha)\geq \frac{d_{\alpha}(v, w)}{|v-w|}=\frac{1}{|v-w|} \geq \frac{1}{2|u|}=\frac{\delta(S)}{2}.\end{aligned}$$ Hence up to at most a factor $2$ the logarithmic spiral has the smallest distortion among all paths for a prescribed pathlength-pathdiameter-ratio. It seems therefore natural to pack the $q$ windings of the $(2,q)$-torus knot into a logarithmic spiral in order to minimize distortion.
\[Proof of Theorem 1\] Let $q$ be an odd integer greater or equal to $50$, and $k=\log(q)/2 \pi q$. We define the embedding $\gamma$ as the union of a segment of the logarithmic spiral with slope $k$, denoted by $S$, and a piecewise linear part, denoted by $L$, see Figure \[f2\]. The segment of the logarithmic spiral S is contained in the yellow painted $(x,z)$ plane and parametrized by $$\begin{aligned}
\varphi: [0,\pi q] \to {\mathbf{R}}^2, \ \ \ \varphi(s)= e^{ks} \cdot
\begin{pmatrix}
\cos(s) \\
\sin(s) \\
\end{pmatrix} ,\end{aligned}$$ see Figures \[f2\] and \[f3\]. The segment of the piecewise linear part L is in the green painted $(x,y)$ plane, see Figures \[f2\] and \[f4\]. Note that $$\vert \varphi(\pi q) \vert=e^{k\pi q}=\sqrt{q} \ \ \ \text{and} \ \ \ \vert \varphi(0) \vert = 1,$$ hence the lengths defining $L$ in Figure \[f4\] are chosen such that the union $\gamma$ of $S$ and $L$ is the simple closed curve illustrated in Figure \[f2\]. The linear segments $L_1$ and $L_2$ indicated in Figure \[f4\] are named because of their special role in the following computations.
To see that the obtained curve is an embedded $(2,q)$-torus knot, we perturb $\gamma$, see Figure \[f5\]. This simple closed curve is ambient isotopic in ${\mathbf{R}}^3$ to $\gamma$ and if we project it onto the $(x,y)$ plane, we see a well known diagram of the $(2,q)$-torus knot, see Figure \[f6\].
We now estimate the distortion of $\gamma$. One has to show that $$\frac {d_{\gamma} (v,w)} {\vert v -w \vert} \leq \frac {7q}{\log q}$$ for all pairs of points $v,w \in \gamma$. A calculation shows that
$$\frac{1}{k} \cdot \sqrt{2 k^2 +1}= \frac{2 \pi q}{\log q} \cdot \sqrt{2 (\log q/2 \pi q)^2 +1} \leq \frac {7q}{\log q}$$ for all positive integers. Therefore, it suffices to show that $$\frac {d_{\gamma} (v,w)} {\vert v-w \vert} \leq \frac{\sqrt{2 k^2 +1}}{k}.$$ In order to do this, we distinguish four cases.
*Case 1: $v,w \in S.$* Let $0 \leq s \leq t \leq \pi q, \ v=\varphi(s), w= \varphi(t)$. From
$$\begin{aligned}
\vert \varphi'(r) \vert =
\left|
\begin{pmatrix}
\cos(r) & -\sin(r) \\
\sin(r) & \cos(r) \\
\end{pmatrix}
\begin{pmatrix}
k e^{k r} \\
e^{k r} \\
\end{pmatrix}
\right| =
\left|
\begin{pmatrix}
k e^{k r} \\
e^{k r} \\
\end{pmatrix}
\right| =
{\textstyle \sqrt {k^2 +1}} \cdot e^{k r} , \parbox[c]{0.2\linewidth}{}\end{aligned}$$
we get $$\begin{aligned}
d_{\gamma} (v, w) &\leq& d_S (v,w) \nonumber \\
&=& \int\limits_s^t \vert \varphi'(r) \vert dr \nonumber\\
&=& {\textstyle \sqrt{k^2 +1}} \int\limits_s^t e^{k r} dr \nonumber\\
&=& \tfrac{\sqrt{k^2 +1}} {k} \cdot (e^{k t} - e^{k s}) \nonumber\\
&=& \tfrac{\sqrt{k^2 +1}}{k} \cdot (\vert \varphi (t) \vert - \vert \varphi (s) \vert ) \nonumber\\
&=& \tfrac{\sqrt{k^2 +1}}{k} \cdot (\vert w \vert - \vert v \vert ). \nonumber\end{aligned}$$ Since $\vert w - v \vert \geq \vert w \vert- \vert v \vert$, we conclude that
$$\begin{aligned}
\frac{d_{\gamma} (v, w)} {\vert v-w \vert} \leq
\frac{\sqrt{k^2 +1}}{k} \cdot \frac {(\vert w \vert - \vert v \vert )}{(\vert w \vert - \vert v \vert )} =
\frac{\sqrt{k^2 +1}}{k}.\end{aligned}$$
*Case 2: $v \in L_1 \cup L_2, \ w \in S$.* We consider the case where $v\in L_1$. The idea is to find the maximum of $$\frac {d_{\gamma} (v, w)} {\vert v -w \vert}$$ for fixed $w$ and varying $v$. Let $t = \vert v - \varphi(0) \vert$, $a = \vert \varphi(0) - w \vert$, and $b=d_S (\varphi(0),w)$, see Figure \[hei\].
Note that $$\vert v - w \vert = \textstyle{\sqrt{t^2 + a^2}}$$ and $$d_{\gamma} (v,\varphi(0)) = \vert v -\varphi(0) \vert = t.$$ We get
$$\begin{aligned}
\frac {d_{\gamma} (v,w)} {\vert v -w \vert} \leq
\frac {d_{\gamma} (v,\varphi(0)) + d_S (\varphi(0),w)} {\vert v - w \vert} = \frac {t + b} {\textstyle {\sqrt{t^2 + a^2}}}= :f(t).\end{aligned}$$
Deriving $f$ with respect to $t$ yields a unique critical point at $t=a^2/b$:
$$\begin{aligned}
0=f'(t)= \frac{a^2-bt} {(a^2+t^2)^{3/2}} \ \ \ \ \Longleftrightarrow \ \ \ \ t=a^2/b.\end{aligned}$$
Since $a^2/b$ is the only critical point, $f(\infty)=1 \leq b/a = f(0)$ and $$f(0) =\frac {b} {a} \leq \frac {\textstyle {\sqrt{a^2 +b^2}}} {a} =
\frac {\tfrac {a^2}{b} + b} {\textstyle{\sqrt {(\tfrac{a^2}{b})^2 + a^2}}} = f(a^2/b),$$ $a^2/b$ must be a global maximum. Consequently we get
$$\begin{aligned}
\frac {d_{\gamma} (v, w)} {\vert v-w \vert} & \ \leq \
\frac {\textstyle {\sqrt{a^2 +b^2}}} {a} \\ & \ = \ \
\sqrt{1 + \left({\frac {b}{a}}\right)^2} \\ & \ = \ \
\sqrt{1 + \left({\frac {d_S (\varphi(0),w)}{\vert \varphi(0) -w\vert}}\right)^2} \\&\overset{\text {Case1}}{\leq}
\sqrt{1 + {\left(\tfrac{\sqrt{k^2 +1}}{k}\right)^2}} \\& \ = \ \
\frac{\sqrt{2 k^2 +1}}{k}.\end{aligned}$$
In the case where $v \in L_2$, we make the estimate with the path that connects $v$ with $w$ through $\varphi(\pi q)$. It works exactly the same and yields the same estimate. *Case 3: $v,w \in L.$* Consider Figure \[f4\] and note that all pairs of points $v,w \in L$ that could cause big distortion are of euclidean distance at least 1. Therefore we get $$\frac{d_{\gamma} (v,w)} {\vert v-w \vert} \leq \l(L) = 11\sqrt{q}+1.$$ A calculation shows that $$11\sqrt{q} +1 \leq \frac{2\pi q}{\log q}=\frac{1}{k}$$ for q greater or equal to 50. *Case 4: $v \in L\setminus (L_1 \cup L_2), w \in S.$* Note that for these pairs of points we have $$\vert v-w \vert \geq \vert w \vert.$$ We estimate $d_{\gamma} (v,w)$ using results of Case 1 and 3: $$\begin{aligned}
d_{\gamma} (v, w) &\leq& d_{L} (v, \varphi(0)) + d_{S} (\varphi(0), w) \nonumber \\
&\leq& \tfrac{1} {k} + \tfrac{\sqrt{k^2 +1}}{k} \cdot (\vert w \vert - 1) \nonumber\\
&\leq& \tfrac{\sqrt{k^2 +1}} {k} \cdot \vert w \vert. \nonumber \end{aligned}$$ We conclude that $$\begin{aligned}
\frac {d_{\gamma} (v, w)} {\vert v-w \vert} \leq
\frac {\tfrac{\sqrt{k^2 +1}} {k} \cdot \vert w \vert} {\vert w \vert} =
\frac{\sqrt{k^2 +1}} {k},\end{aligned}$$ which finishes the proof.
With the same technique and somewhat more effort one can give an embedding $\gamma_q$ of $T_{2,q}$ with $\delta(\gamma_q) \sim \frac{\pi}{2} \frac{q}{\log q}$. In addition a more technical proof yields that this asymptotical upper bound for $\delta(T_{2,q})$ is sharp for those embeddings of $T_{2,q}$ that project to a standard knot diagram via a linear projection. This let the author to the following.
Is $\delta(T_{2,q})$ up to a constant asymptotically equal to $q/ \log q$? And if yes, is the constant equal to $\pi/2$?
[99]{} M. Gromov, J. Lafontaine, P. Pansu, Structures métriques pour les varietés riemanniennes, Cedic/Fernand Nathan, Paris, 1981. M. Gromov, L. Guth, Generalizations of the Kolmogorov-Barzdin embedding estimates, Duke Math. J., 161 (2012), no. 13, 2549-2603. M. Gromov, Filling Riemannian manifolds, J. Differential Geom. 18 (1983), no. 1, 1-147. J. Pardon, On the distortion of knots on embedded surfaces, Ann. of Math. (2) 174 (2011), no. 1, 637-646.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'In this article we investigate the properties of Bernstein processes generated by infinite hierarchies of forward-backward systems of decoupled linear deterministic parabolic partial differential equations defined in $\mathbb{R}^{d}$, where $d$ is arbitrary. An important feature of those systems is that the elliptic part of the parabolic operators may be realized as an unbounded Schrödinger operator with compact resolvent in standard $L^{2}$-space. The Bernstein processes we are interested in are in general non-Markovian, may be stationary or non-stationary and are generated by weighted averages of measures naturally associated with the pure point spectrum of the operator. We also introduce time-dependent trace-class operators which possess most of the attributes of density operators in Quantum Statistical Mechanics, and prove that the statistical averages of certain bounded self-adjoint observables usually evaluated by means of such operators coincide with the expectation values of suitable functions of the underlying processes. In the particular case where the given parabolic equations involve the Hamiltonian of an isotropic system of quantum harmonic oscillators, we show that one of the associated processes is identical in law with the periodic Ornstein-Uhlenbeck process.'
author:
- |
Pierre-A. Vuillermot$^{\ast ,\ast \ast }$ and Jean-C. Zambrini$^{\ast \ast }$\
UMR-CNRS 7502, Inst. Élie Cartan de Lorraine, Nancy, France$^{\ast }$\
Dept. de Matemática, Universidade de Lisboa, Lisboa, Portugal$^{\ast
\ast }$
title: 'On Bernstein processes generated by hierarchies of linear parabolic systems in $\mathbb{R}^{d}$'
---
Introduction and outline
=========================
Bernstein (or reciprocal) processes constitute a generalization of Markov processes and have played an increasingly important rôle in various areas of mathematics and mathematical physics over the years, particularly in view of the recent advances in the Monge-Kantorovitch formulation of Optimal Transport Theory and Stochastic Geometric Mechanics (see, e.g., [albeyaza]{}, [@beurling]-[@cruzeirozambrini], [@jamison], [lasalle]{}-[@leoroezamb], [@roellythieullen], [@vuizambrini]-[zambrinibis]{} and the many references therein for a history and other works on the subject, which trace things back to the pioneering works [bernstein]{} and [@schroedinger]). As such they may be intrinsically defined without any reference to partial differential equations, and may take values in any topological space countable at infinity as was shown in [@jamison]. However, in this article we restrict ourselves to the consideration of Bernstein processes generated by certain systems of parabolic partial differential equations, whose state space is the Euclidean space $\mathbb{R}^{d}$ endowed with its Borel $\sigma $-algebra $\mathcal{B}_{d}$. We begin with the following:
**Definition 1.** Let $d\in \mathbb{N}^{+}$ and $T\in \left( 0,+\infty
\right) $ be arbitrary. We say the $\mathbb{R}^{d}$-valued process $Z_{\tau
\in \left[ 0,T\right] }$ defined on the complete probability space $\left(
\Omega ,\mathcal{F},\mathbb{P}\right) $ is a Bernstein process if $$\mathbb{E}\left( b(Z_{r})\left\vert \mathcal{F}_{s}^{+}\vee \mathcal{F}_{t}^{-}\right. \right) =\mathbb{E}\left( b(Z_{r})\left\vert
Z_{s},Z_{t}\right. \right) \label{condiexpectations}$$$\mathbb{P}$-almost everywhere for every bounded Borel measurable function $b:\mathbb{R}^{d}\mapsto \mathbb{C}$, and for all $r,s,t$ satisfying $r\in
\left( s,t\right) \subset \left[ 0,T\right] $. In (\[condiexpectations\]), the $\sigma $-algebras are$$\mathcal{F}_{s}^{+}=\sigma \left\{ Z_{\tau }^{-1}\left( F\right) :\tau \leq
s,\text{ }F\in \mathcal{B}_{d}\right\} \label{pastalgebra}$$and$$\mathcal{F}_{t}^{-}=\sigma \left\{ Z_{\tau }^{-1}\left( F\right) :\tau \geq
t,\text{ }F\in \mathcal{B}_{d}\right\} , \label{futurealgebra}$$where $\mathbb{E}\left( .\left\vert .\right. \right) $ denotes the conditional expectation on $\left( \Omega ,\mathcal{F},\mathbb{P}\right) $.
This definition obviously extends that of a Markov process in the sense of a complete independence of the dynamics of $Z_{\tau \in \left[ 0,T\right] }$ within the interval $\left( s,t\right) $ once $Z_{s}$ and $Z_{t}$ are known, no matter what the behavior of the process is prior to instant $s$ and after instant $t$. This last property also shows that there are two time directions coming into play from the outset, since $\mathcal{F}_{s}^{+}$ may be interpreted as the $\sigma $-algebra gathering all available information before time $s$ and $\mathcal{F}_{t}^{-}$ as that collecting all available information after time $t$. It is therefore no surprise that any system of parabolic partial differential equations susceptible of generating Bernstein processes should exhibit two time directions, one pointing toward the future and one toward the past. Accordingly, we introduce below hierarchies of partial differential equations which we shall define from adjoint parabolic Cauchy problems of the form$$\begin{aligned}
\partial _{t}u(\mathsf{x},t)& =\frac{1}{2}\Delta _{\mathsf{x}}u(\mathsf{x},t)-V(\mathsf{x})u(\mathsf{x},t),\text{ \ }(\mathsf{x},t)\in \mathbb{R}^{d}\times \left( 0,T\right] , \notag \\
u(\mathsf{x},0)& =\varphi _{0}(\mathsf{x}),\text{ \ \ }\mathsf{x}\in \mathbb{R}^{d} \label{cauchyforward}\end{aligned}$$and$$\begin{aligned}
-\partial _{t}v(\mathsf{x},t)& =\frac{1}{2}\Delta _{\mathsf{x}}v(\mathsf{x},t)-V(\mathsf{x})v(\mathsf{x},t),\text{ \ }(\mathsf{x},t)\in \mathbb{R}^{d}\times \left[ 0,T\right) , \notag \\
v(\mathsf{x,}T)& =\psi _{T}(\mathsf{x}),\text{ \ \ }\mathsf{x}\in \mathbb{R}^{d} \label{cauchybackward}\end{aligned}$$where $\Delta _{\mathsf{x}}$ denotes Laplace’s operator with respect to the spatial variable, and where $\varphi _{0}$ and $\psi _{T}$ are real-valued functions or measures to be specified below. In the sequel we write $L^{2}\left( \mathbb{R}^{d}\right) $ and $L^{\infty }\left( \mathbb{R}^{d}\right) $ for the usual Lebesgue spaces of all square integrable and essentially bounded real- or complex-valued functions on $\mathbb{R}^{d}$, respectively, and $L_{\mathsf{loc}}^{\infty }\mathsf{\left( \mathbb{R}^{d}\right) }$ for the local version of $L^{\infty }\left( \mathbb{R}^{d}\right) $, without ever distinguishing notationally between the real and the complex case. It will indeed be clear from the context which case we are referring to, or else further specifications will be made. Finally we shall denote by $\left( .,.\right) _{2}$ the inner product in $L^{2}\left( \mathbb{R}^{d}\right) $ which we assume to be linear in the first argument, and by $\left\Vert .\right\Vert _{2}$ the corresponding norm.
Throughout this article we impose the following hypothesis regarding $V$, where $\left\vert .\right\vert $ stands for the usual Euclidean norm:
\(H) The real-valued function $V$ is bounded from below and satisfies $V\in
L_{\mathsf{loc}}^{\infty }\mathsf{\left( \mathbb{R}^{d}\right) }$ with $V(\mathsf{x})\rightarrow +\infty $ as $\left\vert \mathsf{x}\right\vert
\rightarrow +\infty $.
It is well known that Hypothesis (H) allows the self-adjoint realization of the elliptic operator on the right-hand side of (\[cauchyforward\])-([cauchybackward]{}), which is up to a sign the operator associated with the closure of the quadratic form$$\mathsf{Q}\left( f\right) =\frac{1}{2}\sum_{j=1}^{d}\int_{\mathbb{\mathbb{R}}^{d}}\mathsf{dx}\left\vert \frac{\partial f(\mathsf{x})}{\partial x_{j}}\right\vert ^{2}+\int_{\mathbb{\mathbb{R}}^{d}}\mathsf{dx}V(\mathsf{x})\left\vert f(\mathsf{x})\right\vert ^{2} \label{quadraticform}$$first defined for every complex-valued, compactly supported and smooth function $f$ on $\mathbb{\mathbb{R}}^{d}$ (see, e.g., Section 2 in Chapter VI of [@kato]). Moreover the self-adjoint realization of the operator associated with (\[quadraticform\]), henceforth denoted by $$H=-\frac{1}{2}\Delta _{\mathsf{x}}+V, \label{hamiltonian}$$generates a symmetric semigroup $\exp \left[ -tH\right] $ on $L^{2}\left(
\mathbb{R}^{d}\right) $ whose integral kernel satisfies$$\left\{
\begin{array}{c}
g(\mathsf{x},t,\mathsf{y})=g(\mathsf{y},t,\mathsf{x}), \\
\\
c_{1}t^{-\frac{d}{2}}\exp \left[ -c_{1}^{\ast }\frac{\left\vert \mathsf{x}-\mathsf{y}\right\vert ^{2}}{t}\right] \leq g(\mathsf{x},t,\mathsf{y})\leq
c_{2}t^{-\frac{d}{2}}\exp \left[ -c_{2}^{\ast }\frac{\left\vert \mathsf{x}-\mathsf{y}\right\vert ^{2}}{t}\right]\end{array}\right. \label{greenfunction}$$for all $\mathsf{x},\mathsf{y\in }\mathbb{\ \mathbb{R}}^{d}\mathbb{\ }$and every $t\in \left( 0,T\right] $, where $c_{1,2}$ and $c_{1,2}^{\ast }$ are positive constants (see, e.g., Theorem 1 in [@aronsonbis] and its complete proof in [@aronson]). At the same time Hypothesis (H) also implies that the resolvent of the self-adjoint realization of ([hamiltonian]{}) is compact in $L^{2}\left( \mathbb{R}^{d}\right) $. As a Schrödinger operator this means that its spectrum $\left( E_{\mathsf{m}}\right) _{\mathsf{m}\in \mathbb{N}^{d}}$ is entirely discrete with $E_{\mathsf{m}}\rightarrow +\infty $ as $\left\vert \mathsf{m}\right\vert
\rightarrow +\infty $, and that there exists an orthonormal basis $\left(
\mathsf{f}_{\mathsf{m}}\right) _{\mathsf{m}\in \mathbb{N}^{d}}$ consisting entirely of its eigenfunctions which we shall assume to be real (see, e.g., Section XIII.14 in [@reedsimon], which allows for more general conditions on $V$). In the sequel we shall refer to the function $g$ in ([greenfunction]{}) as the (parabolic) Green function associated with ([cauchyforward]{})-(\[cauchybackward\]), also called fundamental solution to (\[cauchyforward\]) in references [@aronsonbis] and [@aronson].
In the context of this article we also assume that$$\mathcal{Z}(t):=\sum_{\mathsf{m}\in \mathbb{N}^{d}}\exp \left[ -tE_{\mathsf{m}}\right] <+\infty \label{convergence}$$for every $t\in \left( 0,T\right] $, so that the strong convergence of $$g(\mathsf{x},t,\mathsf{y})=\sum_{\mathsf{m}\in \mathbb{N}^{d}}\exp \left[
-tE_{\mathsf{m}}\right] \mathsf{f}_{\mathsf{m}}(\mathsf{x})\mathsf{f}_{\mathsf{m}}(\mathsf{y}) \label{expansion}$$holds in $L^{2}\left( \mathbb{R}^{d}\times \mathbb{R}^{d}\right) $. Then the construction of Bernstein processes associated with (\[cauchyforward\])-(\[cauchybackward\]) rests on the availability of Green’s function ([greenfunction]{}) and on the existence of probability measures on $\mathcal{B}_{d}\times \mathcal{B}_{d}$ whose joint densities $\mu $ satisfy the normalization condition$$\int_{\mathbb{R}^{d}\times \mathbb{R}^{d}}\mathsf{dxdy}\mu (\mathsf{x,y})=1.
\label{normalization}$$Given these facts we organize the remaining part of this article in the following way: in Section 2 we use the knowledge of $g$ and $\mu $ to state a general proposition about the existence of a probability space which supports a Bernstein process $Z_{\tau \in \left[ 0,T\right] }$ characterized by its finite-dimensional distributions, the joint distribution of $Z_{0}$ and $Z_{T}$ and the probability of finding $Z_{t}$ at any time $t\in \left[
0,T\right] $ in a given region of space. In Section 3 we proceed with the construction of specific families of probability measures by introducing the hierarchies of equations we alluded to above. That is, with each level $\mathsf{m}$ of the spectrum of (\[hamiltonian\]) we associate a pair of adjoint Cauchy problems of the form$$\begin{aligned}
\partial _{t}u(\mathsf{x},t)& =\frac{1}{2}\Delta _{\mathsf{x}}u(\mathsf{x},t)-V(\mathsf{x})u(\mathsf{x},t),\text{ \ }(\mathsf{x},t)\in \mathbb{R}^{d}\times \left( 0,T\right] , \notag \\
u(\mathsf{x},0)& =\varphi _{\mathsf{m,0}}(\mathsf{x}),\text{ \ \ }\mathsf{x}\in \mathbb{R}^{d} \label{cauchyforwardbis}\end{aligned}$$and$$\begin{aligned}
-\partial _{t}v(\mathsf{x},t)& =\frac{1}{2}\Delta _{\mathsf{x}}v(\mathsf{x},t)-V(\mathsf{x})v(\mathsf{x},t),\text{ \ }(\mathsf{x},t)\in \mathbb{R}^{d}\times \left[ 0,T\right) , \notag \\
v(\mathsf{x},T)& =\psi _{\mathsf{m,}T}(\mathsf{x}),\text{ \ \ }\mathsf{x}\in
\mathbb{R}^{d}. \label{cauchybackwardbis}\end{aligned}$$To wit, we are considering as many pairs of such systems as is necessary to take into account the whole pure point spectrum of (\[hamiltonian\]), and then focus our attention on the sequence of probability measures $\mu _{\mathsf{m}}$ given by the joint densities$$\mu _{\mathsf{m}}(\mathsf{x,y})=\varphi _{\mathsf{m,0}}(\mathsf{x)}g(\mathsf{x},T,\mathsf{y})\psi _{\mathsf{m,}T}(\mathsf{y}) \label{densitybis}$$where$$\left\{
\begin{array}{c}
\varphi _{\mathsf{m,0}}(\mathsf{x})=\frac{\delta \left( \mathsf{x}-\mathsf{a}_{\mathsf{m}}\right) }{g^{\frac{1}{2}}(\mathsf{a}_{\mathsf{m}},T,\mathsf{b}_{\mathsf{m}})}, \\
\\
\psi _{\mathsf{m,}T}(\mathsf{x})=\frac{\delta \left( \mathsf{x}-\mathsf{b}_{\mathsf{m}}\right) }{g^{\frac{1}{2}}(\mathsf{a}_{\mathsf{m}},T,\mathsf{b}_{\mathsf{m}})},\end{array}\right. \label{inifinacond}$$thus having$$\mu _{\mathsf{m}}(G)=\int_{G}\mathsf{dxdy}\varphi _{\mathsf{m,0}}(\mathsf{x)}g(\mathsf{x},T,\mathsf{y})\psi _{\mathsf{m,}T}(\mathsf{y})
\label{positivemeasures}$$for every $G\in \mathcal{B}_{d}\times \mathcal{B}_{d}$. In the preceding expressions the points $\mathsf{a}_{\mathsf{m}},\mathsf{b}_{\mathsf{m}}\in
\mathbb{R}^{d}$ are arbitrarily chosen for every $\mathsf{m\in }\mathbb{N}^{d}$ and $\delta $ stands for the Dirac measure so that$$\int_{\mathbb{R}^{d}\times \mathbb{R}^{d}}\mathsf{dxdy}\mu _{\mathsf{m}}(\mathsf{x,y})=1, \label{normalizationbis}$$in agreement with (\[normalization\]). In this manner and by applying the general proposition of Section 2 we obtain a sequence of Markovian bridges $Z_{\tau \in \left[ 0,T\right] }^{\mathsf{m}}$ whose properties we analyze thoroughly. With each level of the spectrum we then associate a weight $p_{\mathsf{m}}$ and consider probability measures of the form $$\bar{\mu}=\sum_{\mathsf{m\in }\mathbb{N}^{d}}p_{\mathsf{m}}\mu _{\mathsf{m}}\text{, \ \ }p_{\mathsf{m}}>0\text{, \ \ }\sum_{\mathsf{m\in }\mathbb{N}^{d}}p_{\mathsf{m}}=1, \label{probabilities}$$that is, statistical mixtures of the measures $\mu _{\mathsf{m}}$. Yet another application of the proposition of Section 2 then allows us to generate a non-stationary and non-Markovian process $\bar{Z}_{\tau \in \left[
0,T\right] }$ associated with $\bar{\mu}$. We also introduce a linear, time-dependent trace-class operator which plays the same rôle as the so-called density operator in Quantum Statistical Mechanics (see, e.g, [vonneumann]{}), and prove that the statistical averages of certain bounded self-adjoint observables evaluated by means of that operator coincide with the expectations of suitable functions of $\bar{Z}_{\tau \in \left[ 0,T\right] }$. In Section 4, keeping the same notation as in Section 3 for the initial-final data in (\[cauchyforwardbis\]) and (\[cauchybackwardbis\]), we carry out a similar construction but this time with $\varphi _{\mathsf{m,0}}$ and $\exp \left[ -TH\right] \psi _{\mathsf{m,}T}$ forming a complete biorthonormal system in $L^{2}\left( \mathbb{R}^{d}\right) $, thus satisfying in particular$$\left( \varphi _{\mathsf{m,0}},\exp \left[ -TH\right] \psi _{\mathsf{n,}T}\right) _{2}=\delta _{\mathsf{m,n}} \label{biorthogonality}$$for all $\mathsf{m,n}\in \mathbb{N}^{d}$ where $\exp \left[ -TH\right] $ stands for the Schrödinger semigroup generated by (\[hamiltonian\]) evaluated at the terminal time $t=T$. The simplest system of this kind is
$$\left\{
\begin{array}{c}
\varphi _{\mathsf{m,0}}(\mathsf{x})=\mathsf{f}_{\mathsf{m}}(\mathsf{x}), \\
\\
\psi _{\mathsf{m,}T}(\mathsf{x})=\exp \left[ TE_{\mathsf{m}}\right] \mathsf{f}_{\mathsf{m}}(\mathsf{x})\end{array}\right. \label{inifinacondbis}$$
where $E_{\mathsf{m}}$ and $\mathsf{f}_{\mathsf{m}}$ are the eigenvalues and the eigenfunctions introduced above, respectively, but generally speaking a pair of initial-final data satisfying (\[biorthogonality\]) always exists provided $\exp \left[ -TH\right] \psi _{\mathsf{m,}T}$ is sufficiently close to$\mathsf{f}_{\mathsf{m}}$ for every $\mathsf{m\in }\mathbb{N}^{d}$ in some sense. This statement essentially comes from an adaptation of a result by Paley and Wiener according to Theorem XXXVII of Chapter VII in [@paleywiener], but then the corresponding measures ([positivemeasures]{}) are signed since we impose no requirement about the positivity of $\varphi _{\mathsf{m,0}}$ and $\exp \left[ -TH\right] \psi _{\mathsf{m,}T}$. In particular, regarding (\[inifinacondbis\]) the eigenfunctions $\mathsf{f}_{\mathsf{m}}$ are typically not positive on $\mathbb{R}^{d}$ with the possible exception of $\mathsf{f}_{0}$, so that it becomes intrinsically impossible to construct a Bernstein process from each $\mu _{\mathsf{m}}$ individually in contrast to the method of Section 3. Nevertheless, the averaging procedure defined by (\[probabilities\]) still allows us to generate genuine probability measures on $\mathcal{B}_{d}\times
\mathcal{B}_{d}$ and hence other non-Markovian processes, which turns out to be particularly simple to do in the case of (\[inifinacondbis\]) when$$p_{\mathsf{m}}=\mathcal{Z}^{-1}(T)\exp \left[ -TE_{\mathsf{m}}\right]
\label{probagibbs}$$where $\mathcal{Z}\left( T\right) $ is given by (\[convergence\]). In Section 4 we also define a linear, time-dependent trace-class operator from a pair of suitably chosen Riesz bases and prove again that the corresponding statistical averages of certain bounded self-adjoint observables coincide with the expectations of suitable functions of the processes, along with many other properties. We devote Section 5 to the application of the results of Sections 3 and 4 to the case where the operator on the right-hand side of (\[cauchyforwardbis\])-(\[cauchybackwardbis\]) is that of an isotropic system of quantum harmonic oscillators, up to a sign. That is, we consider hierarchies of the form
$$\begin{aligned}
\partial _{t}u(\mathsf{x},t)& =\frac{1}{2}\Delta _{\mathsf{x}}u(\mathsf{x},t)-\frac{\lambda ^{2}}{2}\left\vert \mathsf{x}\right\vert ^{2}u(\mathsf{x},t),\text{ \ }(\mathsf{x},t)\in \mathbb{R}^{d}\times \left( 0,T\right] ,
\notag \\
u(\mathsf{x},0)& =\varphi _{\mathsf{m,0,\lambda }}(\mathsf{x}),\text{ \ \ }\mathsf{x}\in \mathbb{R}^{d} \label{cauchyforwardter}\end{aligned}$$
and$$\begin{aligned}
-\partial _{t}v(\mathsf{x},t)& =\frac{1}{2}\Delta _{\mathsf{x}}v(\mathsf{x},t)-\frac{\lambda ^{2}}{2}\left\vert \mathsf{x}\right\vert ^{2}v(\mathsf{x},t),\text{ \ }(\mathsf{x},t)\in \mathbb{R}^{d}\times \left[ 0,T\right) ,
\notag \\
v(\mathsf{x},T)& =\psi _{\mathsf{m,}T,\lambda }(\mathsf{x}),\text{ \ \ }\mathsf{x}\in \mathbb{R}^{d} \label{cauchybackwardter}\end{aligned}$$with $\lambda >0$ and suitable choices of $\varphi _{\mathsf{m,0,\lambda }}$ and $\psi _{\mathsf{m,}T,\lambda }$, and prove that the processes constructed there are intimately tied up with various types of conditioned Ornstein-Uhlenbeck processes. In particular, we show that one of these is identical in law with the periodic Ornstein-Uhlenbeck process, which was also analyzed by means of completely different techniques by various authors in different contexts (see, e.g., [@kwakernaak], [@pedersen] and [@roellythieullen]). To this end we carry out explicit computations of the laws and of the covariances based on the fact that in this situation Green’s function identifies with Mehler’s $d$-dimensional kernel, namely,$$\begin{aligned}
&&g_{\lambda }(\mathsf{x},t,\mathsf{y}) \notag \\
&=&\left( \frac{2\pi \sinh \left( \lambda t\right) }{\lambda }\right) ^{-\frac{d}{2}}\exp \left[ -\frac{\lambda \left( \cosh (\lambda t)\left(
\left\vert \mathsf{x}\right\vert ^{2}+\left\vert \mathsf{y}\right\vert
^{2}\right) -2\left( \mathsf{x,y}\right) _{\mathbb{R}^{d}}\right) }{2\sinh
\left( \lambda t\right) }\right] \label{mehler}\end{aligned}$$for all $\mathsf{x},\mathsf{y\in }\mathbb{R}^{d}$ and every $t\in \left( 0,T\right] $, where $\left( .\mathsf{,.}\right) _{\mathbb{R}^{d}}$ stands for the usual inner product in $\mathbb{R}^{d}$. Finally, we point out that the periodic Ornstein-Uhlenbeck process we just alluded to has the same law as one of the processes used in [@hoeghkrohn] to discuss properties of certain quantum systems in equilibrium with a thermal bath, and that it also identifies with the process “indexed by the circle” and possessing the “two-sided Markov property on the circle” investigated in [@kleinlandau]. Our work indeed shows that many of the processes investigated in those references may be viewed as belonging to a very special class of non-Markovian and stationary Bernstein processes.
On the existence of Bernstein processes in $\mathbb{R}^{d}$
===========================================================
Aside from a probability measure $\mu $ on $\mathcal{B}_{d}\times \mathcal{B}_{d}$ that satisfies (\[normalization\]), the typical construction of a Bernstein process requires a transition function as is the case for Markov processes. Since there are two time directions provided by ([cauchyforward]{})-(\[cauchybackward\]) we shall see that the natural choice is$$Q\left( \mathsf{x},t;F,r;\mathsf{y},s\right) :=\dint\limits_{F}\mathsf{dz}q\left( \mathsf{x},t;\mathsf{z},r;\mathsf{y},s\right)
\label{transitionfunction}$$for every $F\in \mathcal{B}_{d}$, where$$q\left( \mathsf{x},t;\mathsf{z},r;\mathsf{y},s\right) :=\frac{g(\mathsf{x},t-r,\mathsf{z})g(\mathsf{z},r-s,\mathsf{y})}{g(\mathsf{x},t-s,\mathsf{y})}.
\label{transitiondensity}$$Both functions are well defined and positive for all $\mathsf{x},\mathsf{y},\mathsf{z}\in \mathbb{R}^{d}$ and all $r,s,t$ satisfying $r\in \left(
s,t\right) \subset \left[ 0,T\right] $ by virtue of (\[greenfunction\]), and moreover the normalization condition$$Q\left( \mathsf{x},t;\mathbb{R}^{d},r;\mathsf{y},s\right) =1$$holds as a consequence of the semigroup composition law for $g$. It is the knowledge of both $\mu $ and $Q$ that makes it possible to associate a Bernstein process with (\[cauchyforward\])-(\[cauchybackward\]) in the following way:
**Proposition 1.** *Let* $\mu $* satisfy ([normalization]{}) and let* $Q$ *be given by (\[transitionfunction\]). Then there exists a probability space* $\left( \Omega ,\mathcal{F},\mathbb{P}_{\mu }\right) $ *supporting an* $\mathbb{R}^{d}$*-valued Bernstein process* $Z_{\tau \in \left[ 0,T\right] }$* such that the following properties are valid:*
*(a) The function* $Q$* is the two-sided transition function of* $Z_{\tau \in \left[ 0,T\right] }$* in the sense that* $$\mathbb{P}_{\mu }\left( Z_{r}\in F\left\vert Z_{s},Z_{t}\right. \right)
=Q\left( Z_{t},t;F,r;Z_{s},s\right) \label{transition}$$*for each* $F\in \mathcal{B}_{d}$ *and all* $r,s,t$*satisfying* $r\in \left( s,t\right) \subset \left[ 0,T\right] $. *Moreover,*$$\mathbb{P}_{\mu }\left( Z_{0}\in F_{0},Z_{T}\in F_{T}\right) =\mu \left(
F_{0}\times F_{T}\right) \label{jointdistribution}$$*for all* $F_{0},F_{T}\in \mathcal{B}_{d}$*, that is,* $\mu $* is the joint probability distribution of* $Z_{0}$* and* $Z_{T}$*. In particular we have*$$\mathbb{P}_{\mu }\left( Z_{0}\in F\right) =\mu \left( F\times \mathbb{R}^{d}\right) \label{probability2}$$*and*$$\mathbb{P}_{\mu }\left( Z_{T}\in F\right) =\mu \left( \mathbb{R}^{d}\times
F\right) \label{probability3}$$*for each* $F\in \mathcal{B}_{d}$.
*(b) For every* $n\in \mathbb{N}^{+}$ *the finite-dimensional distributions of the process are given by*$$\begin{aligned}
&&\mathbb{P}_{\mu }\left( Z_{t_{1}}\in F_{1},...,Z_{t_{n}}\in F_{n}\right)
\notag \\
&=&\int_{\mathbb{R}^{d}\times \mathbb{R}^{d}}\frac{\mathsf{d}\mu \mathsf{\left( \mathsf{x,y}\right) }}{g(\mathsf{x},T,\mathsf{y})}\int_{F_{1}}\mathsf{dx}_{1}...\int_{F_{n}}\mathsf{dx}_{n} \notag \\
&&\times \dprod\limits_{k=1}^{n}g\left( \mathsf{x}_{k},t_{k}-t_{k-1},\mathsf{x}_{k-1}\right) \times g\left( \mathsf{y},T-t_{n},\mathsf{x}_{n}\right)
\label{distribution}\end{aligned}$$*for all* $F_{1},...,F_{n}\in \mathcal{B}_{d}$* and all* $t_{0}=0<t_{1}<...<t_{n}<T$*, where* $\mathsf{x}_{0}=\mathsf{x}$*. In particular we have*$$\begin{aligned}
&&\mathbb{P}_{\mu }\left( Z_{t}\in F\right) \notag \\
&=&\int_{\mathbb{R}^{d}\times \mathbb{R}^{d}}\frac{\mathsf{d}\mu \mathsf{\left( \mathsf{x,y}\right) }}{g(\mathsf{x},T,\mathsf{y})}\int_{F}\mathsf{dz}g\left( \mathsf{x},t,\mathsf{z}\right) g\left( \mathsf{z},T-t,\mathsf{y}\right) \label{probability1}\end{aligned}$$*for each* $F\in \mathcal{B}_{d}$* and every* $t\in \left(
0,T\right) $.
*(c)* $\mathbb{P}_{\mu }$* is the only probability measure leading to the above properties.*
There already exists a proof of an abstract version of a related statement in [@jamison] as well as a more analytic version of it in [vuizambrini]{}, so that we limit ourselves here to showing how the basic quantities of interest can be expressed in terms of Green’s function ([greenfunction]{}):
**Proof.** The existence of $\left( \Omega ,\mathcal{F},\mathbb{P}_{\mu
}\right) $ and of $Z_{\tau \in \left[ 0,T\right] }$ is through Kolmogorov’s extension theorem, with the probability $\mathbb{P}_{\mu }$ defined on cylindical sets by
$$\begin{aligned}
&&\mathbb{P}_{\mu }\left( Z_{0}\in F_{0},Z_{t_{1}}\in F_{1},...,Z_{t_{n}}\in
F_{n},Z_{T}\in F_{T}\right) \\
&=&\int_{F_{0}\times F_{T}}\mathsf{d}\mu \mathsf{\left( \mathsf{x,y}\right) }\int_{F_{1}}\mathsf{dx}_{1}...\int_{F_{n}}\mathsf{dx}_{n}\dprod\limits_{k=1}^{n}q\left( y,T;x_{k},t_{k};x_{k-1},t_{k-1}\right)\end{aligned}$$
for all $F_{0},...,F_{T}\in \mathcal{B}_{d}$ and all $t_{0}=0<t_{1}<...<t_{n}<T$, where $\mathsf{x}_{0}=\mathsf{x}$ and $q$ is given by (\[transitiondensity\]). Since$$\begin{aligned}
&&\dprod\limits_{k=1}^{n}q\left( y,T;x_{k},t_{k};x_{k-1},t_{k-1}\right) \\
&=&\dprod\limits_{k=1}^{n}\frac{g(\mathsf{y},T-t_{k},\mathsf{x}_{k})g(\mathsf{x}_{k},t_{k}-t_{k-1},\mathsf{x}_{k-1})}{g(\mathsf{y},T-t_{k-1},\mathsf{x}_{k-1})} \\
&=&\frac{1}{g(\mathsf{x},T,\mathsf{y})}\dprod\limits_{k=1}^{n}g(\mathsf{x}_{k},t_{k}-t_{k-1},\mathsf{x}_{k-1})\times g(\mathsf{y},T-t_{n},\mathsf{x}_{n})\end{aligned}$$after $n-1$ cancellations in the products, we therefore obtain$$\begin{aligned}
&&\mathbb{P}_{\mu }\left( Z_{0}\in F_{0},Z_{t_{1}}\in F_{1},...,Z_{t_{n}}\in
F_{n},Z_{T}\in F_{T}\right) \notag \\
&=&\int_{F_{0}\times F_{T}}\frac{\mathsf{d}\mu \mathsf{\left( \mathsf{x,y}\right) }}{g(\mathsf{x},T,\mathsf{y})}\int_{F_{1}}\mathsf{dx}_{1}...\int_{F_{n}}\mathsf{dx}_{n} \notag \\
&&\times \dprod\limits_{k=1}^{n}g(\mathsf{x}_{k},t_{k}-t_{k-1},\mathsf{x}_{k-1})\times g(\mathsf{y},T-t_{n},\mathsf{x}_{n}), \label{distributionbis}\end{aligned}$$which is (\[distribution\]) when $F_{0}=F_{T}=$ $\mathbb{R}^{d}$. We now prove (\[jointdistribution\]) by using the symmetry property in ([greenfunction]{}) along with the semigroup composition law for $g$ to get$$\int_{\mathbb{R}^{d}}\mathsf{dx}_{1}...\int_{\mathbb{R}^{d}}\mathsf{dx}_{n}\dprod\limits_{k=1}^{n}g(\mathsf{x}_{k},t_{k}-t_{k-1},\mathsf{x}_{k-1})\times g(\mathsf{y},T-t_{n},\mathsf{x}_{n})=g(\mathsf{x},T,\mathsf{y})
\label{relation}$$by means of an easy induction argument on $n$. The substitution of ([relation]{}) into (\[distributionbis\]) with the choice $F_{1}=...=F_{n}=\mathbb{R}^{d}$ then leads to the desired relation$$\mathbb{P}_{\mu }\left( Z_{0}\in F_{0},Z_{T}\in F_{T}\right)
=\int_{F_{0}\times F_{T}}\mathsf{d}\mu \mathsf{\left( \mathsf{x,y}\right) ,}$$of which (\[probability2\]) and (\[probability3\]) are obvious particular cases. Finally, (\[probability1\]) is (\[distribution\]) with $n=1$. $\ \ \blacksquare $
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Remark.</span> It is plain that the only relevant conditions in the proof of the proposition are the symmetry and the positivity of Green’s function (\[greenfunction\]), aside from the data of a probability measure $\mu $. Furthermore, as we shall see below Bernstein processes may be stationary and Markovian but in general they are neither one nor the other, as these properties are intimately tied up with the structure of $\mu $. More specifically, according to Theorem 3.1 in [@jamison] adapted to the present situation, a Bernstein process is Markovian if, and only if, there exist positive measures $\nu _{0}$ and $\nu _{T}$ on $\mathcal{B}_{d}$ such that $\mu $ be of the form$$\mu (G)=\int_{G}\mathsf{d}\left( \nu _{0}\otimes \nu _{T}\right) \left(
\mathsf{x,y}\right) g(\mathsf{x},T,\mathsf{y}) \label{markovianmeasure}$$for every $G\in \mathcal{B}_{d}\times \mathcal{B}_{d}$, with$$\mu (\mathbb{R}^{d}\times \mathbb{R}^{d})=1\text{.}$$We refer the reader for instance to [@vuillermot], [@vuizambrini] and some of their references for an analysis of the Markovian case in various situations. Finally, in various different forms Bernstein processes have also recently appeared in applications of Optimal Transport Theory as testified for instance in [@leonard] and in the monographs [galichon]{} and [@villani], and in the developments of Stochastic Geometric Mechanics as in [@zambrinibis].
In the next section we carry out the program described in Section 1 starting with (\[cauchyforwardbis\]), (\[cauchybackwardbis\]) and ([densitybis]{}) when the initial-final data are given by (\[inifinacond\]).
On mixing Bernstein bridges in $\mathbb{R}^{d}$
===============================================
Relation (\[inifinacond\]) implies that measures (\[positivemeasures\]) are already probability measures so that we may apply Proposition 1 directly and in this manner associate a Bernstein process $Z_{\tau \in \left[ 0,T\right] }^{\mathsf{m}}$ with each level of the spectrum. This leads to the following result where $u_{\mathsf{m}}$ and $v_{\mathsf{m}}$ denote the solutions to (\[cauchyforwardbis\]) and (\[cauchybackwardbis\]), respectively, that is,$$u_{\mathsf{m}}(\mathsf{x},t)=\int_{\mathbb{R}^{d}}\mathsf{dy}g(\mathsf{x},t,\mathsf{y})\varphi _{\mathsf{m,0}}(\mathsf{y})>0 \label{forwardsolution}$$and$$v_{\mathsf{m}}(\mathsf{x},t)=\int_{\mathbb{R}^{d}}\mathsf{dy}g(\mathsf{x},T-t,\mathsf{y})\psi _{\mathsf{m,}T}(\mathsf{y})>0. \label{backwardsolution}$$
**Theorem 1.** *Assume that Hypothesis* (H)* holds. Then for every* $\mathsf{m}\in \mathbb{N}^{d}$ *there exists a non-stationary Bernstein process* $Z_{\tau \in \left[ 0,T\right] }^{\mathsf{m}}$ *in* $\mathbb{R}^{d}$ *such that the following statements are valid:*
*(a) The process* $Z_{\tau \in \left[ 0,T\right] }^{\mathsf{m}}$ *is a forward Markov process whose finite-dimensional distributions are*$$\begin{aligned}
&&\mathbb{P}_{\mu _{\mathsf{m}}}\left( Z_{t_{1}}^{\mathsf{m}}\in
F_{1},...,Z_{t_{n}}^{\mathsf{m}}\in F_{n}\right) \notag \\
&=&\int_{\mathbb{R}^{d}}\mathsf{dx}\rho _{\mathsf{m},0}(\mathsf{x})\int_{F_{1}}\mathsf{dx}_{1}...\int_{F_{n}}\mathsf{dx}_{n}\dprod\limits_{k=1}^{n}w_{\mathsf{m}}^{\ast }\left( \mathsf{x}_{k-1},t_{k-1};\mathsf{x}_{k},t_{k}\right) \label{distributionter}\end{aligned}$$*for every* $n\in \mathbb{N}^{+}$,* all* $F_{1},...,F_{n}\in
\mathcal{B}_{d}$* and all* $0=t_{0}<t_{1}<...<t_{n}<T$*, with* $\mathsf{x}_{\mathsf{0}}=\mathsf{x}$. *In the preceding expression the density of the forward Markov transition function is*$$w_{\mathsf{m}}^{\ast }(\mathsf{x},s;\mathsf{y},t)=g(\mathsf{x},t-s,\mathsf{y})\frac{v_{\mathsf{m}}(\mathsf{y},t)}{v_{\mathsf{m}}(\mathsf{x},s)}
\label{markovdensity}$$*for all* $\mathsf{x,y}\in \mathbb{R}^{d}$ *and all* $s,t\in \left[ 0,T\right] $ *with* $t>s$, *while the initial distribution of the process reads*$$\rho _{\mathsf{m},0}(\mathsf{x})=\varphi _{\mathsf{m,0}}(\mathsf{x})v_{\mathsf{m}}(\mathsf{x},0). \label{initialmarginal}$$
*(b) The process* $Z_{\tau \in \left[ 0,T\right] }^{\mathsf{m}}$ *may also be viewed as a backward Markov process since the finite-dimensional distributions (\[distributionter\]) may also be written as*$$\begin{aligned}
&&\mathbb{P}_{\mu _{\mathsf{m}}}\left( Z_{t_{1}}^{\mathsf{m}}\in
F_{1},...,Z_{t_{n}}^{\mathsf{m}}\in F_{n}\right) \notag \\
&=&\int_{\mathbb{R}^{d}}\mathsf{dx}\rho _{\mathsf{m},T}(\mathsf{x})\int_{F_{1}}\mathsf{dx}_{1}...\int_{F_{n}}\mathsf{dx}_{n}\dprod\limits_{k=1}^{n}w_{\mathsf{m}}\left( \mathsf{x}_{k+1},t_{k+1};\mathsf{x}_{k},t_{k}\right) \label{distributionquarto}\end{aligned}$$*for every* $n\in \mathbb{N}^{+}$,* all* $F_{1},...,F_{n}\in
\mathcal{B}_{d}$* and all* $0<t_{1}<...<t_{n}<t_{n+1}=T$*, with* $\mathsf{x}_{n\mathsf{+1}}=\mathsf{x}$. *In the preceding expression the density of the backward Markov transition function is*$$w_{\mathsf{m}}(\mathsf{x},t;\mathsf{y},s)=g(\mathsf{x},t-s,\mathsf{y})\frac{u_{\mathsf{m}}(\mathsf{y},s)}{u_{\mathsf{m}}(\mathsf{x},t)}
\label{markovdensitybis}$$*for all* $\mathsf{x,y}\in \mathbb{R}^{d}$ *and all* $s,t\in \left[ 0,T\right] $ *with* $t>s$, *while the final distribution of the process reads*$$\rho _{\mathsf{m},T}(\mathsf{x})=\psi _{\mathsf{m,}T}(\mathsf{x})u_{\mathsf{m}}(\mathsf{x},T).$$
*(c) We have*$$\mathbb{P}_{\mu _{\mathsf{m}}}\left( Z_{0}^{\mathsf{m}}=\mathsf{a}_{\mathsf{m}}\right) =\mathbb{P}_{\mu _{\mathsf{m}}}\left( Z_{T}^{\mathsf{m}}=\mathsf{b}_{\mathsf{m}}\right) =1 \label{probability4}$$*and*$$\mathbb{P}_{\mu _{\mathsf{m}}}\left( Z_{t}^{\mathsf{m}}\in F\right) =\int_{F}\mathsf{dx}u_{\mathsf{m}}(\mathsf{x},t)v_{\mathsf{m}}(\mathsf{x},t)
\label{probability5}$$*for each* $t\in \left( 0,T\right) $ *and every* $F\in
\mathcal{B}_{d}$.
*(d) Finally,*$$\mathbb{E}_{_{\mu _{\mathsf{m}}}}\left( b(Z_{t}^{\mathsf{m}})\right) =\int_{\mathbb{R}^{d}}\mathsf{dx}b(\mathsf{x})u_{\mathsf{m}}(\mathsf{x},t)v_{\mathsf{m}}(\mathsf{x},t) \label{expectations}$$*for each bounded Borel measurable function* $b:\mathbb{R}^{d}\mathbb{\mapsto C}$ *and every* $t\in \left( 0,T\right) $.
**Proof.** From (\[markovdensity\]) and the semigroup composition law for $g$ we get $$w_{\mathsf{m}}^{\ast }(\mathsf{x},s;\mathsf{y},t)=\int_{\mathbb{R}^{d}}\mathsf{dz}w_{\mathsf{m}}^{\ast }(\mathsf{x},s;\mathsf{z},r)w_{\mathsf{m}}^{\ast }(\mathsf{z},r;\mathsf{y},t)$$for all $\mathsf{x,y,z}\in \mathbb{R}^{d}$ and every $r\in \left( s,t\right)
\subset \left[ 0,T\right] $, so that the Chapman-Kolmogorov relation$$W_{\mathsf{m}}^{\ast }(\mathsf{x},s;F,t)=\int_{\mathbb{R}^{d}}\mathsf{dy}w_{\mathsf{m}}^{\ast }(\mathsf{x},s;\mathsf{y},r)W_{\mathsf{m}}^{\ast }(\mathsf{y},r;F,t)$$holds for every $F\in \mathcal{B}_{d}$, where$$W_{\mathsf{m}}^{\ast }(\mathsf{x},s;F,t):=\int_{F}\mathsf{dy}w_{\mathsf{m}}^{\ast }(\mathsf{x},s;\mathsf{y},t).$$Therefore $W_{\mathsf{m}}^{\ast }$ is the transition function of a forward Markov process with density $w_{\mathsf{m}}^{\ast }$. In order to prove ([distributionter]{}) we start with (\[distribution\]) into which we substitute (\[densitybis\]) to obtain$$\begin{aligned}
&&\mathbb{P}_{\mu _{\mathsf{m}}}\left( Z_{t_{1}}^{\mathsf{m}}\in
F_{1},...,Z_{t_{n}}^{\mathsf{m}}\in F_{n}\right) \label{distributionseptimo}
\\
&=&\int_{\mathbb{R}^{d}}\mathsf{d\mathsf{x}}\varphi _{\mathsf{m,0}}(\mathsf{x)}\int_{F_{1}}\mathsf{dx}_{1}...\int_{F_{n}}\mathsf{dx}_{n}\dprod\limits_{k=1}^{n}g\left( \mathsf{x}_{k},t_{k}-t_{k-1},\mathsf{x}_{k-1}\right) \times v_{\mathsf{m}}(\mathsf{x}_{n},t_{n}) \notag\end{aligned}$$where $\mathsf{x}_{0}=\mathsf{x}$ and $t_{0}=0$. Furthermore, using ([markovdensity]{}) we may rewrite the product in the preceding expression as$$\begin{aligned}
&&\dprod\limits_{k=1}^{n}g\left( \mathsf{x}_{k},t_{k}-t_{k-1},\mathsf{x}_{k-1}\right) \times v_{\mathsf{m}}(\mathsf{x}_{n},t_{n}) \\
&=&\dprod\limits_{k=1}^{n}w_{\mathsf{m}}^{\ast }(\mathsf{x}_{k-1},t_{k-1};\mathsf{x}_{k},t_{k})\times v_{\mathsf{m}}(\mathsf{x},0)\end{aligned}$$after $n-1$ cancellations, which eventually leads to Statement (a) by taking (\[initialmarginal\]) into account. The proof of Statement (b) is similar and thereby omitted. Now, from (\[densitybis\]) and (\[probability2\]) we have$$\mathbb{P}_{\mu _{\mathsf{m}}}\left( Z_{0}^{\mathsf{m}}\in F\right) =\int_{F}\mathsf{dx}\varphi _{\mathsf{m,0}}(\mathsf{x})v_{\mathsf{m}}(\mathsf{x},0)=\left\{
\begin{array}{c}
0\text{ \ if }\mathsf{a}_{\mathsf{m}}\notin F \\
1\text{ \ if }\mathsf{a}_{\mathsf{m}}\in F\end{array}\right. \label{probability9}$$by using the first relation in (\[inifinacond\]), and similarly from ([probability3]{}) we get$$\mathbb{P}_{\mu _{\mathsf{m}}}\left( Z_{T}^{\mathsf{m}}\in F\right) =\int_{F}\mathsf{dx}u_{\mathsf{m}}(\mathsf{x},T)\psi _{\mathsf{m,}T}(\mathsf{x})=\left\{
\begin{array}{c}
0\text{ \ if }\mathsf{b}_{\mathsf{m}}\notin F \\
1\text{ \ if }\mathsf{b}_{\mathsf{m}}\in F\end{array}\right. \label{probability10}$$so that (\[probability4\]) holds. Moreover, (\[probability5\]) is an immediate consequence of (\[densitybis\]), (\[probability1\]) and ([forwardsolution]{}), (\[backwardsolution\]), which proves Statement (c) and thereby Statement (d). Finally, a glance at (\[markovdensity\]) shows that (\[distributionter\]) lacks translation invariance in time so that $Z_{\tau \in \left[ 0,T\right] }^{\mathsf{m}}$ is indeed non-stationary. $\blacksquare $
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Remarks.</span> (1) The fact that $Z_{\tau \in \left[ 0,T\right] }^{\mathsf{m}}$ is both a forward and a backward Markov process is a manifestation of its reversibility in the sense of Definition 2 in [vuizambrini]{}, which is also readily apparent in (\[probability5\]) since the probability density of finding the process in a given region of space at a given time is expressed as the product of the forward solution ([forwardsolution]{}) times the backward solution (\[backwardsolution\]). As a matter of fact we can also obtain (\[probability5\]) either from ([distributionter]{}) or from (\[distributionquarto\]) when $n=1$, and we have$$\mathbb{P}_{\mu _{\mathsf{m}}}\left( Z_{t}^{\mathsf{m}}\in \mathbb{R}^{d}\right) =\int_{\mathbb{R}^{d}}\mathsf{dx}u_{\mathsf{m}}(\mathsf{x},t)v_{\mathsf{m}}(\mathsf{x},t)=1 \label{probability7}$$for every $t\in \left[ 0,T\right] $ as it should be. Indeed, substituting (\[inifinacond\]) into (\[forwardsolution\])-(\[backwardsolution\]) and the resulting expression into (\[probability5\]) we get$$\mathbb{P}_{\mu _{\mathsf{m}}}\left( Z_{t}^{\mathsf{m}}\in F\right) =\frac{1}{g(\mathsf{a}_{\mathsf{m}},T,\mathsf{b}_{\mathsf{m}})}\int_{F}\mathsf{dx}g(\mathsf{a}_{\mathsf{m}},t,\mathsf{x})g(\mathsf{x},T-t,\mathsf{b}_{\mathsf{m}})\text{,}$$which implies (\[probability7\]) thanks to the semigroup composition law for $g$. Finally, we stress the fact that the forward density ([markovdensity]{}) is defined from the backward solution ([backwardsolution]{}), while the backward density (\[markovdensitybis\]) is defined from the forward solution (\[forwardsolution\]), and not the other way around.
\(2) We note that (\[distributionseptimo\]) may also be written as$$\begin{aligned}
&&\mathbb{P}_{\mu _{\mathsf{m}}}\left( Z_{t_{1}}^{\mathsf{m}}\in
F_{1},...,Z_{t_{n}}^{\mathsf{m}}\in F_{n}\right) \label{distributionoctavo}
\\
&=&\int_{F_{1}}\mathsf{dx}_{1}...\int_{F_{n}}\mathsf{dx}_{n}\dprod\limits_{k=2}^{n}g\left( \mathsf{x}_{k},t_{k}-t_{k-1},\mathsf{x}_{k-1}\right) \times u_{\mathsf{m}}(\mathsf{x}_{1},t_{1})v_{\mathsf{m}}(\mathsf{x}_{n},t_{n}) \notag\end{aligned}$$by carrying out the integral over $\mathsf{x}$ and by taking ([forwardsolution]{}) into account. Relation (\[distributionoctavo\]) will play an important rôle in Section 5 since the integrand determines the density of the law of the random vector $(Z_{t_{1}}^{\mathsf{m}},...,Z_{t_{n}}^{\mathsf{m}})\in \mathbb{R}^{nd}$.
\(3) Relation (\[probability4\]) shows that the process $Z_{\tau \in \left[
0,T\right] }^{\mathsf{m}}$ is pinned down at $\mathsf{a}_{\mathsf{m}}$ when $t=0$ and at $\mathsf{b}_{\mathsf{m}}$ when $t=T$. We have therefore obtained a sequence of Markovian bridges associated with the discrete spectrum of the operator on the right-hand side of (\[cauchyforwardbis\])-([cauchybackwardbis]{}), which we shall call Bernstein bridges in the sequel. In particular, each process $Z_{\tau \in \left[ 0,T\right] }^{\mathsf{m}}$ reduces to a Markovian loop in $\mathbb{R}^{d}$ when $\mathsf{a}_{\mathsf{m}}=\mathsf{b}_{\mathsf{m}}$ for every $\mathsf{m}$.
It turns out that Theorem 1 is the stepping stone toward the construction of a non-Markovian process we alluded to at the beginning of this article, which we shall carry out through the averaging procedure briefly sketched in the introduction. Accordingly, by mixing the Bernstein bridges constructed above we obtain the following result:
**Theorem 2.** *Assume that Hypothesis* (H)* holds, and for every* $\mathsf{m}\in \mathbb{N}^{d}$ *let* $Z_{\tau \in \left[
0,T\right] }^{\mathsf{m}}$ *be* *the process of Theorem 1. Let* $\bar{Z}_{\tau \in \left[ 0,T\right] }$ *be the Bernstein process in the sense of Proposition 1 where the probability measure is ([probabilities]{}) with the initial-final conditions given by ([inifinacond]{}). Then the following statements are valid:*
*(a) The process* $\bar{Z}_{\tau \in \left[ 0,T\right] }$ *is non-stationary, non-Markovian and its finite-dimensional distributions are*$$\begin{aligned}
&&\mathbb{P}_{\bar{\mu}}\left( \bar{Z}_{t_{1}}\in F_{1},...,\bar{Z}_{t_{n}}\in F_{n}\right) \notag \\
&=&\sum_{\mathsf{m\in }\mathbb{N}^{d}}p_{\mathsf{m}}\mathbb{P}_{\mu _{\mathsf{m}}}\left( Z_{t_{1}}^{\mathsf{m}}\in F_{1},...,Z_{t_{n}}^{\mathsf{m}}\in F_{n}\right) \label{distributionsesto}\end{aligned}$$*for every* $n\in \mathbb{N}^{+}$ *and* *all* $F_{1},...,F_{n}\in \mathcal{B}_{d}$, *where* $\mathbb{P}_{\mu _{\mathsf{m}}}\left( Z_{t_{1}}^{\mathsf{m}}\in F_{1},...,Z_{t_{n}}^{\mathsf{m}}\in F_{n}\right) $ *is given either by (\[distributionter\]) or (\[distributionquarto\]).*
*(b) We have*$$\mathbb{P}_{\bar{\mu}}(\bar{Z}_{t}\in F)=\sum_{\mathsf{m\in }\mathbb{N}^{d}}p_{\mathsf{m}}\mathbb{P}_{\mu _{\mathsf{m}}}\left( Z_{t}^{\mathsf{m}}\in F\right) \label{probability8}$$*for each* $t\in \left[ 0,T\right] $ *and every* $F\in
\mathcal{B}_{d}$, *where* $\mathbb{P}_{\mu _{\mathsf{m}}}\left(
Z_{t}^{\mathsf{m}}\in F\right) $ *is given by (\[probability5\]), (\[probability9\]) and (\[probability10\]).*
*(c) We have*$$\mathbb{E}_{_{\bar{\mu}}}(b(\bar{Z}_{t})=\sum_{\mathsf{m\in }\mathbb{N}^{d}}p_{\mathsf{m}}\mathbb{E}_{_{\mu _{\mathsf{m}}}}(b(Z_{t}^{\mathsf{m}}))
\label{expectationsbis}$$*for each bounded Borel measurable function* $b:\mathbb{R}^{d}\mathbb{\mapsto C}$ *and every* $t\in \left[ 0,T\right] $, *where* $\mathbb{E}_{_{\mu _{\mathsf{m}}}}\left( b(Z_{t}^{\mathsf{m}})\right) $* is given by (\[expectations\]).*
**Proof.** It is sufficient to substitute the joint density$$\bar{\mu}(\mathsf{x,y})=g(\mathsf{x},T,\mathsf{y})\sum_{\mathsf{m}\in
\mathbb{N}^{d}}p_{\mathsf{m}}\varphi _{\mathsf{m,0}}(\mathsf{x)}\psi _{\mathsf{m,}T}(\mathsf{y})$$with $\varphi _{\mathsf{m,0}}$ and $\psi _{\mathsf{m,}T}$ given by ([inifinacond]{}) into (\[distribution\]) and (\[probability1\]) to obtain (\[distributionsesto\]) and (\[probability8\]), respectively, from which (\[expectationsbis\]) follows. Owing to the lack of translation invariance in time of (\[distributionquarto\]), it is then clear that the process $\bar{Z}_{\tau \in \left[ 0,T\right] }$ is also non-stationary. Finally, we note that $\bar{\mu}$ is not of the form (\[markovianmeasure\]) so that $\bar{Z}_{\tau \in \left[ 0,T\right] }$ is indeed non-Markovian. $\blacksquare $
Having associated an arbitrary weight $p_{\mathsf{m}}$ with each level of the spectrum of (\[hamiltonian\]), it is now natural to ask whether there exists a linear bounded operator $\mathcal{R}\left( t\right) $ acting in $L^{2}\left( \mathbb{R}^{d}\right) $ for every $t\in \left( 0,T\right) $ possessing most of the attributes of a so-called density operator in Quantum Statistical Mechanics. If so, an interesting question is to know whether the averages of certain bounded self-adjoint observables computed by means of such a density operator are in one way or another related to some expectation values of the process $\bar{Z}_{\tau \in \left[ 0,T\right] }$. We shall see that the answer is affirmative if we define$$\mathcal{R}\left( t\right) f:=\sum_{\mathsf{m}\in \mathbb{N}^{d}}p_{\mathsf{m}}\left( f,u_{_{\mathsf{m}}}(\mathsf{.},t)\right) _{2}v_{\mathsf{m}}(\mathsf{.},t) \label{timedensityoperator}$$for each complex-valued $f\in L^{2}\left( \mathbb{R}^{d}\right) $ and every $t\in \left( 0,T\right) $, where $u_{\mathsf{m}}(\mathsf{.},t)$ and $v_{\mathsf{m}}(\mathsf{.},t)$ are given by$$u_{\mathsf{m}}(\mathsf{x},t)=\frac{g(\mathsf{x},t,\mathsf{a}_{\mathsf{m}})}{g^{\frac{1}{2}}(\mathsf{a}_{\mathsf{m}},T,\mathsf{b}_{\mathsf{m}})}
\label{forwardsolution bis}$$and $$v_{\mathsf{m}}(\mathsf{x},t)=\frac{g(\mathsf{x},T-t,\mathsf{b}_{\mathsf{m}})}{g^{\frac{1}{2}}(\mathsf{a}_{\mathsf{m}},T,\mathsf{b}_{\mathsf{m}})},
\label{backwardsolutionbis}$$respectively, after substitution of (\[inifinacond\]) into ([forwardsolution]{}) and (\[backwardsolution\]). We begin with the following result in whose proof we write $c$ for all the irrelevant positive constants depending only on the universal constants $c_{1,2}$ and $c_{1,2}^{\ast }$ in (\[greenfunction\]):
**Theorem 3.** *Let us assume that the sequences of points* $a_{\mathsf{m}},b_{\mathsf{m}}$* in (\[inifinacond\]) satisfy*$$\sup_{\mathsf{m}\in \mathbb{N}^{d}}\left\vert \mathsf{a}_{\mathsf{m}}-\mathsf{b}_{\mathsf{m}}\right\vert <+\infty . \label{supcondition}$$* Then the following statements hold:*
*(a) Formula (\[timedensityoperator\]) defines a linear trace-class operator in* $L^{2}\left( \mathbb{R}^{d}\right) $* for every* $t\in
\left( 0,T\right) $* and we have*$$\func{Tr}\mathcal{R}\left( t\right) =\sum_{\mathsf{m\in }\mathbb{N}^{d}}p_{\mathsf{m}}=1\text{.}$$* *
*(b) Let us consider the linear bounded self-adjoint multiplication operator on* $L^{2}\left( \mathbb{R}^{d}\right) $ *given by* $Bf=bf$* for every complex-valued* $f\in L^{2}\left( \mathbb{R}^{d}\right) $,* where* $b\in $* *$L^{\infty }\left( \mathbb{R}^{d}\right)
$* is real-valued. If* $\bar{Z}_{\tau \in \left[ 0,T\right] }$ *denotes the Bernstein process of Theorem 2 then we have*$$\func{Tr}\left( \mathcal{R}\left( t\right) B\right) =\mathbb{E}_{_{\bar{\mu}}}\left( b(\bar{Z}_{t})\right) \label{averagesequality}$$*for every* $t\in \left( 0,T\right) $, *where the right-hand side of (\[averagesequality\]) is given by (\[expectationsbis\]).*
**Proof.** We first prove that $u_{\mathsf{m}}(\mathsf{.},t),v_{\mathsf{m}}(\mathsf{.},t)\in L^{2}\left( \mathbb{R}^{d}\right) $ and that there exists a constant $c_{\ast }>0$ independent of $\mathsf{m}$ and depending only on $t,T$ and on the constants in (\[greenfunction\]) such that$$\begin{aligned}
\left\Vert u_{\mathsf{m}}(\mathsf{.},t)\right\Vert _{2} &\leq &c_{\ast
}<+\infty , \label{uniformbound1} \\
\left\Vert v_{\mathsf{m}}(\mathsf{.},t)\right\Vert _{2} &\leq &c_{\ast
}<+\infty . \label{uniformbound2}\end{aligned}$$Indeed, from the right-hand side inequality (\[greenfunction\]) we have$$\int_{\mathbb{R}^{d}}\mathsf{dx}g^{2}(\mathsf{x},t,\mathsf{a}_{\mathsf{m}})\leq ct^{-d}\int_{\mathbb{R}^{d}}\mathsf{dx}\exp \left[ -c\frac{\left\vert
\mathsf{x}\right\vert ^{2}}{t}\right] =ct^{-\frac{d}{2}}<+\infty$$for every $t\in \left( 0,T\right) $ independently of $\mathsf{m}$ by translation invariance of the integral, and similarly$$\int_{\mathbb{R}^{d}}\mathsf{dx}g^{2}(\mathsf{x},T-t,\mathsf{b}_{\mathsf{m}})\leq c\left( T-t\right) ^{-\frac{d}{2}}<+\infty .$$On the other hand, from the left-hand side inequality (\[greenfunction\]) we obtain$$\frac{1}{g(\mathsf{a}_{\mathsf{m}},T,\mathsf{b}_{\mathsf{m}})}\leq cT^{\frac{d}{2}}\exp \left[ c\frac{\left\vert \mathsf{a}_{\mathsf{m}}-\mathsf{b}_{\mathsf{m}}\right\vert ^{2}}{T}\right]$$so that we eventually get$$\left\Vert u_{\mathsf{m}}(\mathsf{.},t)\right\Vert _{2}^{2}\leq c\left(
\frac{T}{t}\right) ^{\frac{d}{2}}\exp \left[ c\frac{\left\vert \mathsf{a}_{\mathsf{m}}-\mathsf{b}_{\mathsf{m}}\right\vert ^{2}}{T}\right] \leq c\left(
\frac{T}{t}\right) ^{\frac{d}{2}}\exp \left[ \frac{c}{T}\right] :=c_{\ast
}^{2}<+\infty$$by virtue of (\[forwardsolution bis\]) and (\[supcondition\]). In a completely similar way we have$$\left\Vert v_{\mathsf{m}}(\mathsf{.},t)\right\Vert _{2}^{2}\leq c\left(
\frac{T}{T-t}\right) ^{\frac{d}{2}}\exp \left[ c\frac{\left\vert \mathsf{a}_{\mathsf{m}}-\mathsf{b}_{\mathsf{m}}\right\vert ^{2}}{T-t}\right] \leq
c_{\ast }^{2}$$by changing the value of $c_{\ast }$ if necessary, so that ([uniformbound1]{}) and (\[uniformbound2\]) hold. Therefore, series ([timedensityoperator]{}) converges strongly in $L^{2}\left( \mathbb{R}^{d}\right) $ and defines there a linear bounded operator since$$\sum_{\mathsf{m}\in \mathbb{N}^{d}}p_{\mathsf{m}}\left\vert \left( f,u_{\mathsf{m}}(\mathsf{.},t)\right) _{2}\right\vert \left\Vert v_{\mathsf{m}}(\mathsf{.},t)\right\Vert _{2}\leq c_{\ast }^{2}\left\Vert f\right\Vert
_{2}<+\infty$$for each $f\in L^{2}\left( \mathbb{R}^{d}\right) $ and every $t\in \left(
0,T\right) $. In order to prove that $\mathcal{R}\left( t\right) $ is trace-class, it is then necessary and sufficient to show that$$\sum_{\mathsf{n}\in \mathbb{N}^{d}}\left( \mathcal{R}\left( t\right) \mathsf{h}_{\mathsf{n}},\mathsf{h}_{\mathsf{n}}\right) _{2}<+\infty
\label{matrixtrace}$$for any* *orthonormal basis $\left( \mathsf{h}_{\mathsf{n}}\right) _{\mathsf{n}\in \mathbb{N}^{d}}$ in $L^{2}\left( \mathbb{R}^{d}\right) $, in which case (\[matrixtrace\]) will not depend on the choice of the basis (see, e.g., Theorem 8.1 in Chapter III of [@gohbergkrein]). To this end let us introduce momentarily the auxiliary function$$A(\mathsf{m},\mathsf{n},t):=p_{\mathsf{m}}\left( \mathsf{h}_{\mathsf{n}},u_{\mathsf{m}}(\mathsf{.},t)\right) _{2}\left( v_{\mathsf{m}}(\mathsf{.},t),\mathsf{h}_{\mathsf{n}}\right) _{2}$$so that$$\sum_{\mathsf{m}\in \mathbb{N}^{d}}A(\mathsf{m},\mathsf{n},t)=\left(
\mathcal{R}\left( t\right) \mathsf{h}_{\mathsf{n}},\mathsf{h}_{\mathsf{n}}\right) _{2} \label{identity1}$$for any fixed $\mathsf{n}$. Moreover, for any fixed $\mathsf{m}$ we have$$\sum_{\mathsf{n}\in \mathbb{N}^{d}}A(\mathsf{m},\mathsf{n},t)=p_{\mathsf{m}}\left( u_{\mathsf{m}}(\mathsf{.},t),v_{\mathsf{m}}(\mathsf{.},t)\right)
_{2}=p_{\mathsf{m}} \label{identity2}$$by virtue of (\[probability7\]). In addition, the preceding series converges absolutely as a consequence of the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality and estimates (\[uniformbound1\]), (\[uniformbound2\]) since for any positive integers $N_{1},...,N_{d}$ we have successively$$\begin{aligned}
&&\sum_{\mathsf{n:0\leq n}_{j}\leq N_{j}}\left\vert A(\mathsf{m},\mathsf{n},t)\right\vert \notag \\
&\leq &p_{\mathsf{m}}\left( \sum_{\mathsf{n}\in \mathbb{N}^{d}}\left\vert
\left( u_{\mathsf{m}}(\mathsf{.},t),\mathsf{h}_{\mathsf{n}}\right)
_{2}\right\vert ^{2}\right) ^{\frac{1}{2}}\left( \sum_{\mathsf{n}\in \mathbb{N}^{d}}\left\vert \left( v_{\mathsf{m}}(\mathsf{.},t),\mathsf{h}_{\mathsf{n}}\right) _{2}\right\vert ^{2}\right) ^{\frac{1}{2}} \notag \\
&=&p_{\mathsf{m}}\left\Vert u_{\mathsf{m}}(\mathsf{.},t)\right\Vert
_{2}\left\Vert v_{\mathsf{m}}(\mathsf{.},t)\right\Vert _{2}\leq c_{\ast
}^{2}p_{\mathsf{m}} \label{estimate7}\end{aligned}$$for any fixed $\mathsf{m}$ so that $$\sum_{\mathsf{n}\in \mathbb{N}^{d}}\left\vert A(\mathsf{m},\mathsf{n},t)\right\vert <+\infty$$since the partial sums of this series remain bounded. Finally, ([estimate7]{}) still implies$$\sum_{\mathsf{m}\in \mathbb{N}^{d}}\sum_{\mathsf{n}\in \mathbb{N}^{d}}\left\vert A(\mathsf{m},\mathsf{n},t)\right\vert \leq c_{\ast
}^{2}\sum_{\mathsf{m}\in \mathbb{N}^{d}}p_{\mathsf{m}}=c_{\ast }^{2}<+\infty
.$$Therefore the corresponding iterated series are equal (see, e.g., Theorem 8.43 in Chapter 8 of [@apostol]), that is,$$\sum_{\mathsf{n}\in \mathbb{N}^{d}}\sum_{\mathsf{m}\in \mathbb{N}^{d}}A(\mathsf{m},\mathsf{n},t)=\sum_{\mathsf{m}\in \mathbb{N}^{d}}\sum_{\mathsf{n}\in \mathbb{N}^{d}}A(\mathsf{m},\mathsf{n},t)$$or, equivalently,$$\func{Tr}\mathcal{R}\left( t\right) :=\sum_{\mathsf{n}\in \mathbb{N}^{d}}\left( \mathcal{R}\left( t\right) \mathsf{h}_{\mathsf{n}},\mathsf{h}_{\mathsf{n}}\right) _{2}=\sum_{\mathsf{m}\in \mathbb{N}^{d}}p_{\mathsf{m}}=1$$according to (\[identity1\]) and (\[identity2\]), which is (a). As for the proof of (b), arguing as above for the computation of the trace we have$$\begin{aligned}
&&\func{Tr}\left( \mathcal{R}\left( t\right) B\right) \\
&=&\sum_{\mathsf{n}\in \mathbb{N}^{d}}\sum_{\mathsf{m}\in \mathbb{N}^{d}}p_{\mathsf{m}}\left( \mathsf{h}_{\mathsf{n}},bu_{_{\mathsf{m}}}(\mathsf{.},t)\right) _{2}\left( v_{\mathsf{m}}(\mathsf{.},t),\mathsf{h}_{\mathsf{n}}\right) _{2} \\
&=&\sum_{\mathsf{m}\in \mathbb{N}^{d}}p_{\mathsf{m}}\left( bu_{_{\mathsf{m}}}(\mathsf{.},t),v_{\mathsf{m}}(\mathsf{.},t)\right) _{2}=\mathbb{E}_{_{\bar{\mu}}}\left( b(\bar{Z}_{t})\right)\end{aligned}$$where the last equality follows from (\[expectations\]) and ([expectationsbis]{}) (note that $u_{_{\mathsf{m}}}(\mathsf{.},t)$ and $v_{\mathsf{m}}(\mathsf{.},t)$ are also real-valued). $\blacksquare $
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Remarks.</span> (1) The preceding considerations show that $\mathcal{R}(t)$ is not self-adjoint in general for it is easily seen that its adjoint is obtained by swapping the rôle of (\[forwardsolution bis\]) and ([backwardsolutionbis]{}), that is,$$\mathcal{R}^{\ast }\left( t\right) f=\sum_{\mathsf{m}\in \mathbb{N}^{d}}p_{\mathsf{m}}\left( f,v_{_{\mathsf{m}}}(\mathsf{.},t)\right) _{2}u_{\mathsf{m}}(\mathsf{.},t).$$Aside from that and in addition to the conclusion of Theorem 3, ([timedensityoperator]{}) possesses most of the properties of a density operator. For instance, every operator $\mathcal{P}^{\mathsf{m}}(t):L^{2}\left( \mathbb{R}^{d}\right) \mapsto L^{2}\left( \mathbb{R}^{d}\right) $ defined by$$\mathcal{P}^{\mathsf{m}}(t)f:=\left( f,u_{_{\mathsf{m}}}(\mathsf{.},t)\right) _{2}v_{\mathsf{m}}(\mathsf{.},t)$$satisfies $\left( \mathcal{P}^{\mathsf{m}}(t)\right) ^{2}=\mathcal{P}^{\mathsf{m}}(t)$ as a consequence of (\[probability7\]) and thus represents an oblique projection rather than an orthogonal projection, but ([timedensityoperator]{}) is still a statistical mixture of the $\mathcal{P}^{\mathsf{m}}(t)$ obtained by sweeping over the whole spectrum of ([hamiltonian]{}). Moreover, we remark that (\[timedensityoperator\]) involves both the forward and the backward solutions to ([cauchyforwardbis]{}) and (\[cauchybackwardbis\]), again in agreement with the fact that there are two time directions in the theory from the outset.
\(2) It is tempting to believe that for *every* linear bounded selfadjoint operator there exists a real-valued $b\in $* *$L^{\infty
}\left( \mathbb{R}^{d}\right) $ such that (\[averagesequality\]) holds, since such an operator is unitarily equivalent to a multiplication operator by the spectral theorem. We defer the general analysis of this question to a separate publication.
In the next section we carry out the program described in the introduction when the initial-final data satisfy suitable biorthogonality properties, and where we keep the same notation $\varphi _{\mathsf{m,0}}$ and $\psi _{\mathsf{m,}T}$ for them.
On generating Bernstein processes in $\mathbb{R}^{d}$ by mixing signed measures
===============================================================================
What we first need lies in the following adaptation of a result by Paley and Wiener (see the abstract form given in Section 86 of Chapter V in [riesznagy]{} of Theorem XXXVII of Chapter VII in [@paleywiener]). We omit the proof as it is essentially available therein modulo trivial changes and up to the observation that the equality$$\left( \exp \left[ -tH\right] \varphi _{\mathsf{m,0}},\exp \left[ -\left(
T-t\right) H\right] \psi _{\mathsf{n,}T}\right) _{2}=\left( \varphi _{\mathsf{m,0}},\exp \left[ -TH\right] \psi _{\mathsf{n,}T}\right) _{2}$$holds for every $t\in \left[ 0,T\right] $ as a consequence of the symmetry of the semigroup $\exp \left[ -tH\right] $. In the following statement all functions are supposed to be real-valued with $\left( \mathsf{f}_{\mathsf{m}}\right) _{\mathsf{m\in }\mathbb{N}^{d}\text{ \ }}$the orthonormal basis of Section 1:
**Proposition 2.** *Let* $\left( \psi _{\mathsf{m,}T}\right) _{\mathsf{m\in }\mathbb{N}^{d}}$* be an arbitrary sequence in* $L^{2}\left( \mathbb{R}^{d}\right) $* and let us assume that there exists* $\theta \in \left[ 0,1\right) $ *such that the estimate*$$\left\Vert \dsum\limits_{\mathsf{m}\in \mathsf{I}}\gamma _{_{\mathsf{m}}}\left( \mathsf{f}_{\mathsf{m}}-\exp \left[ -TH\right] \psi _{\mathsf{m,}T}\right) \right\Vert _{2}\leq \theta \left( \sum_{\mathsf{m}\in \mathsf{I}}\left\vert \gamma _{\mathsf{m}}\right\vert ^{2}\right) ^{\frac{1}{2}}
\label{estimatebis}$$*holds for every sequence* $\left( \gamma _{\mathsf{m}}\right) _{\mathsf{m\in }\mathbb{N}^{d}}$* of real numbers, where the sums in (\[estimatebis\]) run over the same finite set* $I\subset \mathbb{N}^{d}$ *which* *may be chosen arbitrarily. Then there exists a sequence* $\left( \varphi _{\mathsf{m,}0}\right) _{\mathsf{m\in }\mathbb{N}^{d}}\subset L^{2}\left( \mathbb{R}^{d}\right) $* such that the following statements are valid:*
*(a) We have*$$\left( \exp \left[ -tH\right] \varphi _{\mathsf{m,0}},\exp \left[ -\left(
T-t\right) H\right] \psi _{\mathsf{n,}T}\right) _{2}=\delta _{\mathsf{m,n}}
\label{biorthogonalitybis}$$*for every* $t\in \left[ 0,T\right] $ *and the strongly convergent expansions*$$\left\{
\begin{array}{c}
f=\dsum\limits_{\mathsf{m\in }\mathbb{N}^{d}}\left( f,\varphi _{\mathsf{m,}0}\right) _{2}\exp \left[ -TH\right] \psi _{\mathsf{m,}T}, \\
\\
f=\dsum\limits_{\mathsf{m\in }\mathbb{N}^{d}}\left( f,\exp \left[ -TH\right]
\psi _{\mathsf{m,}T}\right) _{2}\varphi _{\mathsf{m,}0}\end{array}\right. \label{expansionbis}$$*hold* *for every* $f\in L^{2}\left( \mathbb{R}^{d}\right) $.
*(b) The coefficients in (\[expansionbis\]) satisfy the estimates*$$\begin{aligned}
\left( 1+\theta \right) ^{-1}\left\Vert f\right\Vert _{2} &\leq &\left(
\dsum\limits_{\mathsf{m\in }\mathbb{N}^{d}}\left\vert \left( f,\varphi _{\mathsf{m,}0}\right) _{2}\right\vert ^{2}\right) ^{\frac{1}{2}}\leq \left(
1-\theta \right) ^{-1}\left\Vert f\right\Vert _{2}, \label{estimate1} \\
\left( 1-\theta \right) \left\Vert f\right\Vert _{2} &\leq &\left(
\dsum\limits_{\mathsf{m\in }\mathbb{N}^{d}}\left\vert \left( f,\exp \left[
-TH\right] \psi _{\mathsf{m,}T}\right) _{2}\right\vert ^{2}\right) ^{\frac{1}{2}}\leq \left( 1+\theta \right) \left\Vert f\right\Vert _{2}.
\label{estimate2}\end{aligned}$$
Thus the sequences $\left( \exp \left[ -TH\right] \psi _{\mathsf{m,}T}\right) _{\mathsf{m\in }\mathbb{N}^{d}}$ and $\left( \varphi _{\mathsf{m,}0}\right) _{\mathsf{m\in }\mathbb{N}^{d}}$ constitute Riesz bases of $L^{2}\left( \mathbb{R}^{d}\right) $ in the terminology of [@gohbergkrein] and it is plain that (\[inifinacondbis\]) corresponds to $\theta =0$ in Proposition 2, in which case (\[expansionbis\]) reduces to the usual Fourier expansion of $f$ along the orthonormal basis $\left( \mathsf{f}_{\mathsf{m}}\right) _{\mathsf{m\in }\mathbb{N}^{d}}$ and (\[estimate1\]), (\[estimate2\]) to Parseval’s equality. The reason why we have to consider $\exp \left[ -TH\right] \psi _{\mathsf{m,}T}$ rather than just $\psi _{\mathsf{m,}T}$ lies in Relation (\[normalizationter\]) of the following result:
**Lemma 1.** *Let* $\varphi _{\mathsf{m,0}}$ *and* $\exp \left[ -TH\right] \psi _{\mathsf{m,}T}$ *be as in Proposition 2 and let us again define the density* $\mu _{\mathsf{m}}$ *by* $$\mu _{\mathsf{m}}(\mathsf{x,y})=\varphi _{\mathsf{m,0}}(\mathsf{x)}g(\mathsf{x},T,\mathsf{y})\psi _{\mathsf{m,}T}(\mathsf{y})\text{.}$$*Then the induced measures* $\mu _{\mathsf{m}}$* on* $\mathcal{B}_{d}\times \mathcal{B}_{d}$ *are* *signed and we have*$$\mu _{\mathsf{m}}\left( \mathbb{R}^{d}\times \mathbb{R}^{d}\right) =1
\label{normalizationter}$$*for every* $\mathsf{m\in }\mathbb{N}^{d}$*.*
**Proof.** The measures are signed since there is no requirement about the positivity of $\varphi _{\mathsf{m,0}}$ and $\exp \left[ -TH\right] \psi
_{\mathsf{m,}T}$. In particular, regarding (\[inifinacondbis\]) the eigenfunctions $\mathsf{f}_{\mathsf{m}}$ are typically not positive on $\mathbb{R}^{d}$ with the possible exception of $\mathsf{f}_{0}$. Moreover, expanding $\psi _{\mathsf{m,}T}$ along the orthonormal basis $\left( \mathsf{f}_{\mathsf{m}}\right) _{\mathsf{m\in }\mathbb{N}^{d}}$ we get$$\sum_{\mathsf{k}\in \mathbb{N}^{d}}\exp \left[ -TE_{\mathsf{k}})\right]
\left( \varphi _{\mathsf{m,0}},\mathsf{f}_{\mathsf{k}}\right) _{2}\left(
\psi _{\mathsf{n,}T},\mathsf{f}_{\mathsf{k}}\right) _{2}=\delta _{\mathsf{m,n}}$$from (\[biorthogonality\]), and therefore$$\mu _{\mathsf{m}}\left( \mathbb{R}^{d}\times \mathbb{R}^{d}\right) =\sum_{\mathsf{k}\in \mathbb{N}^{d}}\exp \left[ -TE_{\mathsf{k}})\right] \left(
\varphi _{\mathsf{m,0}},\mathsf{f}_{\mathsf{k}}\right) _{2}\left( \psi _{\mathsf{m,}T},\mathsf{f}_{\mathsf{k}}\right) _{2}=1$$by substituting (\[expansion\]) into (\[positivemeasures\]). $\blacksquare $
The fact that (\[probabilities\]) may define a probability measure in the case under consideration is then ensured by the following result:
**Lemma 2.** *Let the initial-final conditions form a complete biorthonormal system* *in the sense of Proposition 2, and let* $\bar{\mu}$ *be the measure determined by*$$\bar{\mu}(G)=\sum_{\mathsf{m\in }\mathbb{N}^{d}}p_{\mathsf{m}}\mu _{\mathsf{m}}(G) \label{probabilitiesbis}$$*for every* $G\in \mathcal{B}_{d}\times \mathcal{B}_{d}$*. If* $$\left( \mathsf{x,y}\right) \mapsto \sum_{\mathsf{m\in }\mathbb{N}^{d}}p_{\mathsf{m}}\varphi _{\mathsf{m,0}}(\mathsf{x)}\psi _{\mathsf{m,}T}(\mathsf{y}) \label{positiveschwartz}$$*is a positive measure* *on* $\mathbb{R}^{d}\times \mathbb{R}^{d}$ *then* $\bar{\mu}$* is a probability measure on* $\mathcal{B}_{d}\mathcal{\times B}_{d}$.
**Proof.** We have $\bar{\mu}(\mathbb{R}^{d}\times \mathbb{R}^{d})=1$ because of Lemma 1 and the fact that $\sum_{\mathsf{m\in }\mathbb{N}^{d}}p_{\mathsf{m}}=1$. On the other hand, the joint density associated with ([probabilitiesbis]{}) reads$$\bar{\mu}\left( \mathsf{x,y}\right) =g(\mathsf{x},T,\mathsf{y})\sum_{\mathsf{m\in }\mathbb{N}^{d}}p_{\mathsf{m}}\varphi _{\mathsf{m,0}}(\mathsf{x)}\psi _{\mathsf{m,}T}(\mathsf{y}) \label{density}$$where $g(\mathsf{x},T,\mathsf{y})>0$ according to (\[greenfunction\]). $\blacksquare $
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Remark.</span> It may seem abrupt to assume off-hand that ([positiveschwartz]{}) is positive as a measure. However, an important example illustrating this situation comes about when the initial-final data are given by (\[inifinacondbis\]) and the weights associated with the spectrum by (\[probagibbs\]). Indeed, in this case we have$$\mu _{\mathsf{m}}\left( \mathsf{x,y}\right) =\exp \left[ TE_{\mathsf{m}}\right] g(\mathsf{x},T,\mathsf{y})\mathsf{f}_{\mathsf{m}}(\mathsf{x})\mathsf{f}_{\mathsf{m}}(\mathsf{y})$$and therefore$$\begin{aligned}
\bar{\mu}\left( \mathsf{x,y}\right) &=&\mathcal{Z}^{-1}(T)g(\mathsf{x},T,\mathsf{y})\sum_{\mathsf{m\in }\mathbb{N}^{d}}\mathsf{f}_{\mathsf{m}}(\mathsf{x})\mathsf{f}_{\mathsf{m}}(\mathsf{y}) \notag \\
&=&\mathcal{Z}^{-1}(T)g(\mathsf{x},T,\mathsf{y})\delta (\mathsf{x}-\mathsf{y}) \label{positivedensity}\end{aligned}$$where the last equality is a consequence of the completeness of the orthogonal system $\left( \mathsf{f}_{\mathsf{m}}\right) _{\mathsf{m}\in
\mathbb{N}^{d}}$. It is (\[positivedensity\]) that will allow us to relate the above considerations to the periodic Ornstein-Uhlenbeck process in the next section.
Since the solutions $u_{\mathsf{m}}$ and $v_{\mathsf{m}}$ to ([cauchyforwardbis]{}) and (\[cauchybackwardbis\]) may now be written in terms of the Schrödinger semigroup defined in Section 1, namely,$$u_{\mathsf{m}}(\mathsf{.},t)=\exp \left[ -tH\right] \varphi _{\mathsf{m,0}}
\label{semigroup1}$$and$$v_{\mathsf{m}}(\mathsf{.},t)=\exp \left[ -(T-t)H\right] \psi _{\mathsf{m,}T},
\label{semigroup2}$$respectively, then by mixing the measures $\mu _{\mathsf{m}}$ as in Lemma 2 we obtain:
**Theorem 4.** *Assume that Hypothesis* (H) *holds, and let* $\bar{Z}_{\tau \in \left[ 0,T\right] }$ *be the Bernstein process in the sense of Proposition 1 with* $\bar{\mu}$* given by (\[density\]), the particular case (\[positivedensity\]) being excluded. Then the following statements are valid:*
*(a) The process* $\bar{Z}_{\tau \in \left[ 0,T\right] }$ *is non-stationary, non-Markovian and for every* $n\in \mathbb{N}^{+}$ *with* $n\geq 2$ *its finite-dimensional distributions are*$$\begin{aligned}
&&\mathbb{P}_{\bar{\mu}}\left( \bar{Z}_{t_{1}}\in F_{1},...,\bar{Z}_{t_{n}}\in F_{n}\right) \\
&=&\sum_{\mathsf{m\in }\mathbb{N}^{d}}p_{\mathsf{m}}\int_{F_{1}}\mathsf{dx}_{1}...\int_{F_{n}}\mathsf{dx}_{n}\dprod\limits_{k=2}^{n}g\left( \mathsf{x}_{k},t_{k}-t_{k-1},\mathsf{x}_{k-1}\right) \\
&&\mathsf{\times }\left( \exp \left[ -t_{1}H\right] \varphi _{\mathsf{m,0}}\right) (\mathsf{x}_{1}\mathsf{)}\left( \exp \left[ -\left( T-t_{n}\right) H\right] \psi _{\mathsf{m,}T}\right) (\mathsf{x}_{n})\end{aligned}$$*for all* $F_{1},...,F_{n}\in \mathcal{B}_{d}$* and all* $0<t_{1}<...<t_{n}<T$*.*
*(b) We have*$$\begin{aligned}
&&\mathbb{P}_{\bar{\mu}}\left( \bar{Z}_{t}\in F\right) \\
&=&\sum_{\mathsf{m\in }\mathbb{N}^{d}}p_{\mathsf{m}}\int_{F}\mathsf{dx}\left( \exp \left[ -tH\right] \varphi _{\mathsf{m,0}}\right) (\mathsf{x)}\left( \exp \left[ -\left( T-t\right) H\right] \psi _{\mathsf{m,}T}\right) (\mathsf{x})\end{aligned}$$*for each* $F\in \mathcal{B}_{d}$* and every* $t\in \left[ 0,T\right] $.
*(c) We have*$$\begin{aligned}
&&\mathbb{E}_{_{\bar{\mu}}}\left( b(\bar{Z}_{t})\right)
\label{expectationter} \\
&=&\sum_{\mathsf{m\in }\mathbb{N}^{d}}p_{\mathsf{m}}\int_{\mathbb{R}^{d}}\mathsf{dx}b\left( \mathsf{x}\right) \left( \exp \left[ -tH\right] \varphi _{\mathsf{m,0}}\right) (\mathsf{x)}\left( \exp \left[ -\left( T-t\right) H\right] \psi _{\mathsf{m,}T}\right) (\mathsf{x}) \notag\end{aligned}$$*for each bounded Borel measurable function* $b:\mathbb{R}^{d}\mathbb{\mapsto C}$ *and every* $t\in \left[ 0,T\right] $*.*
**Proof.** The substitution of (\[density\]) into (\[distribution\]) gives$$\begin{aligned}
&&\mathbb{P}_{\mu }\left( Z_{t_{1}}\in F_{1},...,Z_{t_{n}}\in F_{n}\right) \\
&=&\sum_{\mathsf{m\in }\mathbb{N}^{d}}p_{\mathsf{m}}\int_{F_{1}}\mathsf{dx}_{1}...\int_{F_{n}}\mathsf{dx}_{n}\dprod\limits_{k=2}^{n}g\left( \mathsf{x}_{k},t_{k}-t_{k-1},\mathsf{x}_{k-1}\right) \\
&&\times \int_{\mathbb{R}^{d}\times \mathbb{R}^{d}}\mathsf{d\mathsf{xdy}}\varphi _{\mathsf{m,0}}(\mathsf{x)}\psi _{\mathsf{m,}T}(\mathsf{y})g\left(
\mathsf{x}_{1},t_{1},\mathsf{x}\right) g\left( \mathsf{y},T-t_{n},\mathsf{x}_{n}\right)\end{aligned}$$for all $F_{1},...,F_{n}\in \mathcal{B}_{d}$ and all $0<t_{1}<...<t_{n}<T$, where we have used the fact that $t_{0}=0$ and $\mathsf{x}_{0}\mathsf{=x}$. This proves (a) since$$\left( \exp \left[ -t_{1}H\right] \varphi _{\mathsf{m,0}}\right) (\mathsf{x}_{1}\mathsf{)=}\int_{\mathbb{R}^{d}}\mathsf{d\mathsf{x}}g\left( \mathsf{x}_{1},t_{1},\mathsf{x}\right) \varphi _{\mathsf{m,0}}(\mathsf{x)}$$and$$\left( \exp \left[ -\left( T-t_{n}\right) H\right] \psi _{\mathsf{m,}T}\right) (\mathsf{x}_{n})=\int_{\mathbb{R}^{d}}\mathsf{\mathsf{dx}}g\left(
\mathsf{x}_{n},T-t_{n},\mathsf{x}\right) \psi _{\mathsf{m,}T}(\mathsf{x}).$$The proof of (b) is similar by using (\[density\]) in (\[probability1\]). It is also plain that (c) follows from (b) and that $\bar{Z}_{\tau \in \left[ 0,T\right] }$ is non-stationary and non-Markovian for the same reasons as those given in the proof of Theorem 2 of the preceding section. $\blacksquare $
When $\bar{\mu}$ is given by (\[positivedensity\]) the associated process remains stationary and it is useful to discuss its properties separately by writing out the various quantities of interest in view of the applications discussed in the next section:
**Corollary 1.** *Assume that Hypothesis* (H)* holds, and let* $\bar{Z}_{\tau \in \left[ 0,T\right] }$ *be the Bernstein process in the sense of Proposition 1 with* $\bar{\mu}$* given by (\[positivedensity\]). Then the following statements are valid:*
*(a) The process* $\bar{Z}_{\tau \in \left[ 0,T\right] }$ *is stationary, non-Markovian and for every* $n\in \mathbb{N}^{+}$ *with* $n\geq 2$ *its finite-dimensional distributions are*$$\begin{aligned}
&&\mathbb{P}_{\bar{\mu}}\left( \bar{Z}_{t_{1}}\in F_{1},...,\bar{Z}_{t_{n}}\in F_{n}\right) \notag \\
&=&\mathcal{Z}^{-1}(T)\int_{F_{1}}\mathsf{dx}_{1}...\int_{F_{n}}\mathsf{dx}_{n} \label{distributionquinto} \\
&&\times \dprod\limits_{k=2}^{n}g\left( \mathsf{x}_{k},t_{k}-t_{k-1},\mathsf{x}_{k-1}\right) \times g\left( \mathsf{x}_{1},T-(t_{n}-t_{1}),\mathsf{x}_{n}\right) \notag\end{aligned}$$*for all* $F_{1},...,F_{n}\in \mathcal{B}_{d}$* and all* $0<t_{1}<...<t_{n}<T$*.*
*(b) We have*$$\mathbb{P}_{\bar{\mu}}\left( \bar{Z}_{t}\in F\right) =\mathcal{Z}^{-1}(T)\int_{F}\mathsf{dx}g\left( \mathsf{x},T,\mathsf{x}\right)
\label{probability6}$$*for each* $F\in \mathcal{B}_{d}$* and every* $t\in \left[ 0,T\right] $.
*(c) We have*$$\mathbb{E}_{_{\bar{\mu}}}\left( b(\bar{Z}_{t})\right) =\mathcal{Z}^{-1}(T)\int_{\mathbb{R}^{d}}\mathsf{dx}b(\mathsf{x})g\left( \mathsf{x},T,\mathsf{x}\right) \label{averageter}$$*for each bounded Borel measurable function* $b:\mathbb{R}^{d}\mathbb{\mapsto C}$ *and every* $t\in \left[ 0,T\right] $*.*
**Proof.** Relation (\[distributionquinto\]) follows from the substitution of (\[positivedensity\]) into (\[distribution\]) and from the semigroup composition law for $g$, while (\[probability6\]) is a consequence of (\[positivedensity\]) into (\[probability1\]) and ([averageter]{}) a consequence of (\[probability6\]) since the density of the law of the process is $\mathsf{x}\mapsto \mathcal{Z}^{-1}(T)g\left( \mathsf{x},T,\mathsf{x}\right) $. Now for any $\tau >0$ sufficiently small such that $0<t_{1}+\tau <...<t_{n}+\tau <T$ we have$$\mathbb{P}_{\bar{\mu}}\left( \bar{Z}_{t_{1}+\tau }\in F_{1},...,\bar{Z}_{t_{n}+\tau }\in F_{n}\right) =\mathbb{P}_{\bar{\mu}}\left( \bar{Z}_{t_{1}}\in F_{1},...,\bar{Z}_{t_{n}}\in F_{n}\right)$$from (\[distributionquinto\]) and therefore $\bar{Z}_{\tau \in \left[ 0,T\right] }$ is stationary, which entails the fact that both ([probability6]{}) and (\[averageter\]) are independent of $t$. Finally the process is non-Markovian since (\[positivedensity\]) is not of the form (\[markovianmeasure\]). $\blacksquare $
As in the preceding section we can now define a linear transformation in $L^{2}\left( \mathbb{R}^{d}\right) $ which will play the rôle of a density operator. Let us set$$\mathcal{R}(t)f:=\sum_{\mathsf{m\in }\mathbb{N}^{d}}p_{\mathsf{m}}\left(
f,u_{\mathsf{m}}(\mathsf{.},t)\right) _{2}v_{\mathsf{m}}(\mathsf{.},t)
\label{timedensityoperatorbis}$$for each $f\in L^{2}\left( \mathbb{R}^{d}\right) $ and every $t\in \left[ 0,T\right] $, where $u_{\mathsf{m}}$ and $v_{\mathsf{m}}$ are given by ([semigroup1]{}) and (\[semigroup2\]), respectively. We begin with the following:
**Lemma 3.** *Assume that* $\left( \psi _{\mathsf{m,}T}\right) _{\mathsf{m\in }\mathbb{N}^{d}}$* is an arbitrary bounded sequence in* $L^{2}\left( \mathbb{R}^{d}\right) $,* and that* $\left( \varphi _{\mathsf{m},0}\right) _{\mathsf{m\in }\mathbb{N}^{d}}$* is the sequence associated with* $\left( \psi _{\mathsf{m,}T}\right) _{\mathsf{m\in
}\mathbb{N}^{d}}$* in the sense of Proposition 2. Then ([timedensityoperatorbis]{}) defines a linear bounded operator in* $L^{2}\left(
\mathbb{R}^{d}\right) $*.*
**Proof.** Since the function $V$ is bounded from below according to Hypothesis (H) we first have$$\begin{aligned}
\left\Vert u_{\mathsf{m}}(\mathsf{.},t)\right\Vert _{2} &\leq
&c_{T}\left\Vert \varphi _{\mathsf{m,0}}\right\Vert _{2}, \label{estimate8}
\\
\left\Vert v_{\mathsf{m}}(\mathsf{.},t)\right\Vert _{2} &\leq
&c_{T}\left\Vert \psi _{\mathsf{m,}T}\right\Vert _{2} \label{estimate9}\end{aligned}$$for some finite constant $c_{T}>0$ depending only on $T$ (and on the lower bound in question). Moreover, by choosing $f=\varphi _{\mathsf{n,0}}$ in the first inequality in (\[estimate2\]) and by using the biorthogonality relation (\[biorthogonality\]), we see that for each $\theta \in \left[
0,1\right) $ there exists a finite constant $c_{\theta }>0$ such that $\left\Vert \varphi _{\mathsf{m,0}}\right\Vert _{2}\leq c_{\theta }$ for every $\mathsf{m}\in \mathbb{N}^{d}$. Combining this with the boundedness of $\left( \psi _{\mathsf{m,}T}\right) _{\mathsf{m\in }\mathbb{N}^{d}}$ and with (\[estimate8\]), (\[estimate9\]) we obtain$$\begin{aligned}
\left\Vert u_{\mathsf{m}}(\mathsf{.},t)\right\Vert _{2} &\leq &c_{\ast
}<+\infty , \\
\left\Vert v_{\mathsf{m}}(\mathsf{.},t)\right\Vert _{2} &\leq &c_{\ast
}<+\infty\end{aligned}$$where $c_{\ast }$ depends only on $T$, the lower bound of $V$ and $\theta $. Therefore we have$$\sum_{\mathsf{m}\in \mathbb{N}^{d}}p_{\mathsf{m}}\left\vert \left( f,u_{\mathsf{m}}(\mathsf{.},t)\right) _{2}\right\vert \left\Vert v_{\mathsf{m}}(\mathsf{.},t)\right\Vert _{2}\leq c_{\ast }^{2}\left\Vert f\right\Vert
_{2}<+\infty$$for each $f\in L^{2}\left( \mathbb{R}^{d}\right) $ and every $t\in \left[ 0,T\right] $, so that (\[timedensityoperatorbis\]) converges strongly in $L^{2}\left( \mathbb{R}^{d}\right) $ with the desired properties. $\blacksquare $
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Remark.</span> It is essential that the sequence $\left( \psi _{\mathsf{m,}T}\right) _{\mathsf{m\in }\mathbb{N}^{d}}$ be bounded for the above argument to hold, but this does not follow from the first inequality in ([estimate1]{}) as the boundedness of $\left( \varphi _{\mathsf{m},0}\right) _{\mathsf{m\in }\mathbb{N}^{d}}$ followed from the first inequality in ([estimate2]{}). Indeed, the first inequality in (\[estimate1\]) along with the biorthogonality relation (\[biorthogonality\]) only shows that there exists a finite constant $c_{\theta }>0$ such that $\left\Vert \exp \left[
-TH\right] \psi _{\mathsf{m,}T}\right\Vert _{2}\leq c_{\theta }$ for every $\mathsf{m}\in \mathbb{N}^{d}$, but that does not entail the boundedness of $\left( \psi _{\mathsf{m,}T}\right) _{\mathsf{m\in }\mathbb{N}^{d}}$.
In fact we have much more than the conclusion of Lemma 3:
**Theorem 5.** *The hypothesis is the same as in Lemma 3. Then the following statements hold:*
*(a) Expression (\[timedensityoperatorbis\]) defines a linear trace-class operator in* $L^{2}\left( \mathbb{R}^{d}\right) $* with*$$\begin{aligned}
\func{Tr}\mathcal{R}(t) &=&\sum_{\mathsf{m\in }\mathbb{N}^{d}}p_{\mathsf{m}}=1, \label{trace1} \\
\func{Tr}\mathcal{R}^{2}(t) &=&\sum_{\mathsf{m\in }\mathbb{N}^{d}}p_{\mathsf{m}}^{2}\leq 1 \label{trace2}\end{aligned}$$*for* *every* $t\in \left[ 0,T\right] $. *In particular we have* $\func{Tr}\mathcal{R}^{2}(t)=1$* if, and only if,* $p_{\mathsf{m}^{\ast }}=1$ *for exactly one* $\mathsf{m}^{\ast }$, *thus having* $p_{\mathsf{m}}=0$* for every* $\mathsf{m\neq m}^{\ast }$*.*
*(b) The eigenvalue equations*$$\begin{aligned}
\mathcal{R}(t)v_{\mathsf{m}}(\mathsf{.},t) &=&p_{\mathsf{m}}v_{\mathsf{m}}(\mathsf{.},t), \label{eigenequation1} \\
\mathcal{R}^{\ast }(t)u_{\mathsf{m}}(\mathsf{.},t) &=&p_{\mathsf{m}}u_{\mathsf{m}}(\mathsf{.},t) \label{eigenequation2}\end{aligned}$$*hold for every* $\mathsf{m}\in \mathbb{N}^{d}$ *and every* $t\in \left[ 0,T\right] $, *where*$$\mathcal{R}^{\ast }(t)f=\sum_{\mathsf{m\in }\mathbb{N}^{d}}p_{\mathsf{m}}\left( f,v_{\mathsf{m}}(\mathsf{.},t)\right) _{2}u_{\mathsf{m}}(\mathsf{.},t) \label{adjointoperator}$$*is the adjoint of* $\mathcal{R}(t)$.
*(c) Let us consider the linear bounded self-adjoint multiplication operator on* $L^{2}\left( \mathbb{R}^{d}\right) $ *given by* $Bf=bf$* for every* $f\in L^{2}\left( \mathbb{R}^{d}\right) $,*where* $b\in $* *$L^{\infty }\left( \mathbb{R}^{d}\right) $*is real-valued. If* $\bar{Z}_{\tau \in \left[ 0,T\right] }$ *denotes the Bernstein process of Theorem 4 then we have*$$\func{Tr}\left( \mathcal{R}\left( t\right) B\right) =\mathbb{E}_{_{\bar{\mu}}}\left( b(\bar{Z}_{t})\right) \label{averagesequalitybis}$$*for every* $t\in \left[ 0,T\right] $, *where the right-hand side of (\[averagesequalitybis\]) is given by (\[expectationter\]).*
**Proof.** The proof of (\[trace1\]) is quite similar to that of Statement (a) in Theorem 3 and is thereby omitted, while that of ([trace2]{}) follows from the biorthogonality of $u_{\mathsf{m}}(.,t)$ and $v_{\mathsf{m}}(.,t)$. Equations (\[eigenequation1\]), (\[eigenequation2\]) are an immediate consequence of (\[timedensityoperatorbis\]), ([adjointoperator]{}) and of the biorthogonality relation ([biorthogonalitybis]{}), while the proof of (c) is identical to that of the last statement of Theorem 3. $\blacksquare $
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Remark.</span> It follows directly from (\[biorthogonalitybis\]) and (\[eigenequation1\]) that$$\sum_{\mathsf{m\in }\mathbb{N}^{d}}\left( \mathcal{R}\left( t\right) v_{\mathsf{m}}(\mathsf{.},t),u_{\mathsf{m}}(\mathsf{.},t)\right) _{2}=\sum_{\mathsf{m\in }\mathbb{N}^{d}}p_{\mathsf{m}}=1.$$Nevertheless, the fact that the preceding expression holds true is not specific to the problem at hand, but is a general property of trace-class operators whose trace may be computed by means of Lidskii’s theorem using biorthogonal systems generated by Riesz bases (see, e.g., Theorems 5 and 6 in Section 2, Chapter I, of [@gelfandvilenkin]). Finally, at the end of this article we will dwell a bit more on the meaning of (\[trace2\]).
If the initial-final conditions are given by (\[inifinacondbis\]) we note that (\[timedensityoperatorbis\]) reduces to the self-adjoint, positive, trace-class time-independent operator $$\mathcal{R}f=\sum_{\mathsf{m\in }\mathbb{N}^{d}}p_{\mathsf{m}}\left( f,\mathsf{f}_{\mathsf{m}}\right) _{2}\mathsf{f}_{\mathsf{m}}.
\label{densityoperator}$$In this case we have the following:
**Corollary 2.** *Let* $B:L^{2}\left( \mathbb{R}^{d}\right)
\mapsto L^{2}\left( \mathbb{R}^{d}\right) $ *be the same operator as in (c) of Theorem 5, and let* $\bar{Z}_{\tau \in \left[ 0,T\right] }$ *be the Bernstein* *process of Corollary 1. Then we have*$$\func{Tr}\left( \mathcal{R}B\right) \mathcal{=}\mathbb{E}_{\bar{\mu}}(b\left( \bar{Z}_{t}\right) )=\mathcal{Z}^{-1}(T)\sum_{\mathsf{m\in }\mathbb{N}^{d}}\exp \left[ -TE_{\mathsf{m}}\right] \int_{\mathbb{R}^{d}}\mathsf{dx}b\mathsf{(x)}\left\vert \mathsf{f}_{\mathsf{m}}\mathsf{(x)}\right\vert ^{2} \label{averages}$$*for every* $t\in \left[ 0,T\right] $.
**Proof.** It is easily verified that$$\func{Tr}\left( \mathcal{R}B\right) =\sum_{\mathsf{m\in }\mathbb{N}^{d}}p_{\mathsf{m}}\int_{\mathbb{R}^{d}}\mathsf{dx}b\mathsf{(x)}\left\vert \mathsf{f}_{\mathsf{m}}\mathsf{(x)}\right\vert ^{2}$$whenever $p_{\mathsf{m}}>0$ satisfies the normalization condition in ([probabilities]{}), while if the probabilities associated with the spectrum are given by (\[probagibbs\]) we have$$\begin{aligned}
&&\mathbb{E}_{\bar{\mu}}\left( b\left( \bar{Z}_{t}\right) \right) =\mathcal{Z}^{-1}(T)\int_{\mathbb{R}^{d}}\mathsf{dx}b\mathsf{(x)}g\left( \mathsf{x},T,\mathsf{x}\right) \\
&=&\mathcal{Z}^{-1}(T)\sum_{\mathsf{m\in }\mathbb{N}^{d}}\exp \left[ -TE_{\mathsf{m}}\right] \int_{\mathbb{R}^{d}}\mathsf{dx}b\mathsf{(x)}\left\vert
\mathsf{f}_{\mathsf{m}}\mathsf{(x)}\right\vert ^{2}\end{aligned}$$for every $t\in \left[ 0,T\right] $ according to (\[expansion\]) and ([averageter]{}). $\blacksquare $
In the final section of this article we apply some of the above results to the class of Bernstein processes generated by (\[cauchyforwardter\]) and (\[cauchybackwardter\]).
On the periodic Ornstein-Uhlenbeck process and related processes
================================================================
We begin by recalling that the eigenvalue equation$$\left( -\frac{1}{2}\Delta _{\mathsf{x}}+\frac{\lambda ^{2}}{2}\left\vert
\mathsf{x}\right\vert ^{2}\right) \mathsf{h}_{\mathsf{m},\lambda }\mathsf{(x)=}E_{\mathsf{m},\lambda }\mathsf{h}_{\mathsf{m},\lambda }\mathsf{(x)}$$holds for every $\mathsf{m\in }$ $\mathbb{N}^{d}$, with$$E_{\mathsf{m},\lambda }:\mathsf{=}\left( \sum_{j=1}^{d}m_{j}+\frac{d}{2}\right) \lambda \label{spectrum}$$and$$\mathsf{h}_{\mathsf{m},\lambda }\mathsf{(x):=}\dprod\limits_{j=1}^{d}h_{m_{j},\lambda }(x_{j}).$$In these expressions $m_{j}$ is the $j^{th}$ component of $\mathsf{m}$, $x_{j}$ the $j^{th}$ component of $\mathsf{x}$ and $h_{m,\lambda }$ denotes the one-dimensional, suitably scaled Hermite function$$h_{m,\lambda }(x):=\sqrt[4]{\lambda }h_{m}\left( \sqrt{\lambda }x\right)$$where$$h_{m}\left( x\right) =(-1)^{m}\left( \pi ^{\frac{1}{2}}2^{m}m!\right) ^{-\frac{1}{2}}e^{\frac{x^{2}}{2}}\frac{d^{m}}{dx^{m}}e^{-x^{2}}\text{.}$$Furthermore we have$$\mathcal{Z}_{\lambda }(T):=\sum_{\mathsf{m}\in \mathbb{N}^{d}}\exp \left[
-TE_{\mathsf{m,}\lambda }\right] =\left( 2\left( \cosh (\lambda T)-1\right)
\right) ^{-\frac{d}{2}} \label{convergencebis}$$by summing the series explicitly, so that Mehler’s kernel (\[mehler\]) may be expanded as$$g_{\lambda }(\mathsf{x},t,\mathsf{y})=\sum_{\mathsf{m}\in \mathbb{N}^{d}}\exp \left[ -tE_{\mathsf{m,}\lambda }\right] \mathsf{h}_{\mathsf{m},\lambda }(\mathsf{x})\mathsf{h}_{\mathsf{m},\lambda }(\mathsf{y})$$according to the considerations of Section 1, where the series is now convergent for every $t\in \left( 0,T\right] $ uniformly in all $\mathsf{x},\mathsf{y\in }\mathbb{R}^{d}$. This last property is a consequence of the Cramér-Charlier inequality$$\left\vert \mathsf{h}_{\mathsf{m},\lambda }(\mathsf{x})\mathsf{h}_{\mathsf{m},\lambda }(\mathsf{y})\right\vert \mathsf{\leq }\left( \frac{\lambda }{\pi
^{2}}\right) ^{\frac{d}{4}}k^{2d}$$valid with $k\leq 1.086435$ uniformly in all $\mathsf{x},\mathsf{y}$ and $\mathsf{m}$ (see, e.g., Section 10.18 in [@erdmagobertri] for the one-dimensional case). We first illustrate some of the consequences of Theorem 1 by considering the initial-final data$$\left\{
\begin{array}{c}
\varphi _{\mathsf{m,0}}(\mathsf{x})=\mathcal{N}_{\mathsf{m},\lambda }\delta
\left( \mathsf{x}\right) , \\
\\
\psi _{\mathsf{m,}T}(\mathsf{x})=\mathcal{N}_{\mathsf{m},\lambda }\delta
\left( \mathsf{x}-\mathsf{b}_{\mathsf{m}}\right)\end{array}\right. \label{inifinacondter}$$where $\left( \mathsf{b}_{\mathsf{m}}\right) _{\mathsf{m}\in \mathbb{N}^{d}}\subset \mathbb{R}^{d}$ is an arbitrary sequence of points associated with (\[spectrum\]), and where$$\mathcal{N}_{\mathsf{m},\lambda }:=\left( \frac{2\pi \sinh \left( \lambda
T\right) }{\lambda }\right) ^{\frac{d}{4}}\exp \left[ \frac{\lambda \coth
\left( \lambda T\right) \left\vert \mathsf{b}_{\mathsf{m}}\right\vert ^{2}}{4}\right] .$$A glance at (\[mehler\]) shows that (\[inifinacondter\]) is a particular case of (\[inifinacond\]) when $\mathsf{a}_{\mathsf{m}}=0$ for every $\mathsf{m}$. The corresponding solutions to (\[cauchyforwardter\]) and (\[cauchybackwardter\]) given by (\[forwardsolution bis\]) and ([backwardsolutionbis]{}) then read$$u_{\mathsf{m},\lambda }(\mathsf{x},t)=\mathcal{N}_{\mathsf{m},\lambda
}^{\ast }\sinh ^{-\frac{d}{2}}\left( \lambda t\right) \exp \left[ -\frac{\alpha _{\lambda }(t)\left\vert \mathsf{x}\right\vert ^{2}}{2}\right]
\label{cauchyforwardquarto}$$and$$\begin{aligned}
v_{\mathsf{m},\lambda }(\mathsf{x},t) &=&\mathcal{N}_{\mathsf{m},\lambda
}^{\ast }\exp \left[ -\frac{\alpha _{\lambda }(T-t)\left\vert \mathsf{b}_{\mathsf{m}}\right\vert ^{2}}{2}\right] \sinh ^{-\frac{d}{2}}\left( \lambda
\left( T-t\right) \right) \notag \\
&&\times \exp \left[ -\frac{1}{2}\left( \alpha _{\lambda }(T-t)\left\vert
\mathsf{x}\right\vert ^{2}-\frac{2\lambda \left( \mathsf{b}_{\mathsf{m}},\mathsf{x}\right) _{\mathbb{R}^{d}}}{\sinh \left( \lambda \left( T-t\right)
\right) }\right) \right] , \label{cauchybackwardquarto}\end{aligned}$$respectively, where we have defined$$\alpha _{\lambda }(t):=\lambda \coth \left( \lambda t\right) \label{alpha}$$for every $t\in \left( 0,T\right] $ and$$\mathcal{N}_{\mathsf{m},\lambda }^{\ast }:=\left( \frac{\lambda \sinh \left(
\lambda T\right) }{2\pi }\right) ^{\frac{d}{4}}\exp \left[ \frac{\alpha
_{\lambda }(T)\left\vert \mathsf{b}_{\mathsf{m}}\right\vert ^{2}}{4}\right] .$$Then the following result holds:
**Corollary 3.*** The Bernstein process* $Z_{\tau \in \left[ 0,T\right] }^{\mathsf{m},\lambda }$* associated with ([cauchyforwardter]{}), (\[cauchybackwardter\]) and (\[inifinacondter\]) in the sense of Theorem 1 is a non-stationary Gaussian and Markovian process such that the following properties are valid:*
*(a) We have*$$\mathbb{P}_{\mu _{\mathsf{m}}}\left( Z_{t}^{\mathsf{m,}\lambda }\in F\right)
=(2\pi \sigma _{\lambda }(t))^{-\frac{d}{2}}\int_{F}d\mathsf{x}\exp \left[ -\frac{\left\vert \mathsf{x-b}_{\mathsf{m,}\lambda }(t)\right\vert ^{2}}{2\sigma _{\lambda }(t)}\right] \label{probability11}$$*for each* $t\in \left( 0,T\right) $* and every* $F\in
\mathcal{B}_{d}$, *where*$$\mathsf{b}_{\mathsf{m,}\lambda }(t)=\frac{\sinh (\lambda t)}{\sinh (\lambda
T)}\mathsf{b}_{\mathsf{m}} \label{meanvector}$$*and*$$\sigma _{\lambda }(t)=\frac{\sinh \left( \lambda (T-t\right) )\sinh (\lambda
t)}{\lambda \sinh (\lambda T)}. \label{variance}$$*Furthermore we have*$$\mathbb{P}_{\mu _{\mathsf{m}}}\left( Z_{0}^{\mathsf{m,}\lambda }=\mathsf{o}\right) =\mathbb{P}_{\mu _{\mathsf{m}}}\left( Z_{T}^{\mathsf{m,}\lambda }=\mathsf{b}_{\mathsf{m}}\right) =1 \label{probability12}$$*for every* $\mathsf{m}\in \mathbb{N}^{d}$.
*(b) We have*$$\mathbb{E}_{\mu _{\mathsf{m}}}\left( (Z_{s}^{\mathsf{m,}\lambda ,i}-b_{\mathsf{m,}\lambda }^{i}(s))(Z_{t}^{\mathsf{m,}\lambda ,j}-b_{\mathsf{m},\lambda }^{j}(t))\right) =\left\{
\begin{array}{c}
\frac{\sinh \left( \lambda (T-t\right) )\sinh (\lambda s)}{\lambda \sinh
(\lambda T)}\delta _{i,j}\text{ for }t\geq s, \\
\\
\frac{\sinh \left( \lambda (T-s\right) )\sinh (\lambda t)}{\lambda \sinh
(\lambda T)}\delta _{i,j}\text{ for }t\leq s\end{array}\right. \label{covariance}$$*for all* $s,t\in \left[ 0,T\right] $* and all* $i,j\in
\left\{ 1,...,d\right\} $*, where* $b_{\mathsf{m,}\lambda }^{i}$* denotes the* $i^{th}$* component of* $\mathsf{b}_{\mathsf{m,}\lambda }$.
*(c) We have*$$\mathbb{E}_{_{\mu _{\mathsf{m}}}}\left( b(Z_{t}^{\mathsf{m,}\lambda
})\right) =(2\pi \sigma _{\lambda }(t))^{-\frac{d}{2}}\int_{\mathbb{R}^{d}}\mathsf{dx}b(\mathsf{x})\exp \left[ -\frac{\left\vert \mathsf{x-b}_{\mathsf{m,}\lambda }(t)\right\vert ^{2}}{2\sigma _{\lambda }(t)}\right]
\label{averagequarto}$$*for each bounded Borel measurable function* $b:\mathbb{R}^{d}\mathbb{\mapsto C}$ *and every* $t\in \left( 0,T\right) $.
**Proof.** We begin by proving (\[probability11\]). Using ([cauchyforwardquarto]{}) and (\[cauchybackwardquarto\]) we first have$$\begin{aligned}
&&u_{\mathsf{m},\lambda }(\mathsf{x},t)v_{\mathsf{m},\lambda }(\mathsf{x},t)
\notag \\
&=&\left( \frac{\lambda \sinh (\lambda T)}{2\pi \sinh \left( \lambda
(T-t\right) )\sinh (\lambda t)}\right) ^{\frac{d}{2}}\exp \left[ \frac{\left( \alpha _{\lambda }(T)-\alpha _{\lambda }(T-t)\right) \left\vert
\mathsf{b}_{\mathsf{m}}\right\vert ^{2}}{2}\right] \notag \\
&&\times \exp \left[ -\frac{1}{2}\left( \left( \alpha _{\lambda }(t)+\alpha
_{\lambda }(T-t)\right) \left\vert \mathsf{x}\right\vert ^{2}-\frac{2\lambda
\left( \mathsf{b}_{\mathsf{m}},\mathsf{x}\right) _{\mathbb{R}^{d}}}{\sinh
\left( \lambda \left( T-t\right) \right) }\right) \right]
\label{probadensity}\end{aligned}$$after regrouping terms, and furthermore$$\begin{aligned}
\alpha _{\lambda }(T)-\alpha _{\lambda }(T-t) &=&-\frac{\lambda \sinh
(\lambda t)}{\sinh \left( \lambda (T-t\right) )\sinh (\lambda T)}
\label{alphadiff} \\
\alpha _{\lambda }(t)+\alpha _{\lambda }(T-t) &=&\frac{\lambda \sinh
(\lambda T)}{\sinh \left( \lambda (T-t\right) )\sinh (\lambda t)}
\label{alphasum}\end{aligned}$$from (\[alpha\]). The substitution of (\[alphadiff\]) and (\[alphasum\]) into (\[probadensity\]) then leads to$$\begin{aligned}
&&u_{\mathsf{m},\lambda }(\mathsf{x},t)v_{\mathsf{m,}\lambda }(\mathsf{x},t)
\notag \\
&=&\left( \frac{\lambda \sinh (\lambda T)}{2\pi \sinh \left( \lambda
(T-t\right) )\sinh (\lambda t)}\right) ^{\frac{d}{2}}\exp \left[ -\frac{\lambda \sinh (\lambda t)\left\vert \mathsf{b}_{\mathsf{m}}\right\vert ^{2}}{2\sinh \left( \lambda (T-t\right) )\sinh (\lambda T)}\right] \notag \\
&&\times \exp \left[ -\frac{\lambda }{2}\left( \frac{\sinh (\lambda
T)\left\vert \mathsf{x}\right\vert ^{2}-2\sinh (\lambda t)\left( \mathsf{b}_{\mathsf{m}},\mathsf{x}\right) _{\mathbb{R}^{d}}}{\sinh \left( \lambda
(T-t\right) )\sinh (\lambda t)}\right) \right] . \label{probadensityter}\end{aligned}$$Now, for the numerator of the argument in the second exponential of the preceding expression we have $$\begin{aligned}
&&\sinh (\lambda T)\left\vert \mathsf{x}\right\vert ^{2}-2\sinh (\lambda
t)\left( \mathsf{b}_{\mathsf{m}},\mathsf{x}\right) _{\mathbb{R}^{d}} \notag
\\
&=&\sinh (\lambda T)\left\vert \mathsf{x-b}_{\mathsf{m,}\lambda
}(t)\right\vert ^{2}-\frac{\sinh ^{2}(\lambda t)\left\vert \mathsf{b}_{\mathsf{m}}\right\vert ^{2}}{\sinh (\lambda T)} \label{identitybis}\end{aligned}$$by virtue of (\[meanvector\]). Therefore, taking (\[variance\]) and ([identitybis]{}) into account in (\[probadensityter\]) we get$$\begin{aligned}
&&u_{\mathsf{m},\lambda }(\mathsf{x},t)v_{\mathsf{m},\lambda }(\mathsf{x},t)
\\
&=&(2\pi \sigma _{\lambda }(t))^{-\frac{d}{2}}\exp \left[ -\frac{\left\vert
\mathsf{x-b}_{\mathsf{m,}\lambda }(t)\right\vert ^{2}}{2\sigma _{\lambda }(t)}\right]\end{aligned}$$following the cancellation of two exponential factors, which proves Statement (a) according to (\[probability5\]). We also remark that ([probability12]{}) is a particular case of (\[probability4\]), and that ([averagequarto]{}) holds according to (\[expectations\]).
We now turn to the proof of (\[covariance\]). According to ([distributionoctavo]{}) we note that the density of the law of $(Z_{t_{1}}^{\mathsf{m,}\lambda },...,Z_{t_{n}}^{\mathsf{m,}\lambda })\in \mathbb{R}^{nd}$ is$$\begin{aligned}
&&\dprod\limits_{k=2}^{n}g_{\lambda }\left( \mathsf{x}_{k},t_{k}-t_{k-1},\mathsf{x}_{k-1}\right) \times u_{\mathsf{m},\lambda }(\mathsf{x}_{1},t_{1})v_{\mathsf{m},\lambda }(\mathsf{x}_{n},t_{n}) \\
&=&\left( 2\pi \right) ^{-\frac{nd}{2}}\left( \frac{\lambda ^{n}\sinh
(\lambda T)}{\sinh \left( \lambda (T-t_{n}\right) )\sinh (\lambda t_{1})}\right) ^{\frac{d}{2}}\left( \dprod\limits_{k=2}^{n}\sinh \left( \lambda
(t_{k}-t_{k-1})\right) \right) ^{-\frac{d}{2}} \\
&&\times \exp \left[ \frac{1}{2}(\alpha _{\lambda }(T)-\alpha _{\lambda
}(T-t_{n}))\left\vert \mathsf{b}_{\mathsf{m}}\right\vert ^{2}\right] \\
&&\times \exp \left[ -\frac{\lambda }{2}\sum_{k=2}^{n}\frac{\cosh (\lambda
(t_{k}-t_{k-1}))\left( \left\vert \mathsf{x}_{k}\right\vert ^{2}+\left\vert
\mathsf{x}_{k-1}\right\vert ^{2}\right) -2\left( \mathsf{x}_{k}\mathsf{,x}_{k-1}\right) _{\mathbb{R}^{d}}}{\sinh \left( \lambda (t_{k}-t_{k-1})\right)
}\right] \\
&&\times \exp \left[ -\frac{1}{2}\left( \alpha _{\lambda }(t_{1})\left\vert
\mathsf{x}_{1}\right\vert ^{2}+\alpha _{\lambda }(T-t_{n})\left\vert \mathsf{x}_{n}\right\vert ^{2}\right) \right] \times \exp \left[ \frac{\lambda
\left( \mathsf{b}_{\mathsf{m}},\mathsf{x}_{n}\right) _{\mathbb{R}^{d}}}{\sinh \left( \lambda (T-t_{n}\right) )}\right]\end{aligned}$$for every $n\geq 2$. Therefore, the tridiagonal matrix $C_{\lambda }^{-1}$ corresponding to the quadratic part when $d=1$ is identified as$$C_{\lambda ,k,k}^{-1}=\left\{
\begin{array}{c}
\frac{\lambda \sinh (\lambda t_{2})}{\sinh \left( \lambda
(t_{2}-t_{1}\right) )\sinh (\lambda t_{1})}\text{ \ \ for }k=1, \\
\\
\frac{\lambda \sinh (\lambda (t_{k+1}-t_{k-1}))}{\sinh \left( \lambda
(t_{k+1}-t_{k}\right) )\sinh (\lambda (t_{k}-t_{k-1}))}\text{ \ \ for }k=2,...,n-1, \\
\\
\frac{\lambda \sinh (\lambda (T-t_{n-1}))}{\sinh \left( \lambda
(T-t_{n}\right) )\sinh (\lambda (t_{n}-t_{n-1}))}\text{ \ \ for }k=n\end{array}\right.$$(the second line not being there if $n=2)$, and $$C_{\lambda ,k,k-1}^{-1}=C_{\lambda ,k-1,k}^{-1}=-\frac{\lambda }{\sinh
\left( \lambda \left\vert t_{k}-t_{k-1}\right\vert \right) }\text{ \ \ for }k=2,...,n.$$Consequently, inverting the matrix and using numerous identities among hyperbolic functions we eventually get$$C_{\lambda ,k,l}=\left\{
\begin{array}{c}
\frac{\sinh \left( \lambda (T-t_{k})\right) \sinh \left( \lambda
t_{l}\right) }{\lambda \sinh \left( \lambda T\right) }\text{ \ \ for }k\geq
l, \\
\\
\frac{\sinh \left( \lambda (T-t_{l})\right) \sinh \left( \lambda
t_{k}\right) }{\lambda \sinh \left( \lambda T\right) }\text{ \ \ for }k\leq
l,\end{array}\right.$$which leads to (\[covariance\]) by standard arguments. $\blacksquare $
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Remarks.</span> (1) Corollary 3 thus describes a sequence of random curves all pinned down at the origin when $t=0$ and at $\mathsf{b}_{\mathsf{m}}$ when $t=T$, with probability one. We also remark that the Gaussian law is not centered unless $\mathsf{b}_{\mathsf{m}}=\mathsf{o}$, and that the process is clearly non-stationary and Markovian since (\[probability11\]) depends explicitly on time and (\[covariance\]) factorizes as the product of a function of $s$ times a function of $t$. Moreover, we note that the curve $\sigma _{\lambda }:\left[ 0,T\right] \mapsto \mathbb{R}_{0}^{+}$ given by (\[variance\]) is concave aside from satisfying $\sigma _{\lambda
}(0)=\sigma _{\lambda }(T)=0$, and that it takes on the maximal value at the midpoint of the time interval, namely,$$\sigma _{\lambda }\left( \frac{T}{2}\right) =\frac{\sinh ^{2}\left( \frac{\lambda T}{2}\right) }{\lambda \sinh (\lambda T)},$$thereby retaining the main features of a Brownian bridge. In fact, $Z_{\tau
\in \left[ 0,T\right] }^{\mathsf{m},\lambda }$ does reduce to a Brownian bridge in the limit $\lambda \rightarrow 0_{+}$ since$$\lim_{\lambda \rightarrow 0_{+}}\mathbb{E}_{\mu _{\mathsf{m}}}\left( (Z_{s}^{\mathsf{m},\lambda ,i}-b_{\mathsf{m},\lambda }^{i}(s))(Z_{t}^{\mathsf{m},\lambda ,j}-b_{\mathsf{m},\lambda }^{j}(t))\right) =\left\{
\begin{array}{c}
\frac{(T-t)s}{T}\delta _{i,j}\text{ \ \ \ for }t\geq s, \\
\\
\frac{(T-s)t}{T}\delta _{i,j}\text{ \ \ for }t\leq s\end{array}\right.$$according to (\[covariance\]).
\(2) Relations (\[inifinacondter\]) represent a very degenerate case of Gaussian data. It would have been possible to replace (\[inifinacondter\]) by choosing genuine Gaussian curves for both $\varphi _{\mathsf{m,0}}$ and $\psi _{\mathsf{m,}T}$, or by $$\left\{
\begin{array}{c}
\varphi _{\mathsf{m,0}}(\mathsf{x})=\exp \left[ \frac{\lambda Td}{4}\right]
\delta \left( \mathsf{x}\right) , \\
\\
\psi _{\mathsf{m,}T}(\mathsf{x})=\exp \left[ \frac{\lambda Td}{4}\right]
\exp \left[ -\frac{\lambda \left\vert x\right\vert ^{2}}{2}\right]\end{array}\right.$$for every $\mathsf{m}$. In this case the corresponding Bernstein process would have been a non-stationary, Markovian centered process $Z_{\tau \in \left[ 0,T\right] }^{\lambda }$ satisfying$$\mathbb{P}_{\mu }\left( Z_{0}^{\lambda }=\mathsf{o}\right) =1,$$whose variance and covariance are given by$$\left\{
\begin{array}{c}
\sigma _{\lambda }(t)=\frac{\sinh \left( \lambda t\right) \exp \left[
-\lambda t\right] }{\lambda }, \\
\\
\mathbb{E}\left( Z_{s}^{\lambda ,i}Z_{t}^{\lambda ,j}\right) =\frac{\exp \left[ -\lambda \left( s+t\right) \right] }{2\lambda }\left( \exp \left[
2\lambda \left( s\wedge t\right) \right] -1\right) \delta _{i,j}\end{array}\right.$$respectively, in other words a process identical in law with a $d$-dimensional Ornstein-Uhlenbeck process conditioned to start at the origin. We omit the details of the computations that led to the above formulae, which are quite similar to those carried out above.
Finally, we still have the following consequence of Theorem 3, where the density operator is defined by$$\mathcal{R}_{\lambda }\left( t\right) f:=\sum_{\mathsf{m}\in \mathbb{N}^{d}}p_{\mathsf{m}}\left( f,u_{\mathsf{m,}\lambda }(\mathsf{.},t)\right)
_{2}v_{\mathsf{m,}\lambda }(\mathsf{.},t)$$for each complex-valued $f\in L^{2}\left( \mathbb{R}^{d}\right) $ and every $t\in \left( 0,T\right) $, where $u_{\mathsf{m,}\lambda }(\mathsf{.},t)$ and $v_{\mathsf{m,}\lambda }(\mathsf{.},t)$ are given by ([cauchyforwardquarto]{}) and (\[cauchybackwardquarto\]), respectively:
**Corollary 4**. *Let* $\bar{Z}_{\tau \in \left[ 0,T\right]
}^{\lambda }$* be the Bernstein process in the sense of Proposition 1 corresponding to the joint probability density* $$\bar{\mu}_{\lambda }(\mathsf{x,y})=g_{\lambda }\left( \mathsf{x},T,\mathsf{y}\right) \delta \left( \mathsf{x}\right) \sum_{\mathsf{m\in }\mathbb{N}^{d}}p_{\mathsf{m}}\mathcal{N}_{\mathsf{m},\lambda }^{2}\delta \left(
\mathsf{y}-\mathsf{b}_{\mathsf{m}}\right)$$* generated from (\[inifinacondter\]), where* $\left( \mathsf{b}_{\mathsf{m}}\right) _{\mathsf{m}\in \mathbb{N}^{d}}\subset \mathbb{R}^{d}$* is an arbitrary sequence such that*$$\sup_{\mathsf{m}\in \mathbb{N}^{d}}\left\vert \mathsf{b}_{\mathsf{m}}\right\vert <+\infty .$$*If* $B$* is the multiplication operator of Theorem 3, then we have*$$\func{Tr}\left( \mathcal{R}_{\lambda }\left( t\right) B\right) =(2\pi \sigma
_{\lambda }(t))^{-\frac{d}{2}}\sum_{\mathsf{m\in }\mathbb{N}^{d}}p_{\mathsf{m}}\int_{\mathbb{R}^{d}}\mathsf{dx}b(\mathsf{x})\exp \left[ -\frac{\left\vert
\mathsf{x-b}_{\mathsf{m,}\lambda }(t)\right\vert ^{2}}{2\sigma _{\lambda }(t)}\right]$$*for each* $t\in \left( 0,T\right) $* and every* $p_{\mathsf{m}}>0$* satisfying the normalization condition in (\[probabilities\]).*
The situation is quite different from that we just described if we consider the hierarchy (\[cauchyforwardter\]), (\[cauchybackwardter\]) with the initial-final data$$\begin{aligned}
\varphi _{\mathsf{m,0,\lambda }}(\mathsf{x}) &=&\mathsf{h}_{\mathsf{m,\lambda }}(\mathsf{x}), \notag \\
\psi _{\mathsf{m,}T,\lambda }(\mathsf{x}) &=&\exp \left[ TE_{\mathsf{m,\lambda }}\right] \mathsf{h}_{\mathsf{m,\lambda }}(\mathsf{x})
\label{otherchoice}\end{aligned}$$and with (\[probagibbs\]) for the probabilities associated with each level of the spectrum, thus having$$\mathcal{R}_{\lambda }f:=\mathcal{Z}_{\lambda }^{-1}(T)\sum_{\mathsf{m\in }\mathbb{N}^{d}}\exp \left[ -TE_{\mathsf{m,}\lambda }\right] \left( f,\mathsf{h}_{\mathsf{m},\lambda }\right) _{2}\mathsf{h}_{\mathsf{m},\lambda }
\label{densityoperatorbis}$$for the density operator (\[densityoperator\]). Then we have:
**Theorem 6.** *For every* $\lambda >0$ *the Bernstein process* $\bar{Z}_{\tau \in \left[ 0,T\right] }^{\lambda }$*associated with the infinite hierarchy (\[cauchyforwardter\])-([cauchybackwardter]{}) in the sense of Corollary 1 is a stationary, non-Markovian Gaussian process such that the following statements are valid:*
(*a) We have*$$\mathbb{P}_{\bar{\mu}}\left( \bar{Z}_{t}^{\lambda }\in F\right) =(2\pi
\sigma _{\lambda })^{-\frac{d}{2}}\int_{F}\mathsf{dx}\exp \left[ -\frac{\left\vert \mathsf{x}\right\vert ^{2}}{2\sigma _{\lambda }}\right]
\label{gaussianprocesster}$$*for each* $t\in \left[ 0,T\right] $ *and every* $F\in
\mathcal{B}_{d}$, *where*$$\sigma _{\lambda }=\frac{\sinh \left( \lambda T\right) }{2\lambda \left(
\cosh (\lambda T)-1\right) }. \label{variancebis}$$
*(b) The components of* $\bar{Z}_{\tau \in \left[ 0,T\right]
}^{\lambda }$* satisfy the relation*$$\mathbb{E}_{\bar{\mu}}\left( \bar{Z}_{s}^{\lambda ,i}\bar{Z}_{t}^{\lambda
,j}\right) =\frac{\cosh \left( \lambda \left( \left\vert t-s\right\vert -\frac{T}{2}\right) \right) }{2\lambda \sinh \left( \frac{\lambda T}{2}\right) }\delta _{i,j} \label{covariancebis}$$*for all* $s,t\in \left[ 0,T\right] $* and all* $i,j\in
\left\{ 1,...,d\right\} $*.*
*(c) For every linear bounded self-adjoint multiplication operator* $B $* on* $L^{2}\left( \mathbb{R}^{d}\right) $ *as defined in Theorem 5 we have*$$\func{Tr}\left( \mathcal{R}_{\lambda }B\right) \mathcal{=}\mathbb{E}_{\bar{\mu}}(b\left( \bar{Z}_{t}^{\lambda }\right) )=(2\pi \sigma _{\lambda })^{-\frac{d}{2}}\int_{\mathbb{R}^{d}}\mathsf{dx}b(\mathsf{x})\exp \left[ -\frac{\left\vert \mathsf{x}\right\vert ^{2}}{2\sigma _{\lambda }}\right]$$*for every* $t\in \left[ 0,T\right] $.
**Proof.** The process $\bar{Z}_{\tau \in \left[ 0,T\right] }^{\lambda
} $ is Gaussian by virtue of (\[distributionquinto\]) with Green’s function (\[mehler\]). Furthermore we have $$g_{\lambda }(\mathsf{x},T,\mathsf{x})=\left( \frac{\lambda }{2\pi \sinh
\left( \lambda T\right) }\right) ^{\frac{d}{2}}\exp \left[ -\frac{\lambda
\left( \cosh (\lambda T)-\mathsf{1}\right) \left\vert \mathsf{x}\right\vert
^{2}}{\sinh \left( \lambda T\right) }\right]$$so that (\[gaussianprocesster\]) with (\[variancebis\]) follows immediately from (\[probability6\]) and (\[convergencebis\]). We now turn to the proof of (\[covariancebis\]) by determining the Gaussian density of $\left( \bar{Z}_{t_{1}}^{\lambda },...,\bar{Z}_{t_{n}}^{\lambda
}\right) $ in $\mathbb{R}^{nd}$ for any $n\in \mathbb{N}^{+}$ by substituting (\[mehler\]) and (\[convergencebis\]) into ([distributionquinto]{}). We obtain$$\begin{aligned}
&&\left( 2\left( \cosh (\lambda T)-1\right) \right) ^{\frac{d}{2}} \\
&&\times \dprod\limits_{k=2}^{n}g_{\lambda }\left( \mathsf{x}_{k},t_{k}-t_{k-1},\mathsf{x}_{k-1}\right) \times g_{\lambda }\left( \mathsf{x}_{1},T-(t_{n}-t_{1}),\mathsf{x}_{n}\right) \\
&=&\left( 2\pi \right) ^{-\frac{nd}{2}}\left( \frac{2\lambda ^{n}\left(
\cosh (\lambda T)-1\right) }{\sinh \left( \lambda (T-(t_{n}-t_{1})\right) )}\right) ^{\frac{d}{2}}\dprod\limits_{k=2}^{n}\left( \sinh (\lambda
(t_{k}-t_{k-1})\right) ^{-\frac{d}{2}} \\
&&\times \exp \left[ -\frac{\lambda }{2}\sum_{k=2}^{n}\frac{\cosh (\lambda
(t_{k}-t_{k-1}))\left( \left\vert \mathsf{x}_{k}\right\vert ^{2}+\left\vert
\mathsf{x}_{k-1}\right\vert ^{2}\right) -2\left( \mathsf{x}_{k}\mathsf{,x}_{k-1}\right) _{\mathbb{R}^{d}}}{\sinh \left( \lambda (t_{k}-t_{k-1})\right)
}\right] \\
&&\times \exp \left[ -\frac{\lambda }{2}\frac{\cosh (\lambda
(T-(t_{n}-t_{1})))\left( \left\vert \mathsf{x}_{1}\right\vert
^{2}+\left\vert \mathsf{x}_{n}\right\vert ^{2}\right) -2\left( \mathsf{x}_{1}\mathsf{,x}_{n}\right) _{\mathbb{R}^{d}}}{\sinh \left( \lambda
(T-(t_{n}-t_{1}))\right) }\right] .\end{aligned}$$For the sake of clarity we identify the inverse of the covariance matrix $C_{\lambda }$ by considering the case $n=2$ separately from the case $n\geq
3 $. For $n=2$ we obtain$$C_{\lambda ,k,k}^{-1}=\frac{\lambda \sinh (\lambda T)}{\sinh \left( \lambda
(t_{2}-t_{1}\right) )\sinh \left( \lambda (T-(t_{2}-t_{1})\right) )}\text{ \
\ \ \ for }k=1,2$$and$$C_{\lambda ,2,1}^{-1}=C_{\lambda ,1,2}^{-1}=-\frac{\lambda }{\sinh \left(
\lambda \left\vert t_{2}-t_{1}\right\vert \right) }\text{ }-\frac{\lambda }{\sinh \left( \lambda (T-\left\vert t_{2}-t_{1}\right\vert \right) )},$$while for $n\geq 3$ we get$$C_{\lambda ,k,k}^{-1}=\left\{
\begin{array}{c}
\frac{\lambda \sinh \left( \lambda (T-(t_{n}-t_{2})\right) )}{\sinh \left(
\lambda (t_{2}-t_{1}\right) )\sinh \left( \lambda (T-(t_{n}-t_{1})\right) )}\text{ \ \ \ \ for }k=1, \\
\\
\frac{\lambda \sinh \left( \lambda (t_{k+1}-t_{k-1})\right) }{\sinh \left(
\lambda (t_{k+1}-t_{k})\right) \sinh \left( \lambda (t_{k}-t_{k-1})\right) }\text{ \ \ \ \ for }k=2,...,n-1, \\
\\
\frac{\lambda \sinh \left( \lambda (T-(t_{n-1}-t_{1})\right) )}{\sinh \left(
\lambda (t_{n}-t_{n-1})\right) \sinh \left( \lambda (T-(t_{n}-t_{1})\right) )}\text{ \ \ \ \ for }k=n\text{ ,}\end{array}\right.$$$$C_{\lambda ,k,k-1}^{-1}=C_{\lambda ,k-1,k}^{-1}=-\frac{\lambda }{\sinh
\left( \lambda \left\vert t_{k}-t_{k-1}\right\vert \right) }\text{ \ \ for }k=2,...,n,$$and $$C_{\lambda ,n,1}^{-1}=C_{\lambda ,1,n}^{-1}=-\frac{\lambda }{\sinh \left(
\lambda (T-\left\vert t_{n}-t_{1}\right\vert \right) )},$$all the remaining matrix elements being zero. In both cases we then obtain by inversion$$C_{\lambda ,k,l}=\frac{\sinh \left( \lambda \left\vert
t_{k}-t_{l}\right\vert \right) -\sinh \left( \lambda (\left\vert
t_{k}-t_{l}\right\vert -T)\right) }{2\lambda \left( \cosh (\lambda
T)-1\right) }$$for all $k,l\in \left\{ 1,...,n\right\} $ or, equivalently,$$C_{\lambda ,k,l}=\frac{\cosh \left( \lambda \left( \left\vert
t_{k}-t_{l}\right\vert -\frac{T}{2}\right) \right) }{2\lambda \sinh \left(
\frac{\lambda T}{2}\right) },$$so that (\[covariancebis\]) eventually follows. Finally, Statement (c) follows from Corollary 2 by taking (\[gaussianprocesster\]) into account. Note that independently of the considerations of the preceding section a glance at (\[gaussianprocesster\]) and (\[covariancebis\]) shows directly that $\bar{Z}_{\tau \in \left[ 0,T\right] }^{\lambda }$ is stationary, as well as non-Markovian since (\[covariancebis\]) does not factorize as the product of a function of $s$ times a function of $t$. $\blacksquare $
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Remarks.</span> (1) It turns out that the process of Theorem 6 identifies in law with the $d$-dimensional periodic Ornstein-Uhlenbeck process. In order to see this we define$$X_{t}:=\frac{e^{-\lambda t}}{1-e^{-\lambda T}}\int_{0}^{T}e^{-\lambda
(T-\tau )}\mathsf{dW}_{\tau }+\int_{0}^{t}e^{-\lambda (t-\tau )}\mathsf{dW}_{\tau },\text{ \ \ }t\in \left[ 0,T\right] \label{periodicOU}$$where $\mathsf{W}_{\tau \in \left[ 0,T\right] }$ is a given Wiener process in $\mathbb{R}^{d}$, and where the integrals in (\[periodicOU\]) are both forward Itô integrals. It is known from a particular case of Theorem 2.1 in [@kwakernaak], or from a direct computation using the rules of Itô calculus (see also Section 5 in [@roellythieullen] for the case $d=1$), that (\[periodicOU\]) may be viewed as a way of writing the forward Ornstein-Uhlenbeck integral equation with random periodic boundary conditions$$\begin{aligned}
X_{t} &=&e^{-\lambda t}X_{0}+\int_{0}^{t}e^{-\lambda (t-\tau )}\mathsf{dW}_{\tau },\text{ \ \ }t\in \left[ 0,T\right] , \notag \\
X_{0} &=&X_{T} \label{itoOU}\end{aligned}$$when $\mathbb{E}\left( X_{0}\right) =0$, whose covariance is precisely ([covariancebis]{}). Therefore, our analysis shows that the periodic Ornstein-Uhlenbeck process may be viewed as a very special example of a stationary and non-Markovian Bernstein process. Incidentally, that process happens to be quite relevant to the mathematical investigation of certain quantum systems in equilibrium with a thermal bath when the inverse temperature is interpreted as the period. This is indeed a consequence of the fact that it also identifies in law with the Gaussian process of mean zero used in Theorem 2.1 of [@hoeghkrohn] when the positive matrix therein is chosen as $A=\lambda \mathbb{I}_{d}$ with $\mathbb{I}_{d}$ the identity in $\mathbb{R}^{d}$. This, in turn, follows immediately from ([covariancebis]{}) which may also be written as $$\mathbb{E}_{\bar{\mu}}\left( \bar{Z}_{s}^{\lambda ,i}\bar{Z}_{t}^{\lambda
,j}\right) =\frac{\exp \left[ -\lambda \left\vert t-s\right\vert \right]
+\exp \left[ -\lambda \left( T-\left\vert t-s\right\vert \right) \right] }{2\lambda \left( 1-\exp \left[ -\lambda T\right] \right) }\delta _{i,j}$$by virtue of the identity $$\frac{\cosh \left( \lambda \left( t-\frac{T}{2}\right) \right) }{\sinh
\left( \frac{\lambda T}{2}\right) }=\frac{\exp \left[ -\lambda t\right]
+\exp \left[ -\lambda \left( T-t\right) \right] }{1-\exp \left[ -\lambda T\right] }$$valid for every $t\in \left[ 0,T\right] $. Finally, we observe that the definition of a periodic process “indexed by the circle” that satisfies the “two-sided Markov property on the circle” given in Section 4 of [kleinlandau]{} is a very special case of our definition of a Bernstein process given at the beginning of this paper. Indeed, a standard argument shows that Relation (\[condiexpectations\]) is equivalent to the statement that $\mathcal{F}_{s}^{+}\vee $ $\mathcal{F}_{t}^{-}$ is conditionally independent of the $\sigma $-algebra$$\mathcal{F}_{\left[ s,t\right] }:=\sigma \left\{ Z_{\tau }^{-1}\left(
F\right) :\tau \in \left[ s,t\right] ,\text{ }F\in \mathcal{B}_{d}\right\}$$when$$\mathcal{F}_{\left\{ s,t\right\} }=\sigma \left\{ Z_{s}^{-1}\left( F\right) ,\text{ }Z_{t}^{-1}\left( F\right) :F\in \mathcal{B}_{d}\right\}$$is given. In this respect we also refer the reader to [@carmatheo] and [@jamisonbis] for the stationary Gaussian case when $d=1$. More generally, we remark that Problem (\[itoOU\]) falls into the realm of a much more general class of periodic linear stochastic differential equations which were investigated by several authors, including [@kwakernaak] where some of the multidimensional time-periodic processes considered there were useful regarding the resolution of filtering, smoothing and prediction problems.
\(2) We complete this article with an observation concerning the interpretation of (\[trace2\]). Following the analogy with Quantum Statistical Mechanics, we may say that the operator $\mathcal{R}(t)$ represents a so-called pure state when $\func{Tr}\mathcal{R}^{2}(t)=1$ and a mixed state when $\func{Tr}\mathcal{R}^{2}(t)<1$ (see, e.g., [vonneumann]{} for explanations regarding this terminology). In view of the first part of Theorem 5, it is therefore legitimate to say that the non-Markovian Bernstein processes that we constructed from the method of Section 4 correspond to mixed states in the above sense. Similar considerations hold for operator (\[densityoperatorbis\]), which satisfies the inequalities$$0\leq \mathcal{R}_{\lambda }^{2}\leq \mathcal{R}_{\lambda }\leq \mathbb{I}$$in the sense of quadratic forms since $\mathcal{R}_{\lambda }$ is self-adjoint, where $\mathbb{I}$ stands for the identity in $L^{2}\left(
\mathbb{R}^{d}\right) $. In this case we always have $\func{Tr}\mathcal{R}_{\lambda }^{2}(t)<1$ by virtue of (\[probagibbs\]), and the only process that would correspond to a pure state in this context is the Markovian process generated by the measure$$\mu _{0,\lambda }(G)=\int_{G}\mathsf{dxdy}\varphi _{0\mathsf{,0,\lambda }}(\mathsf{x})g_{\lambda }(\mathsf{x},T,\mathsf{y})\psi _{0\mathsf{,}T\mathsf{,\lambda }}(\mathsf{y})$$which is of the form (\[markovianmeasure\]), where $g_{\lambda }$ is Mehler’s kernel (\[mehler\]) and $\varphi _{0\mathsf{,0,\lambda }}$, $\psi
_{0\mathsf{,}T\mathsf{,\lambda }}$ are given by (\[otherchoice\]) with $\mathsf{m}=0$. There are, however, many other interesting Markovian Bernstein processes associated with (\[cauchyforwardter\])-([cauchybackwardter]{}) (see, e.g., [@zambrinibis]).
**Acknowledgements.** The research of both authors was supported by the FCT of the Portuguese government under grant PTDC/MAT-STA/0975/2014. The first author is also indebted to Marco Dozzi for stimulating discussions regarding certain probabilistic aspects of this article.
[99]{} <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Albeverio, S., Yasue, K., Zambrini, J-C.,</span> *Euclidean quantum mechanics: analytical approach,* Annales de l’Institut Henri Poincaré, Physique Théorique, **49** (1989) 259-308.
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Apostol, T. M.,</span> *Mathematical Analysis,* Addison-Wesley Series in Mathematics, Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Inc., Reading (1974).
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Aronson D. G.,</span> *Bounds for the fundamental solution of a parabolic equation,* Bulletin of the American Mathematical Society **73** (1967) 890-896.
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Aronson D. G.,</span>* Non-negative solutions of linear parabolic equations,* Annali della Scuola Normale Superiore di Pisa **22** (1968) 607-694.
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Bernstein, S.,</span> *Sur les liaisons entre les grandeurs aléatoires*, in: Verhandlungen des Internationalen Mathematikerkongress **1** (1932) 288-309.
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Beurling, A.,</span> *An automorphism of product measures,* Annals of Mathematics **72** (1960) 189-200.
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Carlen, E. A.,</span> *Conservative diffusions*, Communications in Mathematical Physics **94** (1984) 293-315.
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Carmichael, J. P., Masse, J. C., Theodorescu, R.,</span> *Processus Gaussiens stationnaires réciproques sur un intervalle,* Comptes Rendus de l’Académie des Sciences, Série I, **295** (1982) 291-294.
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Cruzeiro, A. B., Zambrini, J.-C.,</span>* Malliavin calculus and Euclidean quantum mechanics, I. Functional calculus,* Journal of Functional Analysis **96** (1991) 62-95.
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Erdélyi, A., Magnus, W., Oberhettinger, F., Tricomi, F. G.,</span> *Higher Transcendental Functions,* *II,* McGraw-Hill, Inc., New York (1953).
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Galichon, A.,</span> *Optimal Transport Methods in Economics*, Princeton University Press, Princeton (2016).
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Gel’fand, I. M., Vilenkin, N. Y.,</span> *Generalized Functions IV: Applications of Harmonic Analysis,* Academic Press, New York (1964).
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Gohberg, I. C., Krein, M. G.,</span> *Introduction to the Theory of Linear Nonselfadjoint Operators in Hilbert Space,* Translations of Mathematical Monographs **18**, American Mathematical Society, Providence (1969).
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">H</span>$\oslash $<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">egh-Krohn, R,</span>*Relativistic quantum statistical mechanics in two-dimensional space-time,* Communications in Mathematical Physics** 38** (1974) 195-224.
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Jamison, B.,</span> *Reciprocal processes: the stationary Gaussian case,* The Annals of Mathematical Statistics **41** (1970) 1624-1630.
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Jamison, B.,</span> *Reciprocal processes,* Zeitschrift für Wahrscheinlichkeitstheorie und Verwandte Gebiete **30** (1974) 65-86.
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Kato, T.,</span> *Perturbation Theory for Linear Operators,* Grundlehren der mathematischen Wissenschaften **132**, Springer Verlag, New York (1984).
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Klein, A., Landau, L. J.,</span> *Periodic Gaussian Osterwalder-Schrader positive* *processes and the two-sided Markov property on the circle,* Pacific Journal of Mathematics **94** (1981) 341-367.
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Kwakernaak, H.,</span> *Periodic linear differential stochastic processes,* SIAM Journal on Control **13** (1975) 400-413.
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Lassalle, R.,</span> *Causal transport plans and their Monge-Kantorovich problems,* Stochastic Analysis and Applications, **36** (2018), in press.
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Léonard, C.,</span> *A survey of the Schrödinger problem and some of its connections with optimal transport,* Discrete and Continuous Dynamical Systems, Series A, **34** (2014) 1533-1574.
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Léonard, C., Roelly, S., Zambrini, J.-C.</span>, *Reciprocal processes. A measure-theoretical point of view,* Probability Surveys **11** (2014) 237-269.
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Paley, R. E. A. C, Wiener, N.,</span>*Fourier Transforms in the Complex Domain,* American Mathematical Society Colloquium Publications XIX, American Mathematical Society, New York (1934).
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Pedersen, J.,</span> *Periodic Ornstein-Uhlenbeck processes driven by Lévy processes,* Journal of Applied Probability **39*** *(2002) 748-763.
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Reed, M., Simon, B.,</span> *Methods of Modern Mathematical Physics IV: Analysis of Operators,* Academic Press, New York (1978).
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Riesz, F., Nagy, B. SZ.,</span> *Functional Analysis,* Dover Books on Mathematics, Dover (1990).
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Roelly, S., Thieullen, M.,</span> *A characterization of reciprocal processes via an integration by parts formula on the path space,* Probability Theory and Related Fields **123** (2002) 97-120.
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Schrödinger, E.,</span> *Sur la théorie relativiste de l’électron et l’interprétation de la mécanique quantique,* Annales de l’Institut Henri Poincaré **2** (1932) 269-310.
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Villani, C.,</span>* Optimal Transport: Old and New,* Grundlehren der Mathematischen Wissenschaften **338**, Springer, New York (2009).
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">von Neumann, J.,</span> *Mathematical Foundations of Quantum Mechanics,* Princeton Landmarks in Mathematics Series, Princeton University Press (1996).
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Vuillermot, P.-A.,</span> *On the time evolution of Bernstein processes associated with a class of parabolic equations,* Discrete and Continuous Dynamical Systems, Series B, **23** (2018), in press.
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Vuillermot, P.-A., Zambrini, J.-C.,</span> *Bernstein diffusions for a class of linear parabolic partial differential equations,* Journal of Theoretical Probability **27** (2014) 449-492.
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Zambrini, J.-C.,</span> *Variational processes and stochastic versions of mechanics,* Journal of Mathematical Physics **27** (1986) 2307-2330.
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Zambrini, J.-C.,</span> *The research program of Stochastic Deformation (with a view toward Geometric Mechanics),* in:* *Stochastic Analysis: a Series of Lectures, Birkhäuser Progress in Probability book series **68,** Eds. R. Dalang, M. Dozzi, F. Flandoli, F. Russo (2015), pp. 359-393.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'Droplet evaporation of multicomponent droplets is essential for various physiochemical applications, e.g. in inkjet printing, spray cooling and microfabrication. In this work, we observe and study phase segregation of an evaporating sessile binary droplet, consisting of a mixture of water and a surfactant-like liquid (1,2-hexanediol). The phase segregation (i.e., demixing) leads to a reduced water evaporation rate of the droplet and eventually the evaporation process ceases due to shielding of the water by the non-volatile 1,2-hexanediol. Visualizations of the flow field by particle image velocimetry and numerical simulations reveal that the timescale of water evaporation at the droplet rim is faster than that of the Marangoni flow, which originates from the surface tension difference between water and 1,2-hexanediol, eventually leading to segregation.'
author:
- Yaxing Li
- Pengyu Lv
- Christian Diddens
- Huanshu Tan
- Herman Wijshoff
- Michel Versluis
- Detlef Lohse
title: 'Evaporation-triggered segregation of sessile binary droplets'
---
The evaporation of a sessile droplet has attracted a lot of attention over the past years [@picknett1977; @deegan1997; @lohse2015rmp; @hu2002; @popov2005; @cazabat2010; @sbonn2006; @ristenpart2007; @lim2008; @schoenfeld2008; @gelderblom2011; @marin2011; @brutin2011; @ledesma2014; @Tan2016], not only from a fundamental scientific perspective, but also because of many technological and biological applications, such as inkjet printing [@park2006control], nanopatterning depositions [@kuang2014controllable], and DNA stretching [@jing1998automated]. Within the whole class of problems, the so-called “coffee-stain effect” which was presented to the scientific community 20 y ago [@deegan1997], has become paradigmatic. The problem and its variations keep inspiring the community. This holds not only for the evaporation of liquids with dispersed particles [@marin2011; @nguyen2017manipulating], but also for that of liquid mixtures, including binary and ternary mixtures [@Sefiane2003; @sefiane2008; @kim2016controlled; @Tan2016; @diddens2017evaporating]. In recent work on an evaporating Ouzo drop (a ternary mixture of water, ethanol and anise oil), Tan $et\ al$. [@Tan2016] showed that a phase transition and the nucleation of oil microdroplets can be triggered by evaporation. The reason for the nucleation lies in the varying solubility of oil in the ethanol-water mixtures: the high evaporation rate at the rim of the droplet together with the higher volatility of ethanol as compared to water causes an oil oversaturation at the rim, leading to localized oil microdroplet nucleation. The oil microdroplets are advected over the whole drop by Marangoni flow and further droplets later nucleate in the bulk. Finally, the microdroplets are jammed and coalesce during the further evaporation process, eventually leading to the formation of a separated oil phase in the remaining binary water/oil droplet. Liquid-liquid phase separation during evaporation not only occurs for Ouzo droplets, but is omnipresent in nature and technology [@lobl1994nucleation; @wang1998nucleation; @rao1989nucleation; @hyman2014liquid].
In this work, we study segregation within an evaporating 1,2-hexanediol/water miscible binary droplet. 1,2-hexanediol is used in a variety of applications, such as co-surfactant for modifying the sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS) micelles [@kennedy2001interaction] and oil solubilization in ternary systems [@d2003small]. The features of its aqueous solution are widely studied in many previous papers [@hajji1989comparative; @frindi1991ultrasonic; @Szekely2007], which show that 1,2-hexanediol molecules form micelle-like aggregates characterized by a critical micelle concentration (CMC) in aqueous solutions, leading to an almost constant surface tension above the CMC [@Romero200767]. Compared with water, 1,2-hexanediol is non-volatile under room conditions, implying a preferred evaporation of the more volatile water during the drying process. However, to the best of our knowledge, the segregation of the miscible 1,2-hexanediol and water during the evaporation process has never been observed, nor studied. In this paper, we explore experimentally and numerically the mechanism of segregation of 1,2-hexanediol from the miscible water, that is found to be triggered by selective evaporation.
We begin with the visualization of the distribution of the mixture components during evaporation by labelling water and 1,2-hexanediol with the fluorescent dyes dextran and nile red, respectively. A dyed 0.5 $\mu\text{L}$ binary droplet with initial 10$\%$ mass concentration of 1,2-hexanediol (around the CMC [@Romero200767]) is deposited on a transparent hydrophobic octadecyltrichlorosilane (OTS)-glass surface, while monitoring its evaporation under ambient conditions with confocal microscopy from side and bottom (see supporting information). The contact angle of the droplet varies between 43$^\circ$ and 23$^\circ$ during the whole evaporation process, measured by bright-field imaging from side view. Fig. \[fig:images\_conf\] presents the segregation process of the evaporating binary droplet. In the beginning the droplet is homogeneously mixed, as revealed by the uniformed green colour over the surface and on the bottom (Fig. \[fig:images\_conf\]$A$,\[fig:images\_conf\]$A'$). About 34 s after deposition, 1,2-hexanediol microdroplets nucleate at the rim of the droplet, revealed by the yellow colour (Fig. \[fig:images\_conf\]$B$,\[fig:images\_conf\]$B'$). During further evaporation, the nucleated microdroplets of 1,2-hexanediol grow and coalesce, which forms star-shape binary mixture area revealed in blue colour (Fig. \[fig:images\_conf\]$C$,\[fig:images\_conf\]$C'$). Eventually, 1,2-hexanediol covers the whole surface of the droplet and the evaporation process stops with some water being entrapped by the 1,2-hexanediol (Fig. \[fig:images\_conf\]$D$,\[fig:images\_conf\]$D'$). From comparing the initial and the final size, we calculate that approximately 96$\%$ of the water has evaporated while 4$\%$ got trapped.
![Confocal images of the segregation process during droplet evaporation in a side (A-D) and bottom (A’-D’) view taken at the same times. (A-D) The confocal microscope scans the rectangular box with the volume 590 $\mu \text{m}$ $\times$ 590 $\mu \text{m}$ $\times$ 90 $\mu \text{m}$. Water (blue) and 1,2-hexanediol (yellow) are labeled with different dyes for the observation. (A and A’) In the beginning, the droplet is homogeneously mixed. (B and B’) At about 34 s after recording started, 1,2-hexanediol nucleates at the contact line of the droplet, which is revealed as yellow round shapes. (C and C’) The nucleated microdroplets of 1,2-hexanediol gradually grow and coalesce. (D and D’) The evaporation ends when 1,2-hexanediol fully covers the surface of the droplet. []{data-label="fig:images_conf"}](images_confocal-eps-converted-to.pdf){width="100.00000%"}
To obtain insight into the segregation process, we record the evolution of the flow field within the evaporating binary 1,2-hexanediol/water droplet by particle image velocimetry (PIV) combined with confocal microscopy. For a first qualitative understanding, we added 1 $\mu m$ diameter fluorescent particles at a concentration of $5 \times 10^{-5} \ \text{vol}\%$, which is much less than the particle concentration required for a quantitative PIV measurement [@diddens2017evaporating; @kim2016controlled]. The whole droplet and all particles were illuminated: particles near the substrate (pink colour) were in focus of the camera; the grey or transparent objects were out-of-focus particles and reside in the upper part of the droplet.
Initially, the flow is directed radially outwards near the substrate (see Fig \[fig:PIV\_schematics\]A). In this phase, only water evaporates from the binary droplet and the droplet is thin, $H/L \ll 1$, where the droplet height $H$ is approximately 60 $\mu$m and droplet footprint diameter $L$ is about 600 $\mu$m. Therefore, due to the relative high concentration of 1,2-hexanediol caused by the singularity of the water evaporation rate at the rim of the sessile droplet [@cazabat2010], a Marangoni flow is driven from the contact line to the apex of the droplet by the surface tension gradient, which originates from the concentration variation along the surface. Note that the surface tension of 1,2-hexanediol aqueous solution is monotonously decreasing with 1,2-hexanediol concentration when it is lower than the CMC [@Romero200767]. As a consequence, a convective flow inside the droplet is driven by the Marangoni flow and water is transported to the contact line by radial outflow near the substrate. However, here the convective flow within the droplet is not sufficient to compensate for the evaporative water loss near the contact line. The typical outwards flow velocity shortly after deposition is $U \approx 1\ \mu$m/s, implying a Reynolds number $Re = \rho HU/\mu \approx 10^{-5}$, where $\rho \approx 10^3$ kg/m$^3$ is the liquid density and $\mu \approx 10$ mPa s is the viscosity. We compare the time scales of evaporation $t_{\text{ev}} \sim \rho LH/(D_{\text{w},\text{air}} \Delta c_w) $ [@dietrich2016] with that of convective Marangoni flow $t_{\text{Ma}} \sim L/U $ on the surface: $t_{\text{ev}}/t_{\text{Ma}} \sim \rho HU/(D_{\text{w},\text{air}} \Delta c_\text{w}) \approx 10^{-1}$, where $D_{\text{w},\text{air}} = 2.4 \times 10^{-5}$ m$^2$/s is the diffusion coefficient of water vapor at room temperature and $\Delta c_\text{w} \approx 10^{-2}$ kg/m$^3$ is the vapor concentration difference from the air-liquid interface to the surrounding air. The small ratio $t_{\text{ev}}/t_{\text{Ma}} \ll 1$ indicates that the water loss due to the evaporation cannot be replenished by convective flux. Therefore, the concentration of 1,2-hexanediol near the contact line keeps increasing due to the insufficient compensation by the water due to the low convective flow.
In the second phase, after about 18 s (Fig. \[fig:PIV\_schematics\]B), all particles, which had accumulated at the contact line, released and simultaneously moved upward along with the Marangoni flow [@marin2016surfactant; @kim2016controlled]. They move along the liquid-air interface due to the hydrophilicity of the particles and the diol accumulation at the rim. In the third regime (Fig. \[fig:PIV\_schematics\]C), the particles floating on the upper layer formed a star shape which is revealed by the orange dashed line, and then flowed down to the bottom of the droplet through the shape of fingers of a star. Compared with the observations in Fig.\[fig:images\_conf\], the star shape corresponds to the blue part in Fig.\[fig:images\_conf\]C and C’, which represents the water-rich area. The fingers are formed by the liquid on the upper layer flowing downward through the streams between each two neighbouring growing nucleated microdroplets. During the segregation process, the surface tension force is dominant compared to gravity forces, as the Bond number Bo = $\rho g L^{2}/\sigma \approx 10^{-1}$, where $g = 9.8\ \text{m}/\text{s}^{2}$ gravity and $\sigma \approx 24$ mN/m is the surface tension of the 1,2-hexanediol aqueous solution above the CMC [@Romero200767]. In the final phase, when 1,2-hexanediol almost entirely covers the surface and the evaporation ceases, particles flow irregularly and eventually are deposited uniformly with no particles accumulating at the edge when evaporation fully stops (Fig. \[fig:PIV\_schematics\]D).
![(A-D) Bottom-view snapshots of the droplet seeded with fluorescent particles in different life phases. (A) The flow is directed radially outwards near the substrate, as shown by particles transported to the contact line (blue arrows). (B) All the particles are released from the contact line and flow to the upper center (orange circle) of the droplet (red arrows). (C) Particles floating on the upper layer form a star shaped pattern (purple lines) and flow downward through the fingers of the star (green arrows). (D) When the droplet stops evaporating, the particles are deposited homogeneously on the substrate, without leaving a coffee-stain. (E-F) Schematics of the flow inside the binary droplet at different phases. (E) Before segregation, the surface tension gradient drives a Marangoni flow from the edge to the apex of the droplet. (F) After segregation, the nucleated microdroplets of 1,2-hexanediol grow and coalesce. At the same time, water-rich liquid from the upper layer of the droplet flows down through the streams between neighbouring nucleated microdroplets. []{data-label="fig:PIV_schematics"}](PIV_schematics-eps-converted-to.pdf){width="100.00000%"}
To obtain a quantitative analysis of the flow field during evaporation, we add 520 nm diameter fluorescent particles at a concentration of $2 \times 10^{-3}\ \text{vol}\%$ into the droplet. The flow speed $U$ and the wall-normal vorticity $\omega = \partial_x u_y - \partial_y u_x$ for the in-plane velocity ($u_x, u_y$) are measured during the whole evaporation process. Also from the evolution of the mean vorticity $\bar{\omega}$, the different life phases of the evaporation can be identified, now even quantitatively, see Fig. \[fig:PIV\_plot\]. In the early phase, there is almost only outward radial flow, resulting in constant low vorticity. After de-staining of the particles, there are some small vortices appearing near the droplet rim due to the receding contact line. When segregation starts, the vorticity sharply increases due to a series of vortices forming in the nucleated microdroplets of 1,2-hexanediol, see also in Fig. \[fig:images\_conf\]C. During coalescence of the growing nucleated microdroplets, small vortices merge and form larger vortices. When the growing microdroplets reach the area where floating particle reside, the particles flow down to the bottom. Finally the flow becomes irregular and then vanishes at the end of the evaporation process.
![Particle image velocimetry results showing the flow field near the substrate in terms of velocity vectors and vorticity, allowing to identify evaporation stages. The five vertical lines show the moments of the five snapshots. (Blue line: 10s; red line: 80s; yellow line: 112s; purple line: 122s; green line: 167s.) []{data-label="fig:PIV_plot"}](PIV_plot-eps-converted-to.pdf){width="100.00000%"}
Sessile droplet evaporation is a diffusion-dominated process driven by the concentration gradient of the droplet’s constituent(s) from the droplet interface towards the surroundings. The case of a pure evaporating sessile droplet has analytically been solved by Popov [@popov2005], see the supporting information.
For a droplet consisting of more than one component, the situation gets more complicated and can only be treated numerically. Several generalizations are necessary to adopt Popov’s model to a multi-component droplet. Since these generalizations are described in detail in several recent publications [@Diddens2017a; @Diddens2017b; @diddens2017evaporating; @Tan2016; @Tan2017a], only a brief overview of the model is given in the following, focusing on the case of the present binary mixture.
As 1,2-hexanediol is non-volatile, only the evaporation rate of water has to be determined. However, in contrast to the case of a pure water droplet, where the water vapor concentration $c_{\text{w}}$ is saturated directly above the liquid-gas interface, i.e. $c_{\text{w}}=c_{\text{w,s}}$, in the case of a droplet, consisting of two miscible liquids, the vapor concentration is given by the vapor-liquid equilibrium. This equilibrium can be expressed by Raoult’s law, i.e. $c_{\text{w}}=\gamma_{\text{w}}X_{\text{w}}c_{\text{w,s}}$, where $X_{\text{w}}$ is the mole fraction of water in the liquid and $\gamma_{\text{w}}$ is the activity coefficient of water for the 1,2-hexanediol/water mixture. The water vapor concentration is in general non-uniform along the interface and changes over time. The evaporation process is modeled by the quasi-steady vapor diffusion equation $\nabla^2c_{\text{w}}=0$. We use Raoult’s law at the liquid-gas interface and the ambient vapor concentration $c_{\text{w}}=c_{\text{w},\infty}$ far away from the droplet as Dirichlet boundary conditions. The evaporation rate of water $J_{\text{w}}$ is then given by the diffusive flux at the interface, i.e. $J_{\text{w}}=-D_{\text{w,air}}\partial_n c_{\text{w}}$.
In case of a pure droplet, or for a multicomponent droplet in the presence of a very intense Marangoni flow, it is sufficient to keep track of the total mass of each species over time to predict the volume evolution [@Diddens2017a; @Tan2017a]. Here, however, the Marangoni flow is weak and segregation occurs, so that an explicit spatio-temporal dependence of the local liquid composition emerges. Hence, the convection-diffusion equation for the water mass fraction $Y_{\text{w}}$ has to be solved inside the droplet: $$\rho\left(\partial_t Y_{\text{w}} + \vec{u}\cdot\nabla Y_{\text{w}}\right) = \nabla\cdot\left(\rho D \nabla Y_{\text{w}} \right) - J_{\text{w}}\delta_{\text{interf.}}
\label{eq:num:convdiffuyw}$$ The mass density of the liquid $\rho$ and the diffusivity $D$ are composition-dependent quantities, i.e. $\rho(Y_{\text{w}})$ and $D(Y_{\text{w}})$. The evaporation rate of water enters Eq. as interfacial sink term $\delta_{\text{interf.}}$.
The advection velocity $\vec{u}$ is obtained from the Stokes equation, subject to a no-slip boundary condition at the substrate, the kinematic boundary condition considering evaporation, the Laplace pressure in normal direction at the liquid-gas interface, and the Marangoni shear stress that arises due to the composition-dependent surface tension $\sigma(Y_{\text{w}})$ in tangential direction at the liquid-gas interface. Furthermore, the composition-dependence of the dynamic viscosity $\mu(Y_{\text{w}})$ has to be considered. For the composition-dependence of the liquid’s material properties, we have fitted experimental data and/or used models. More details and plots of these relations can be found in the supplementary information.
The resulting set of coupled equations can be solved numerically with a finite element method [@Diddens2017b; @diddens2017evaporating; @Tan2017a]. We restrict ourselves to axial symmetry. Since the evolution of the contact angle is determined by microscopic interactions at the contact line, it cannot be predicted by the model. Instead, the experimentally measured evolution of the contact angle was imposed throughout the simulation, see Fig. \[fig:parameters\_10\]A.
![Experimental (data points) and numerical results (solid line) for the temporal evolution of the geometrical parameters (A): footprint dimater $L$, contact angle $\theta$ and (B): volume $V$ from experiment and numerical simulation. The error bars are deduced from the experimental accuracy.[]{data-label="fig:parameters_10"}](parameters_10-eps-converted-to.pdf){width="100.00000%"}
![These snapshots from the simulation of an evaporating droplet with initially $10 \%$ of 1,2-hexanediol with the axisymmetric finite element model at different times $t$. In the gas phase, the water vapor concentration $c_{\text{w}}$ is shown and the corresponding evaporation rate $J_{\text{w}}$ is indicated by the arrows at the interface. Inside the droplet, the mass fraction of 1,2-hexanediol (left) and the velocity (right) is depicted. Note the very different phenomena at $t = 10$s (upper) and at the two later times $t = 145$s, and $t = 180$s (lower).[]{data-label="fig:10per"}](10per-eps-converted-to.pdf){width="100.00000%"}
In Fig. \[fig:10per\], these snapshots of the simulation for the droplet consisting of an initial $10 \%$ 1,2-hexanediol are depicted. While initially a considerable Marangoni flow is present and the profile of the evaporation rate resembles the case of a pure water droplet, the situation drastically changes at later times: The Marangoni flow ceases due to the nearly constant surface tension at lower water concentrations. Towards the end of the evaporation process, the evaporation rate suddenly decreases once the water concentration $Y_{\text{w}}$ falls below a threshold of about $10 \%$. Since this transition sets in near the contact line, the profile of the evaporation rate shows a remarkable deviation from the case of a pure droplet with a pronounced evaporation at the apex in this stage. The evaporation-triggered segregation effect in radial direction is well captured by the model. Finally, a remaining water residue is entrapped in the bulk of the droplet (4$\%$ of the initial water content) which can only reach the interface by diffusion. The comparison between simulation and experimental data shows an excellent quantitative agreement as shown in Fig. \[fig:parameters\_10\]B.
To summarize, segregation within a binary droplet in spite of the simplifying asymmetry, triggered by selective evaporation is observed during the drying process of a 1,2-hexanediol/water mixture droplet. The small surface tension differences cannot drive a strong enough Marangoni flow on the surface to induce a high enough convection within the droplet to obtain perfect mixing. Therefore a locally high concentration of 1,2-hexanediol accumulates near the contact line of the droplet, leading to segregation. The evolution of the vorticity field indicates different life stages of the evaporating droplet. We quantitatively compare the experimental data with a numerical simulation, showing excellent agreement. While the model perfectly predicts the water and diol concentrations in the inner center and outer layer of the droplet, respectively, note that it cannot predict the phase separation of the two liquids due to the complexity of the diol’s solubility in water. Indeed, 1,2-hexanediol can mix with water at any concentration without phase separation in equilibrium due to the formation of micelles-like aggregates. However, in the dynamic system of an evaporating droplet, the continuous loss of water leads to large fluctuations through mutual attractions of micelles within the new 1,2-hexanediol phase, which eventually forms the nucleation of 1,2-hexanediol [@sear2014quantitative]. From an energetic point of view, it is likely that the separated 1,2-hexanediol phase has the same, or at least a very similar, chemical potential as the mixed phase in the droplet [@hyman2014liquid]. Stochastic fluctuations then lead to the phase separation. Our findings offer new perspectives to understand how surfactants act in an evaporating system, and may inspire further studies of complex dynamical aspects associated with microdroplet nucleation.
The authors thank A. Prosperetti, A. Marin, H. Reinten and M. van den Berg for the invaluable discussions and NWO and Océ for financial support.
[40]{}
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 careful analysis of the $HEAO1~A2~2-10~keV$ full-sky map of the X-ray background (XRB) reveals clustering on the scale of several degrees. After removing the contribution due to beam smearing, the intrinsic clustering of the background is found to be consistent with an auto-correlation function of the form $3.6 \pm 0.9 \times 10^{-4} \theta^{-1}$ where $\theta$ is measured in degrees. If current AGN models of the hard XRB are reasonable and the cosmological constant-cold dark matter ($\Lambda CDM$) cosmology is correct, this clustering implies an X-ray bias factor of $b_X \sim 2$. Combined with the absence of a correlation between the XRB and the cosmic microwave background (CMB), this clustering can be used to limit the presence of an integrated Sachs-Wolfe (ISW) effect and thereby to constrain the value of the cosmological constant, $\Omega_\Lambda \le 0.60$ (95% C.L.). This constraint is inconsistent with much of the $\Omega_\Lambda$ parameter space currently favored by other observations. Finally, we marginally detect the dipole moment of the diffuse XRB and find it to be consistent with the dipole due to our motion with respect to the mean rest frame of the XRB. The limit on the amplitude of any intrinsic dipole is $\delta I_x / I \le 5 \times 10^{-3}$ at the 95 % C.L. When compared to the local bulk velocity, this limit implies a constraint on the matter density of the universe of ${\Omega_m}^{0.6}/b_X(0) \gs 0.24$.'
author:
- 'S.P. Boughn'
- 'R.G. Crittenden'
- 'G.P. Koehrsen'
title: 'The Large-Scale Structure of the X-ray Background and its Cosmological Implications'
---
Introduction
============
The X-ray background (XRB) was discovered before the cosmic microwave background (CMB), but only now is its origin being fully understood. The hard ($2-10 ~ keV$) XRB has been nearly completely resolved into individual sources; most of these are active galactic nuclei (AGN), but there is a minor contribution from the hot, intergalactic medium in rich clusters of galaxies (Rosati et al. 2002; Cowie et al. 2002; & Mushotzky et al. 2000). In addition, the spectra of these faint X-ray sources are consistent with that of the “diffuse” XRB. If current models of the luminosity functions and evolution of these sources are reasonably correct, then the XRB arises from sources in the redshift range $0 < z < 4$, making them an important probe of density fluctuations intermediate between relatively nearby galaxy surveys ($z \ls 0.5$) and the CMB ($z \sim 1000$).
While there have been several attempts to measure large scale, correlated fluctuations in the hard XRB, these have only yielded upper limits or, at best, marginal detections (e.g. Barcons et al. 2000, Treyer et al. 1998 and references cited therein). On small scales, a recent correlation analysis of 159 sources in the Chandra Deep Field South survey detected significant correlations for separations out to $100~arcsec$ (Giacconi et al. 2001). (At the survey flux level, these sources comprise roughly two thirds of the hard XRB.) On much larger scales, a recent analysis by Scharf et al. (2000) claims a significant detection of large-scale harmonic structure in the XRB with spherical harmonic order $1 \le \ell \le 10$ corresponding to structures on angular scales of $ \theta \gs 10^\circ$ The auto-correlation results we describe here complement this analysis, indicating clustering on angular scales of $3^{\circ}$ to $10^{\circ}$, corresponding to harmonic order of $ \ell \ls 30$. However, all three detections have relatively low signal to noise and require independent confirmation.
The dipole moment of the XRB has received particular attention, primarily because of its relation to the dipole in the CMB, which is likely due to the Earth’s motion with respect to the rest frame of the CMB. If this is the case, one expects a similar dipole in the XRB with an amplitude that is 3.4 times larger because of the difference in spectral indices of the two backgrounds (Boldt 1987). In the X-ray literature, this dipole is widely known as the Compton-Getting effect (Compton & Getting 1935). In addition, it is quite likely that the XRB has an intrinsic dipole due to the asymmetric distribution in the local matter density that is responsible for the Earth’s peculiar motion in the first place. Searches for both these dipoles have concentrated on the hard XRB, since at lower energies the X-ray sky is dominated by Galactic structure. There have been several tentative detections of the X-ray dipole (e.g. Scharf et al. (2000)), but these have large uncertainties. A firm detection of an intrinsic dipole or even an upper limit on its presence would provide an important constraint on the inhomogeneity of the local distribution of matter via a less often used tracer of mass and a concomitant constraint on cosmological models (e.g., Lahav, Piran & Treyer 1997).
This paper is organized as follows. In section §2 we describe the hard X-ray map used in the analysis, the determination of its effective beam size, and cuts made to remove the foreground contaminants. In section §3, we describe the remaining large scale structures in the map and the determination of their amplitudes. The dipole is of particular interest, and is the topic of section §4. The correlation function of the residual map and its implications for intrinsic correlations are discussed in section §5. In section §6, we compare our results to previous observations and discuss the cosmological implications of these results in §7.
HEAO1 A2 ${\it 2 - 10~keV}$ X-ray Map
=====================================
There has been much recent progress in understanding the X-ray background through instruments such as ROSAT, Chandra and XMM. However, these either have too low an energy threshold or have too small a field of view to study the large scale structure of the hard X-rays. The best observations relevant to large scale structure are still those from the HEAO1 A2 experiment that measured the surface brightness of the X-ray background in the $0.1 - 60~keV$ band (Boldt 1987).
The HEAO1 data set we consider was constructed from the output of two medium energy detectors (MED) with different fields of view ($3^\circ \times 3^\circ$ and $3^\circ \times 1.5^\circ$) and two high energy detectors (HED3) with these same fields of view. These data were collected during the six month period beginning on day 322 of 1977. Counts from the four detectors were combined and binned in 24,576 $1.3^\circ \times 1.3^\circ$ pixels. The pixelization we use is an equatorial quadrilateralized spherical cube projection on the sky, the same as used for the COBE satellite CMB maps (White and Stemwedel 1992). The combined map has a spectral bandpass (quantum efficiency $\gs 50\%$) of approximately $3-17~keV$ (Jahoda & Mushotzky 1989) and is shown in Galactic coordinates in Figure \[fig:heao\]. For consistency with other work, all signals are converted to equivalent flux in the $2-10~keV$ band.
Because of the ecliptic longitude scan pattern of the HEAO satellite, sky coverage and therefore photon shot noise are not uniform. However, the variance of the cleaned, corrected map, $2.1 \times 10^{-2}~(TOT~counts~s^{-1})^2$, is much larger than the variance of photon shot noise, $0.8 \times 10^{-2}~(TOT~counts~s^{-1})^2$, where $1~TOT~counts~s^{-1} \approx 2.1 \times 10^{-11}
erg~s^{-1} cm^{-2}$ (Allen, Jahoda & Whitlock 1994). This implies that most of the variance in the X-ray map is due to “real” structure. For this reason and to reduce contamination from any systematics that might be correlated with the scan pattern, we chose to weight the pixels equally in this analysis.
The point spread function
-------------------------
To determine the level of intrinsic correlations, we must account for the effects of beam smearing and so it is essential to characterize the point spread function (PSF) of the above map. The PSF varies somewhat with position on the sky because of the pixelization and the asymmetric beam combined with the HEAO1 scan pattern. We obtained a mean PSF by averaging the individual PSFs of 60 strong HEAO1 point sources (Piccinotti 1982) that were located more than $20^{\circ}$ from the Galactic plane. The latter condition was imposed to avoid crowding and to approximate the windowing of the subsequent analysis (see §2.2). The composite PSF, shown in Figure \[fig:psf\], is well fit by a Gaussian with a full width, half maximum (FWHM) of $3.04^\circ$.
As a check of this PSF, we generated Monte Carlo maps of sources observed with $3^\circ \times 3^\circ$ and $3^\circ \times 1.5^\circ$ (FWHM) triangular beams appropriate for the A2 detectors (Shafer 1983) and then combined the maps with quadcubed pixelization as above. The resulting average PSF from these trials is also well fit by a Gaussian with a FWHM of $2.91^\circ$, i.e., about $4.5\%$ less than that in the Figure \[fig:psf\]. Considering that the widths of the triangular beams given above are nominal, that the triangular beam pattern is only approximate (especially at higher energies), and that we did not take into account the slight smearing in the satellite scan direction (Shafer 1983), the agreement is remarkably good. In the following analysis, we use the $3.04^\circ$ fit derived from the observed map; however, changing the PSF FWHM by a few percent does not significantly affect the results of this paper.
Cleaning the map
----------------
To remove the effects of the Galaxy and strong extra-galactic point sources, some regions of the map were excluded from the analysis. The dominant feature in the HEAO map is the Galaxy (see Figure \[fig:heao\]) so all data within $20^\circ$ of the Galactic plane or within $30^\circ$ of the Galactic center were cut from the map. In addition, large regions ($6.5^\circ \times 6.5^\circ$) centered on $92$ discrete X-ray sources with $2 - 10~keV$ fluxes larger than $3 \times 10^{-11} erg~s^{-1} cm^{-2}$ (Piccinotti 1982) were removed from the maps. Around the sixteen brightest of these sources (with fluxes larger than $1 \times 10^{-10} erg~s^{-1} cm^{-2}$) the cut regions were enlarged to $9^\circ \times 9^\circ$. Further enlarging the area of the excised regions had a negligible effect on the following analysis so we conclude that the sources have been effectively removed. The resulting “cleaned” map (designated Map A) has a sky coverage of $55.5\%$ and is our baseline map for further cuts.
To test the possibility of further point source contamination, we also used the ROSAT All-Sky Survey (RASS) Bright Source Catalog (Voges et al. 1996) to identify relatively bright sources. While the RASS survey has somewhat less than full sky coverage ($92\%$), it has a relatively low flux limit that corresponds to a $2-10~keV$ flux of $\sim 2 \times 10^{-13}~erg~s^{-1}~cm^{-2}$ for a photon spectral index of $\alpha = -2$. Every source in the RASS catalog was assigned a $2-10~keV$ flux from its B-band flux by assuming a spectral index of $-3< \alpha < -1$ as deduced from its HR2 hardness ratio. For fainter sources, the computed value of $\alpha$ is quite uncertain; if it fell outside the typical range of most X-ray sources, $-3< \alpha < -1$, then $\alpha$ was simply forced to be $-1$ or $-3$. It is clear that extrapolating RASS flux to the $2-10~keV$ band is not accurate, so one must consider the level to which sources are masked with due caution. However, we are only using these fluxes to mask bright sources and so this procedure is unlikely to bias the results.
We considered maps where the ROSAT sources were removed at three different inferred $2-10~keV$ flux thresholds. First, we identified sources with fluxes exceeding the Piccinotti level, $3 \times 10^{-11} erg~s^{-1} cm^{-2}$. Thirty-four additional, high Galactic latitude RASS sources were removed, resulting in a map with sky coverage of $52\%$ (designated Map B). In order to compare more directly with the results of Scharf et al. (2000) (see §6) we removed sources at their flux level, $2 \times 10^{-11} erg~s^{-1} cm^{-2}$. The map masked in this way has $47\%$ sky coverage (compared to the $48\%$ coverage of the Scharf et al. analysis) and is designated Map C. Finally, to check how sensitive our dipole results are to the particular masking of the map, we lowered the flux cut level to $1 \times 10^{-11} erg~s^{-1} cm^{-2}$, which reduced the sky coverage to $34\%$. The map resulting from this cut is designated Map D in Table 3.
As an alternative to using the RASS sources, the map itself was searched for “sources” that exceeded the nearby background by a specified amount. Since the quad-cubed format lays out the pixels on an approximately square array, we averaged each pixel with its eight neighbors and then compared this value with the median value of the next nearest sixteen pixels (ignoring pixels within the masked regions). If the average flux associated with a given pixel exceeded the median flux of the background by a prescribed threshold, then all 25 pixels ($6.5^\circ \times 6.5^\circ$) were removed from further consideration. For a threshold corresponding to 2.2 times the mean shot noise in the map approximately 120 more “sources” were identified and masked resulting in a sky coverage of $42\%$. This map is labeled Map E in Table 3. Finally, we used an even more aggressive cut corresponding to 1.75 times the mean shot noise which resulted in a masked map with $33\%$ sky coverage. This map is labeled Map F.
Modeling the Local Large-Scale Structure
=========================================
Sources of large scale structure
--------------------------------
There are several local sources of large-scale structure in the HEAO map which can not be eliminated by masking isolated regions. These include diffuse emission from the Galaxy, emission (diffuse and/or faint point sources) from the Local Supercluster, the Compton-Getting dipole, and a linear time drift in detector sensitivity. Since none of these are known *a priori*, we fit an eight parameter model to the data. Of course, the Compton-Getting dipole is known in principle if one assumes the kinetic origin of the dipole in the cosmic microwave background; however, there may also be an intrinsic X-ray dipole that is not accounted for. (See §4 below.) Only one correction was made *a priori* to the map and that was for the dipole due to the Earth’s motion around the sun; however, this correction has a negligible effect on the results. A more detailed account of the model is given in Boughn (1999).
The X-ray background has a diffuse (or unresolved) Galactic component which varies strongly with Galactic latitude (Iwan et al. 1982). This emission is still significant at high Galactic latitude ($b_{II}>20^\circ$) and extrapolates to $\sim 1\%$ at the Galactic poles. We modeled this emission in two ways. The first model consisted of a linear combination of a secant law Galaxy with the Haslam $408~GHz$ full sky map (Haslam et al. 1982). The latter was included to take into account X-rays generated by inverse Compton scattering of CMB photons from high energy electrons in the Galactic halo, the source of much of the synchrotron emission in the Haslam map. As an alternative Galaxy model we also considered the two disk, exponentially truncated model of Iwan et al. (1982). Our results are independent of which model is used.
In addition to the Galactic component, evidence has been found for faint X-ray emission from plane of the Local Supercluster (Jahoda 1993, Boughn 1999). Because of its faintness, very detailed models of this emission are not particularly useful. The model we use here is a simple “pillbox”, i.e uniform X-ray emissivity within a circular disk of thickness equal to a $1/4$ of the radius and with its center located $4/5$ of a radius from us in the direction of the Virgo cluster (see Boughn 1999 for details). The amplitude of this emission, while significant, is largely independent of the details of the model and, in any case, has only a small effect on the results.
Time drifts in the detector sensitivity can also lead to apparent structure in the reconstructed X-ray map. At least one of the A-2 detectors changed sensitivity by $\sim 1\%$ in the six month interval of the current data set (Jahoda 1993). Because of the ecliptic scan pattern of the HEAO satellite, this results in a large-scale pattern in the sky which varies with ecliptic longitude with a period of $180^\circ$. If the drift is assumed to be linear, the form of the resulting large-scale structure in the map is completely determined. A linear drift of unknown amplitude is taken into account by constructing a sky map with the appropriate structure and then fitting for the amplitude simultaneously with the other parameters. We investigated the possibility of non-linear drift by considering quadratic and cubic terms as well; however, this did not significantly reduce the $\chi^2$ of the fit nor change the subsequent results.
Modeling the maps
-----------------
The eight parameters that characterize the amplitude of these structures are used to model the large-scale structure in the HEAO map. Let the X-ray intensity map be denoted by the vector $\bf{I}$, where the element $I_i$ is the intensity in the $i^{th}$ pixel. The observed intensity is modelled as the sum of eight templates with amplitudes described by the eight dimensional vector $\bf{a}$, $${\bf{I}} = \tilde{X}{\bf{a}} + {\bf{n}}$$ where $\tilde{X}$ is an $8 \times n_{pix}$ matrix whose elements are the values of each template function at each pixel of the map. As discussed above, these template functions include: a uniform map to represent the monopole of the X-ray background; the three components of a dipole (in equatorial coordinates); the large-scale pattern resulting from a linear instrumental gain drift; a Galactic secant law; the Haslam $408~GHz$ map ; and the amplitude of the “pillbox” model of the local supercluster. The noise vector ${\bf{n}}$ is assumed to be Gaussian distributed with correlations described by $\tilde{C}\equiv \langle {\bf{n \, n}}^T\rangle$.
As discussed above (§2), we chose to weight each pixel equally since the shot noise is considerably less than the “real” fluctuations in the sky. For the purposes of fitting the map to the above model we consider both photon shot noise and fluctuations in the XRB (see Figure \[fig:acf\]) to be “noise”. This noise is correlated and a minimum $\chi^2$ fit must take such correlations into account. However, for simplicity, we ignore these correlations when finding the best fit model amplitudes and perform a standard least squares fit by minimizing $|{\bf{I}} - \tilde{X}{\bf{a}}|^2$ on the cleaned HEAO map. From the standard equations of linear regression the values of the parameters that minimize this sum are $${\bf{a}} = \tilde{B}^{-1} \tilde{X}^T {\bf{I}}$$ where $\tilde{B} = \tilde{X}^T \tilde{X}$ is a symmetric eight by eight matrix. This would be the maximum likelihood estimator if the correlation matrix were uniform and diagonal. Though this fit ignores correlations in the errors, it is unbiased and is likely to be very close to the minimum $\chi^2$ (maximum likelihood) fit, since the noise correlations are on a much smaller scale than the features we are attempting to fit.
The correlated nature of the noise cannot be ignored when computing the uncertainties in the fit since there are far fewer noise independent data points than there are pixels in the map. It is straightforward to show that errors in the estimated parameters $\delta {\bf{a}}$ are given by $$\label{eqn:sigc}
\langle \delta {\bf{a}} \, \delta {\bf{a}}^T \rangle =
\tilde{B}^{-1} \tilde{X}^T \tilde{C} \tilde{X} \tilde{B}^{-1}$$ This error is likely to be only slightly larger than would be the case for the maximum likelihood estimator. $\tilde{C}$ is a combination of the uncorrelated shot noise and the correlated fluctuations indicated in Figure \[fig:acf\]. We assume it to be homogeneous and isotropic, i.e., that $\tilde{C}_{ij}$ depends only on the angular separation of the $i$ and $j$ pixels.
------- ------------------ ------------------ ------------------
$a_1$ background 328.6 $\pm$ 1.9 same
$a_2$ $\hat{x}$ dipole -1.17 $\pm$ 0.62 -0.24 $\pm$ 0.62
$a_3$ $\hat{y}$ dipole -0.38 $\pm$ 0.98 -0.68 $\pm$ 0.98
$a_4$ $\hat{z}$ dipole -0.52 $\pm$ 0.69 -0.34 $\pm$ 0.69
$a_5$ time drift 7.15 $\pm$ 1.23 same
$a_6$ secant law 3.28 $\pm$ 0.84 same
$a_7$ Haslam map 0.03 $\pm$ 0.08 same
$a_8$ Supercluster 4.11 $\pm$ 1.35 same
------- ------------------ ------------------ ------------------
[Eight fit parameters for Map C (sources brighter than $2\times10^{-11}~erg~s^{-1}cm^{-2}$ removed). The units are $0.01~
TOT~count~s^{-1} (4.5~deg^2)^{-1} \simeq 1.54\times 10^{-10}erg~s^{-1}cm^{-2}$. Fits are shown both for the original map and for the map corrected for the Compton-Getting (C-G) dipole. ]{} \[tab:comp\]
Table \[tab:comp\] lists the values and errors of the parameters fit to Map C (see §2). Instrument time drift, the Galaxy and structure associated with the local supercluster all appear to be significant detections. The dipole is detected at about the $2~\sigma$ level and is consistent with that expected for the Compton-Getting dipole (see Table \[tab:dipole\]). Table \[tab:corrm\] lists the elements of the normalized correlation matrix of the fit parameters and it is apparent that the parameters are largely uncorrelated. This was supported by fits that excluded some of the parameters (see §4).
------- ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------
$a_1$ 1.0 0.0 -0.5 0.1 -0.4 -0.6 -0.1 -0.3
$a_2$ 0.0 1.0 -0.1 0.2 0.3 -0.1 0.0 0.1
$a_3$ -0.5 -0.1 1.0 0.1 0.0 0.7 0.0 -0.3
$a_4$ 0.1 0.2 0.1 1.0 -0.1 0.0 0.0 -0.1
$a_5$ -0.4 0.3 0.0 -0.1 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.2
$a_6$ -0.6 -0.1 0.7 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 -0.4
$a_7$ -0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 -0.3
$a_8$ -0.3 0.1 -0.3 -0.1 0.2 -0.4 -0.3 1.0
------- ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------
[Normalized correlation coefficients for the fit parameters in Table \[tab:comp\].]{}
To compute the true $\chi^2 \equiv ({\bf{I}} - \tilde{X}{\bf{a}})^T \tilde{C}^{-1}
({\bf{I}} - \tilde{X}{\bf{a}})$ of the fit requires inverting $\tilde{C}$ which is a $11,531 \times 11,531$ matrix. Instead we compute an effective reduced $\chi^2$ using $$\chi_{eff}^2 \equiv {1 \over N} ({\bf{I}} - \tilde{X}{\bf{a}})^T \tilde{D}^{-1}
({\bf{I}} - \tilde{X}{\bf{a}})$$ where $\tilde{D}$ is the diagonal part of the correlation matrix, $\tilde{D}_{ii} = \sigma_{s,i}^2 +\sigma_b^2$, $\sigma_{s,i}$ is the shot noise in the $i^{th}$ pixel, ${\sigma_b}^2$ is the variance of the fluctuations in the XRB, and $N$ is the number of pixels minus eight, the number of degrees of freedom in the fit. The shot noise in a given pixel is inversely proportional to the number of photons received and we assume is inversely proportional to the coverage of that pixel. This is approximately true since all the non-flagged pixels are exposed to approximately the same flux. We find ${\chi_{eff}}^2 = 1.00$ for this fit, which we take as an indication that we have properly characterized the amplitude of the noise so that the errors quoted in the table have neither been underestimated nor overestimated. However, it should be emphasized that ${\chi_{eff}}^2$ is not to be interpreted statistically as being derived from a ${\chi}^2$ distribution.
The residual maps show very little evidence for structure on angular scales $\theta > 10^{\circ}$ above the level of the noise, $\langle \delta I^2 \rangle / \bar{I}^2 \sim 10^{-5}$ where $\delta I$ are the residual fluctuations in X-ray intensity and $\bar{I}$ is the mean intensity (see Figure \[fig:resid\]). Since all the components of the model have significant structure on large angular scales, it appears that these particular systematics have been effectively eliminated.
The Dipole of the X-ray Background
==================================
The dipole fit to the map is consistent with the Compton-Getting dipole and there is no evidence for any additional intrinsic dipole in the XRB. To make this more quantitative, we corrected the maps for the predicted Compton-Getting dipole and fit the corrected map for any residual, intrinsic dipole. These dipole fit parameters are also included in Table \[tab:comp\]. Leaving out any individual model component, such as the time drift, the galaxy, Haslam or supercluster template, made little difference in the amplitude of the fit dipole. This is, perhaps, not too surprising since the Galaxy and time drift models are primarily quadrupolar in nature and the pancake model, while possessing a significant dipole moment, has a relatively small amplitude. All such fits were consistent with the Compton-Getting dipole alone. Even when all four of these parameters were excluded from the fit, the dipole amplitude increased by only $0.004~TOT~counts~s^{-1}$ with a direction that was was $33^{\circ}$ from that of the CMB dipole. The effective $\chi^2$ for the four parameter fit was, however, significantly worse, i.e., ${\chi_{eff}}^2 = 1.05$.
Table \[tab:dipole\] lists the amplitude and direction of the dipole fit to Map C along with the fits to Maps D, E, and F. All of these fits are consistent with amplitude and direction of the Compton-Getting dipole (as inferred from the CMB dipole) which is also indicated in the Table. The effective $\chi^2$s of these fits range from 0.99 to 1.01, again indicating that the amplitude of the noise is reasonably well characterized. No errors are given for these quantities for reasons that will be discussed below. In order to check for unknown systematics, we performed dipole fits to a variety of other masked maps with larger Galaxy cuts as well as cuts of the brighter galaxies in the Tully Nearby Bright Galaxy Atlas (Tully 1988). The details of these cuts are discussed in Boughn (1999); however, none had a significantly different dipole fit.
Since all of these dipoles are consistent with the Compton-Getting dipole we also fit these maps with a six parameter fit in which the dipole direction was constrained to be the direction of the CMB dipole. The dipole amplitude of these fits and errors computed according to Eq. (3-3) are also given in Table \[tab:dipole\].
------- -------- --------------- -------------- ---------------------
Map C 0.0133 $309^{\circ}$ $39^{\circ}$ 0.0117 $\pm$ 0.0064
Map D 0.0218 $300^{\circ}$ $33^{\circ}$ 0.0184 $\pm$ 0.0062
Map E 0.0150 $296^{\circ}$ $50^{\circ}$ 0.0148 $\pm$ 0.0059
Map F 0.0190 $283^{\circ}$ $44^{\circ}$ 0.0184 $\pm$ 0.0064
C-G 0.0145 $264^{\circ}$ $48^{\circ}$ 0.0145
------- -------- --------------- -------------- ---------------------
[ The dipole amplitude and directions are from the 8-parameter fits in $TOT$ units and Galactic coordinates. Map C is for the map of Table \[tab:comp\]; Map D is masked at a source level of $\sim1 \times 10^{-11}
erg~s^{-1} cm^{-2}$; Map E is masked with internal source identification; and Map F is masked with a lower level of internal source identification (see §2 for full details). Also listed are the amplitude and direction of the Compton-Getting dipole (G-P) as inferred from the CMB dipole. The constrained amplitudes are for dipole models fixed to the direction of the CMB dipole. ]{}
Even though we find no evidence for an intrinsic dipole in the XRB, it would be useful to place an upper limit on its amplitude. We define the dimensionless dipole by writing the first two moments of the X-ray intensity as $$I(\hat{\bf n}) = \bar{I} (1 + \vec{\Delta} \cdot \hat{\bf n}),$$ where $\vec{\Delta}$ is a vector in the direction of the dipole. There are various approaches one could take to find an upper limit, and the problem is complicated somewhat because the error bars are anisotropic (see Table 1). The dipole in the $\hat{y}$ direction is less constrained than in the other directions because of the anisotropic masking of the map. Here we take the limits on the individual components of the intrinsic dipole and marginalize over the dipole direction to obtain a distribution for its amplitude. For this, we use a Bayesian formalism and assume a uniform prior on the amplitude, $|\vec{\Delta}|$. We find $\Delta < 0.0052$ at the 95 % C.L. If the direction of the dipole is fixed to be that of the CMB dipole then the 95% C.L. upper limits on the dipole amplitudes fall in the range $0.0030$ to $0.0043$ for the fits listed in Table \[tab:dipole\].
The same sort of problem arises when trying to attach an error bar to the amplitude of the dipole fits to the maps which include the Compton-Getting dipole. It seems clear from Table \[tab:comp\] that we find evidence for a dipole at the 2 $\sigma$ level. This is supported by the six parameter fits of Table \[tab:dipole\], where the various maps indicate positive detections at a 2 to 3 $\sigma$ level. However, in the eight parameter fits, the dipole amplitude is a non-linear combination of the fit components. There are two approaches we can take in converting the three dimensional limits to a limit on the dipole amplitude. We can either fix the direction in the direction of the CMB dipole, which results in the constrained limits shown in Table \[tab:dipole\]. Alternatively, we can marginalize over the possible directions of the dipole, which will necessarily result in weaker limits than when the direction is fixed. This is particularly true here, where the direction of greatest uncertainty in the dipole measurement is roughly orthogonal to the expected dipole direction. In the case of the Compton-Getting dipole, there is a strong prior that it should be in the CMB dipole direction, so our limit is stronger than it would be if we did not have information about the CMB.
In addition to the upper limit on the intrinsic dipole amplitude, we can also constrain the underlying dipole variance, which can, in turn, be used to test theoretically predicted power spectra. While the observed amplitude is related to the dipole variance, $\langle \Delta^2 \rangle = 3 \sigma_\Delta^2$, there is large uncertainty due to cosmic variance. The dipole represents only three independent samplings of $\sigma_\Delta$. To constrain $\sigma_\Delta$, we again take a Bayesian approach and calculate the likelihood of observing the data given the noise and $\sigma_\Delta$, $${\cal {P}} (\vec{\Delta}|\sigma_\Delta) \propto \prod
e^{- \Delta_i^2/2(\sigma_i^2 + \sigma_\Delta^2)}
(\sigma_i^2 + \sigma_\Delta^2)^{-1/2},$$ where the product is over the three spatial directions and we have ignored the small off-diagonal noise correlations (see Table \[tab:corrm\]). With a uniform prior on $\sigma_\Delta$, its posterior distribution implies a 95% C.L. upper limit of $\sigma_\Delta < 0.0064 $. This is twice as high as would be inferred from the limit on the dipole because of the significant tail in the distribution due to cosmic variance. The limit implied by the dipole (of Map C), $\sigma_\Delta = \Delta/\sqrt{3} < 0.0030 $ is at the 80% C.L. The difference between the limits arises because occasionally a small dipole can occur even when the variance is large.
The bottom line is that we have detected the dipole in the XRB at about the 2 $\sigma$ level and that it is consistent with the Compton-Getting dipole. There is no evidence for any other intrinsic dipole at this same level. We will discuss the apparent detection of an intrinsic dipole by Scharf et al. (2000) in §6.
Correlations in the X-ray Background
====================================
A standard way to detect the clustering of sources (or of the emission of these sources) is to compute the auto-correlation function (ACF), defined by $$\omega(\theta) = {1 \over \bar{I}^2} \sum_{i,j} (I_i -\bar{I})
(I_j-\bar{I}) / N_{\theta}$$ where the sum is over all pairs of pixels, $i,j$, separated by an angle $\theta$, $I_i$ is the intensity of the $ith$ pixel, $\bar{I}$ is the mean intensity, and $N_{\theta}$ is the number of pairs of pixels separated by $\theta$. Figure \[fig:acf\] shows the ACF of the residual map after being corrected with the 8-parameter fit and for photon shot noise in the $\theta = 0^\circ$ bin. The error bars are highly correlated and were determined from Monte Carlo trials in which the pixel intensity distribution was assumed to be Gaussian with the same ACF as in the figure. There is essentially no significant structure for $\theta > 13^{\circ}$ once local structures have been removed, as is evident in Figures \[fig:acf\], \[fig:resid\], and \[fig:intrin\].
It is clear from Figure \[fig:acf\] that the residuals of Map A possess significant correlated structure. It must be determined how much, if any, is due to clustering in the XRB and how much is simply due to smearing by the PSF of the map. It is straightforward to show that an uncorrelated signal smeared by a Gaussian PSF, $PSF(\theta) \propto e^{-\theta ^2 / 2\sigma_p ^2}$, results in an ACF of the form $\omega (\theta) \propto e^{-\theta ^2 /4\sigma_p ^2}$ where $\sigma_p = 1.29^{\circ}$ is the Gaussian width of the PSF in Figure \[fig:psf\] ($\theta_{FWHM}^2 = 8 \sigma_p^2 \ln 2.$) The dashed curve in Figure \[fig:acf\] is essentially this functional form, modified slightly to take into account the pixelization. In the plot, its amplitude has been forced to agree with $\theta = 0^\circ$ data point, while a maximum likelihood fit results in an amplitude about 5% lower (a consequence of the correlated noise). For $\theta \gs 3^{\circ}$, the ACF of the data clearly exceeds that accountable by beam smearing and this excess is even more pronounced with the maximum likelihood fit. The reduced $\chi^2$ for the fit to the first eight data points ($\theta \ls 9^{\circ}$) is $\chi ^2 = 18.6$ for six degrees of freedom which is another measure of the excess structure between 3 and 9 degrees. Note, this is a two parameter fit since the photon shot noise (which occurs only at $\theta = 0^\circ$) is also one of the parameters.
While it is apparent that there is some intrinsic correlation in the X-ray background, it cannot be estimated by the residual to the above two parameter fit since that overestimates the contribution of beam smearing in order to minimize $\chi^2$. Instead, we also include in the fit a form for the intrinsic correlation and find its amplitude as well. Since the signal to noise is too small to allow a detailed model of the intrinsic clustering, we chose to model it with a simple power-law $\omega (\theta) = (\theta_0/\theta)^\epsilon$. This form provides an acceptable fit to the ACF of both radio and X-ray surveys on somewhat smaller angular scales (Cress & Kamionkowski 1998, Soltan et al. 1996, Giacconi et al. 2001). This intrinsic correlation was then convolved with the PSF and applied to the quadcube pixelization of the map (e.g., Boughn 1998).
Finally, it is important to take into account the effects of the 8-parameter fit used to remove the large-scale structure as discussed in §3. If the X-ray background has intrinsic structure on the scale of many degrees, the 8-parameter fit will tend to remove it in order to minimize $\chi^2$. Since the model is composed of relatively large scale features, the greatest effect is expected for the largest angles. The significance of this effect was determined by generating Monte Carlo trials assuming a Gaussian pixel intensity distribution with the same ACF as in Figure \[fig:acf\]. The 8-parameter model was then fit and each trial map was corrected accordingly. The ACFs computed for these corrected maps indicate that, as expected, the value of the ACF is significantly attenuated for larger angles. The attenuation factor for $\theta = 9^{\circ}$ is already 0.55 and decreases rapidly for larger angles. The errors indicated in Figure \[fig:acf\] were also determined from these Monte Carlo trials and, as mentioned above, are highly correlated.
We model the auto-correlation function as a sum of three templates and fit for their best amplitude. Much of the analysis parallels the discussion for the fits of large scale structure in the map, with the exception that here the number of bins is small enough that it is simple to calculate the maximum likelihood fit. Again, we model the observed correlation function vector as ${\bf{\omega}} = \tilde{W} {\bf{c}} + {\bf{n}}_{\omega}$, where $\tilde{W}$ is a $3 \times n_{bin}$ matrix containing the templates for shot noise ($\omega_s$), beam smearing ($\omega_{PSF}$), and intrinsic correlations in the XRB ($\omega_{intr}$). The amplitudes are given by the three element vector ${\bf{c}}$ and the noise is described by the correlation matrix determined from Monte Carlo trials, $\tilde{C}_\omega = \langle{\bf{n}}_{\omega} {\bf{n}}_{\omega}^T \rangle$.
Shot noise contributes only to the first bin (zero separation) of the ACF and has amplitude given by its variance, $\omega_s$. Beam smearing contributes to the ACF with a template that looks like the beam convolved with itself, so appears as a Gaussian with a FWHM a factor of $\sqrt{2}$ larger than that of the beam and has amplitude denoted as $\omega_{psf}$. Finally, the intrinsic correlations are modelled as $(\theta_0/\theta)^\epsilon$, which is then smoothed appropriately by the beam. Its amplitude is denoted by its inferred correlation at zero separation, $\omega_{intr}.$ We fit using a range of indices, $0.8 \ge \epsilon \ge 1.6$, which cover the range of theoretical models of the intrinsic correlation. Both the PSF template and the intrinsic template are modified to include the effects of the attenuation at large angles as discussed above.
Minimizing $\chi^2$ with respect to the three fit parameters, ${\bf{c}}$, results in the maximum likelihood fit to the model if one assumes Gaussian statistics. This assumption is reasonable by virtue of the central limit theorem since each data point consists of the combination of the signals from a great many pixels, each of which is approximately Gaussian distributed. In the presence of correlated noise, $\chi^2$ is defined by $$\chi^2 = ({\bf{\omega}} - \tilde{W} {\bf{c}})^T \tilde{C}^{-1}_{\omega}
({\bf{\omega}} - \tilde{W} {\bf{c}})$$ It is straightforward to show that the value of the parameters that minimize $\chi^2$ are given by $${\bf{c}} = \Omega^{-1} \tilde{W}^T \tilde{C}_\omega^{-1} \omega$$ where $\Omega = \tilde{W}^T \tilde{C}_\omega^{-1} \tilde{W}.$ Because of the large attenuation of the ACF at large angles, we chose to fit to only those data points with $\theta_i \le 9^{\circ}$, i.e., $i \le 8$, even though there appears to be statistically significant structure out to $\theta \sim 13^{\circ}$. The results of the fit of the $\epsilon = 1$ model to the ACF of the residuals of Map A are listed in Table \[tab:acf\] and plotted in Figure \[fig:acf\].
It is also straightforward to show that the correlation matrix of the fit parameters is given by, $ \langle \delta c_n \delta c_m \rangle
= \Omega_{nm}^{-1}$ so the errors given in Table \[tab:acf\] are given by $\sigma_{c_n}^2 = \Omega_{nn}^{-1}$ and the normalized correlation coefficients by $r_{nm} = \Omega_{nm}^{-1}/(\Omega_{nn}^{-1}\Omega_{mm}^{-1})^{1/2}$. The correlations are as expected, i.e., $\omega_{intr}$ and $\omega_{psf}$ are highly correlated, while $\omega_s$ is relatively uncorrelated with the other two parameters.
From the results in Table \[tab:acf\] it appears that intrinsic correlations in the X-ray background are detected at the 4 $\sigma$ level for sources with flux levels below $3 \times 10^{-11} erg~s^{-1} cm^{-2}$. Of course, if we have not successfully eliminated sources with fluxes larger than this, then the clustering amplitude might well be artificially inflated. It was for this reason that we used the RASS catalog to identify and remove additional sources with intensities $\gs 3 \times 10^{-11} erg~s^{-1} cm^{-2}$, the result of which was Map B (see §2). The fits to Map B are also listed in Table \[tab:acf\]. The clustering amplitude, $\omega_{intr}$, of the fits to this modified map were only $11\%$ less than that of Map A, i.e., considerably less than 1 $\sigma$. The $\chi^2$s of both fits are acceptable.
These results are not very sensitive to the attenuation corrections. If they are removed from the model, the resulting amplitude of the fit clustering coefficient only decreases by $\sim 20\%$, less than $1~\sigma$. It should be noted that the corrections were relatively small (an average attenuation factor of 0.83 ranging from 1.0 at $\theta = 0^{\circ}$ to 0.55 for $\theta = 9^{\circ}$) and in all cases, the attenuation was less than the error bar of the corresponding data point. If data points with $\theta > 9^{\circ}$ are included, the fits become more sensitive to the attenuation corrections which are, in turn, quite sensitive to the 8-parameter fit.
[|c|r|r|r|r|r|r|r|]{} & & & & & & &\
A & 7.71 $\pm$ 0.15 & 8.63 $\pm$ 0.59 & 2.64 $\pm$ 0.65 & 2.3/5 & -0.19 & -0.04 & -0.83\
B & 7.57 $\pm$ 0.15 & 8.22 $\pm$ 0.59 & 2.33 $\pm$ 0.65 & 3.6/5 & -0.19 & -0.04 & -0.83\
[Fit model parameters for Map A with 55% sky coverage and Map B with 52% sky coverage after removing additional ROSAT sources (see §2). The intrinsic fluctuations are modelled as $\omega \propto \theta^{-1}$.]{}
Figure \[fig:resid\] is a plot of the residuals of the fit to the ACF of Map A for $\theta \le 9^{\circ}$ and of the uncorrected ACF from $10^{\circ}$ to $180^{\circ}$. The vertical scale is the same as for Figure \[fig:acf\]. The *rms* of these 140 data points is $1 \times 10^{-5}$ and it is clear that there is very little residual structure at levels exceeding this value. The observed correlation function for $\theta > 10^{\circ}$ in Figure \[fig:resid\] is entirely consistent with the noise levels determined from the Monte Carlo simulations: the *rms* of $\omega/\sigma$ is 1.03, indicating that there is no evidence for intrinsic fluctuations on these scales. We also take this as an indication that the errors are reasonably well characterized by the Monte Carlo calculation. The variance of the photon shot noise, ${\sigma_{s}}^2 = \omega_{s} {\bar{I}}^2$, is consistent with that expected from photon counting statistics only (Jahoda 2001). It should be noted that not only the shape but the amplitude of the beam smearing contribution, $\omega_{PSF}$, can be computed from source counts as a function of $2-10~keV$ flux. We will argue in §6 that, while our fitted value is consistent with current number counts, the latter are not yet accurate enough to correct the data.
Figure \[fig:intrin\] shows the model of the intrinsic clustering, $\omega_{intr}$, compared to the data with both the shot noise and PSF component removed. The model curve is not plotted beyond $\theta = 9^{\circ}$ since the attenuation factor due to the 8-parameter fit corrections are large and uncertain at larger angles. The amplitude of $\omega_{intr}$ is sensitive to the exponent in the assumed power law for the intrinsic correlations. For example, the fit amplitude for a $\theta^{-1.6}$ power law the amplitude is a factor of $\sim 2$ larger than for a $\theta^{-0.8}$ power law. However, for a range of fits with $0.8 \le \epsilon \le 1.6$, the values of $\omega_{intr} (\theta)$ at $\theta = 4.5^{\circ}$ are all within $\pm 3\%$ of each other. Therefore, we chose to normalize the X-ray ACF at $4.5^{\circ}$ when comparing to cosmological models (see §7.1). The $\chi^2s$ are reasonable for all these fits.
The bottom line is that there is fairly strong evidence for intrinsic clustering on these angular scales at the level of $\omega_{intr} \sim 3.6 \times 10^{-4} \theta^{-1}$ (see §6.1). While the exponent is $\epsilon \sim 1$, it is not strongly constrained. The implications of the intrinsic clustering of the X-ray background will be discussed in §7.
Comparisons with Previous work
==============================
Clustering
----------
As mentioned above, the component of the ACF due to beam smearing, $\omega_{PSF}$, can be determined with no free parameters if the flux limited number counts of X-ray sources are known. While such counts are still relatively inaccurate for our purposes, we did check to see if our results are consistent with current data. Over a restricted flux range, the X-ray number counts, $N(<S)$, are reasonably approximated by a power law, i.e., $N(< S) = K~S^{-\gamma}$ where $S$ is the flux of the source. It is straightforward to show that the variance of flux due to a Poisson distribution of sources is $${\sigma_{PSF}^2} (0) = \pi {\sigma_p}^2~A^2~\gamma~K~S^{2-\gamma}/(2-\gamma)$$ where $S$ is the upper limit of source flux, $\sigma_p$ is the Gaussian width of the PSF and $A^{-1}$ is the flux of a point source that results in a peak signal of $1~TOT~count~s^{-1}$ in our composite map. In our case, $A = 2.05 \times 10^{10}erg^{-1}~s~cm^2$. Using the $BeppoSAX~2-10~kev$ number count data of Giommi, Perri, & Fiore (2000), the $Chandra$ data of Mushotzky et al. (2000), and the $HEAO1~A2$ data of Piccinotti et al. (1982), we constructed a piecewise power-law $N(< S)$ for the range $6 \times 10^{-16} < S < 3 \times 10^{-11} erg~s^{-1}cm^{-2}$ and computed $\omega_{PSF}(0) = \sigma^2_{PSF}/\bar{I}^2$ to be $8.4 \times 10^{-4}$. The close agreement of this value with those in Table \[tab:acf\] is fortuitous given that the value depends most sensitively on the number counts at large fluxes which are the most unreliable, typically accurate only to within a factor of two. However, it is clear that the $\omega_{PSF}$ of Table \[tab:acf\] are quite consistent with the existing number count data.
The results of §5 clearly indicate the presence of intrinsic clustering in the XRB. Mindful that the detection is only $\sim 4~\sigma$, we tentatively assume that the ACF has an amplitude of $\omega_{intr} \sim 2.5 \times 10^{-4}$ (the average of the two values in Table \[tab:acf\]) and is consistent with a $\theta^{-1}$ functional dependence. It is straight forward to relate this to the underlying correlation amplitude, $\theta_0$. The variance of correlations smoothed by a beam of Gaussian size $\sigma$ is given by $$\omega_{intr}(0) = {\Gamma(1 - \epsilon/2) \over 2^{\epsilon}}
\left({\theta_0 \over \sigma} \right)^\epsilon.$$ When $\epsilon = 1$, then $\theta_0 = 2 \sigma \omega_{intr}/\pi^{1/2}$. Using this, we find $$\omega_{XRB}(\theta) \simeq 3.6 \times 10^{-4}~\theta^{-1}
\label{eqn:acf}$$ where $\theta$ is measured in degrees and the normalization is such that $\omega_{XRB}(0) = \langle {\delta I}^2 \rangle / \bar{I}^2$.
For comparison, this amplitude is about a factor of three below the $2~\sigma$ upper limit determined by Carrera et al. (1993) obtained with Ginga data ($4-12~keV$) for angular scales between 0.2 and 2.0 degrees. The detection of a significant correlation in the $HEAO1~A2$ data at the level of $3 \times 10^{-5}$ at $\theta = 10^{\circ}$ by Mushotzky and Jahoda (1992) was later attributed to structure near the super-Galactic plane (Jahoda 1993). To check for this effect in the present analysis, we masked all pixels within 15 and 20 degrees from the super-Galactic plane. The results were indistinguishable from those of Table \[tab:acf\]. It is interesting that the clustering indicated in Eq. (6-3) is consistent with this level of fluctuations at $10^{\circ}$; however, our sensitivity has begun to decline significantly at $10^{\circ}$ due to the fit for large scale structures. A correlation analysis of ROSAT soft X-ray background by Soltan et al. (1996) detected correlations about an order of magnitude larger than indicated in Eq. (6-3). Even considering that the ROSAT band ($0.5-2.0~keV$) is distinct from the HEAO band, it is difficult to imagine that the two correlation functions could be so disparate unless the lower energy analysis is contaminated by the Galaxy.
While there has yet to be a definitive detection of the clustering of hard X-ray sources, a recent deep Chandra survey of 159 sources shows a positive correlation of source number counts on angular scales of 5 to 100 arcsec (Giacconi et al. 2001). Although the signal to noise is low and dependent on source flux, the implied number count ACF is roughly consistent with $\omega_N (\theta) \sim 3 \times 10^{-3}\theta^{-1}$ where $\omega_N (0) \equiv \langle {\delta N}^2 \rangle / \bar{N}^2$ and $\bar{N}$ is the mean surface density of sources. This is consistent with the correlation function determined by Vikhlinin & Forman (1995) for sources identified within ROSAT PSPC deep pointings. A direct comparison between the Chandra result with that of Eq. (6-3) is complicated by the more than one hundred times difference in the angular scales of the two analyses. It is doubtful that a single powerlaw model is adequate over this range. Furthermore, one is a luminosity ACF while the other is a flux limited, number count ACF. Relating the two requires understanding the luminosity function and its evolution as well as how the X-ray bias depends on scale. For these reasons, a direct comparison would be difficult to interpret. We only note in passing that the small angular scale ACF is a factor of eight larger than that of Eq. (6-3) assuming a $\theta^{-1}$ dependence.
Finally, the recent harmonic analysis of the $HEAO1~A2$ data by Scharf et al. (2000) yielded a positive detection of structure in the XRB out to harmonic order $l \sim 10$. The present analysis looks at similar maps, so the results should be comparable. A direct comparison is complicated by the differences in analysis techniques, masking and corrections to the map. A rough comparison can be made by performing a Legendre transform on the $\theta^{-1}$ ACF model of Eq. (6-3). The ACF can be expressed in terms of Legendre polynomials as $$\omega(\theta) = {{1}\over{4\pi}} \sum_\ell (2\ell+1){C_\ell} P_\ell(\cos\theta)$$ where the ${C_l}$ constitute the angular power spectrum. Taking the Legendre transform $${C_\ell} = 2 \pi \int_{-1}^1 \omega(\theta)~P_\ell(\cos \theta)~d(\cos\theta)$$ where $P_\ell(\theta)$ is the Legendre polynomial of order $\ell$. Substituting the $\theta^{-1}$ model into this expression results in power spectrum coefficients, $C_\ell \simeq 4\times 10^{-5}/\ell$ for $\ell \sim 5.$ Note that for $\ell \sim 5$, this expression is relatively insensitive to the index $\epsilon$ in the expression for $\omega_{intr}$. While these values are highly uncertain, they are comparable to those found by Scharf et al. (2000) when the sky coverage and differences in notation are accounted for. Considering the low signal to noise of the data as well as the differences in the two analyses, a more detailed comparison would not be particularly useful.
The Dipole
----------
Scharf et al. (2000) also searched for the XRB dipole using a $HEAO1~A2$ map and similar methods to those described in §4. They claim a detection of an intrinsic dipole with amplitude $\Delta \sim 0.0065$, though with a rather large region of uncertainty, i.e., $0.0023 \ls \Delta \ls 0.0085$, and in a direction about $80^{\circ}$ from that of the Compton-Getting dipole, in the general direction of the Galactic center. They used the $3^\circ \times 1.5^\circ$ $HEAO1~A2$ map restricted to regions further than $22^{\circ}$ from the Galactic plane. In addition, regions about sources with fluxes greater than $2 \times 10^{-11} erg~s^{-1} cm^{-2}$ were cut from the map. The sky coverage and the level of source removal closely correspond to those of our Map C. However, since we used a combination of the $3^\circ \times 1.5^\circ$ and $3^\circ \times 3^\circ$ maps, our map has significantly less ($\sim 1/\sqrt 3$) photon shot noise. While our analyses are similar, there are some significant differences: they corrected the map beforehand for linear instrument drift and Galaxy emission while we fit for those components simultaneously with the dipole and with emission from the local supercluster which they ignore.
The upper limit on the intrinsic dipole we find is about the same amplitude as the Compton-Getting dipole, i.e., $\Delta < 0.0052$ at the 95 % C.L. Thus we exclude roughly the upper half of the Scharf et al. range and believe that their claim of a detection is probably an overstatement. While Scharf et al. do not take into account emission from the plane of the local supercluster, even if we leave that component out of our fit, the dipole moment (including the C-G dipole) increases by only $0.005~TOT~cts~s^{-1}$ and is still consistent with the C-G dipole. The upper limit on the intrinsic dipole with this fit is determined primarily by the noise in the fit and is not significantly different from that value given above. It is difficult to understand how their quoted errors could be two to four times less than those quoted in Table \[tab:dipole\]. The shot noise variance in the map they used was three times greater than in our combination map and so one would expect their errors would be somewhat larger than those above. They performed only a four parameter fit (offset plus dipole) which would result in a slight reduction of error; however, this is a bit misleading since their Galaxy model and linear time drift are derived from essentially the same data set. It is possible that their lower errors could result from ignoring correlations in the noise (our detected ACF). In any case, we find no evidence for an intrinsic dipole moment in the XRB.
Implications for Cosmology
==========================
Clustering and Bias in the X-ray Background
-------------------------------------------
The observed X-ray auto-correlation can be compared to the matter auto-correlation predicted by a given cosmological model. The linear bias factor for the X-rays can then be determined by normalizing to the observed CMB anisotropies. Since X-rays arise at such high redshifts, the fluctuations we measure are on scales $\lambda \sim 100 h^{-1} Mpc$, comparable to those constrained by the CMB, i.e., on wavelengths that entered the horizon about the time of matter domination.
The predicted X-ray ACF depends on both the cosmological model and on the model for how the X-ray sources are distributed in redshift, which is constrained by observed number counts and the redshift measurements of discrete sources. We use the redshift distribution described in Boughn, Crittenden and Turok (1998), based on the unified AGN model of Comastri et al. (1995). (See also the more recent analysis by Gilli et al. (2001).) While we will not reproduce those calculations here, the basic result is that the XRB intensity is thought to arise fairly uniformly in redshift out to $z=4$. Our results here are not very sensitive to the precise details of this distribution.
Another issue in the calculation of the power spectrum is the possible time dependence of the linear bias. Some recent studies indicate that the bias is tied to the growth of fluctuations and may have been higher at large redshift (Fry 1996, Tegmark & Peebles 1998). For the purposes of the power spectrum, an evolving bias will have the same effect as changing the source redshift distribution. Again, our results are not strongly dependent on these uncertainties, but they comprise an important challenge to using the X-ray fluctuation studies to make precision tests of cosmology.
Figure \[fig:x-cls\] shows the predicted XRB power spectrum, normalized to our observations. On the scales of interest, the predicted spectra are fairly featureless, and reasonably described by a power law in $\ell$, $C_\ell \propto \ell^{\epsilon -2}$, which corresponds to the correlation of the form $\omega(\theta) = (\theta_0/\theta)^\epsilon$. For the models of interest, $1.1 < \epsilon < 1.6$ for $\ell < 100$, and decreases at higher $\ell$ (smaller separations). Note that the spectra calculated by Treyer et al. (1998) appear to be consistent with our findings, suggesting $\epsilon = 1.2$. The precise index $\epsilon$ depends on the position of the power spectrum peak which is determined by the shape parameter, $\Gamma \simeq \Omega_m h.$ Larger values of $\Gamma$ imply more small scale power and thus higher $\epsilon.$
For simplicity, we normalize to the X-ray correlation function at $4.5^{\circ}$, $\omega(4.5^\circ)= 1.0 \pm 0.25\times 10^{-4}$. This separation is large enough to be independent of the PSF contribution to the ACF, but not so large that the attenuation from the large scale fits becomes significant. Also, the value of the fit ACF at $4.5^{\circ}$ is nearly independent of the index $\epsilon$ (see §5). As can be seen from Figure \[fig:x-cls\], this normalization fixes the power spectrum at $\ell \simeq 5-7$.
We normalize the fluctuations to the COBE power spectrum as determined by Bond, Jaffe & Knox (1998). However, it should be noted that fits to smaller angular CMB fluctuations indicate that using COBE alone may somewhat overestimate the matter fluctuation level (Lahav et al. 2002). The biases derived from the models appear to be largely insensitive to the matter density. This is due to a cancellation of two effects: the CMB normalization and the power spectrum shape (White & Bunn 1995). The biases are roughly inversely proportional to $h$. Typical biases appear to be $b_X = 2.3 \pm 0.3 (0.7/h)^{0.9}$, increasing slightly as $\Gamma$ decreases and the peak of the power spectrum moves to larger scales.
The Intrinsic X-ray Dipole
---------------------------
The theoretical models normalized to our observations predict the intrinsic power on a wide range of scales, assuming the X-ray bias is scale independent. In particular, these models give a prediction for the variance of the intrinsic dipole moment. We can compare our model predictions to the the upper limit for the intrinsic dipole to see if we should have observed it in the X-ray map.
The dipole amplitude in the $\hat{z}$ direction is related to the spherical harmonic amplitude by $\Delta_z = \sqrt{3/4\pi} a_{10}$. Thus, the expected dipole amplitude is related to the power spectrum by $$\langle \Delta^2 \rangle =
3 \times {3 \over 4 \pi} \langle |a_{1m}|^2 \rangle = {9 \over 4 \pi} C_1.$$ Note that there is considerable cosmic variance on this, as it is estimated with only three independent numbers; $\delta C_1/ C_1 = (2/3)^{1/2}$, which corresponds to a 40 % uncertainty in the amplitude of the dipole.
Also shown in Figure \[fig:x-cls\] is the level of our dipole limit, translated using equation (7-1), which corresponds to $C_1 < 3.8 \times 10^{-5}$. While our limit on the dipole limit is at the 95 % C.L., this translates to a 80 % C. L. limit on the variance $C_1$ when cosmic variance is included. As discussed above, the 95 % upper limit is four times weaker when cosmic variance is included, $C_1 < 1.5 \times 10^{-4}$. Normalized to the ACF, all the theories are easily compatible with the $C_1$ bound. The large cosmic variance associated with the dipole makes it difficult to rule out any cosmological models.
With our detected level of clustering, typical theories would predict a dipole amplitude of $\Delta \simeq 0.003$. While the theories are not in conflict with the dipole range claimed by Scharf et al., they strongly prefer the lower end of their range, even for the most shallow of the models. A dipole amplitude $\Delta \ge 0.005$ would be very unlikely from the models, indicating either a significantly higher bias than we find or a model with more large scale power ($\epsilon \le 1.1$).
The dipole and bulk motions
---------------------------
The dipole of the X-ray background provides another independent test of the large scale X-ray bias through its relation to our peculiar velocity (e.g. see Scharf et al. (2000) and references therein.) Like the gravitational force, the flux of a nearby source drops off as an inverse-square law, so the dipole in the X-ray flux is proportional to the X-ray bias times the gravitational force produced by nearby matter. Our peculiar motion is a result of this force, and is related to the gravitational acceleration by a factor which depends on the matter density.
In typical CDM cosmologies, the dipole and our peculiar velocity arise due to matter at fairly low redshifts ($z < 0.1$). If this is the case, it is straight forward to relate their amplitudes. Following the notation of Scharf et al., we define $D^\alpha = \int d\Omega I(\hat{\bf{n}}) \hat{n}^\alpha =
4\pi \bar{I} \Delta^\alpha/3$. Using linear perturbation theory, one can show the local bulk flow is $$v^\alpha = {{H_0 f} \over {b_X(0) \rho_X (0)}} D^\alpha,$$ where $\rho_X (0)$ is the local X-ray luminosity density, $b_X(0)$ is the local X-ray bias and $f \simeq \Omega_m^{0.6}$ is related to the growth of linear perturbations (Peebles 1993). From the mean observed intensity (Gendreau et al. 1995) and the local X-ray luminosity density (Miyaji et al. 1994) we find that $\bar{I} \simeq 2.4 \rho_X (0) c/4 \pi H_0$. This implies that $$|v| \simeq 2.4 \times 10^5 \Delta \, {\Omega_m^{0.6} \over b_X(0)}
\, \rm{km\,s^{-1}}.$$ This relation was derived by Scharf et al. (2000), though their numerical factor was computed from a fiducial model rather than directly from the observations, as above. In any case, the uncertainty in $\rho_X (0)$ is considerable, $6 \times 10^{38} erg\, s^{-1}Mpc^{-3} < \rho_X (0)
< 15 \times 10^{38}erg\, s^{-1}Mpc^{-3}$ (Miyaji et al. 1994), and so is the uncertainty in this relation.
Our maps have bright sources removed, which correspond to nearby sources out to $60 h^{-1} Mpc$. Thus, we need to compare our dipole limit to the motion of a sphere of this radius centered on us. Typical velocity measurements on this scale find a bulk velocity of $v_{60} \simeq 300 \pm 100$ km/s (see Scharf et al. (2000) for a summary.) With our dipole limit, this implies that $\Omega_m^{0.6}/b_X(0) \gs 0.24 \pm 0.08$ where the uncertainty in $\bar{I}/\rho_X (0)$ is not included. This constraint is independent of cosmic variance issues. While the diameter of the local (Virgo) supercluster is generally considered to be in on the order of $40 h^{-1}$ to $50 h^{-1}~Mpc$ (e.g., Davis et al. 1980), there is evidence that the overdensity in the Supergalactic plane extends significantly beyond $60h^{-1}~Mpc$ (Lahav et al. 2000). One might, therefore, suspect that our correction for emission from the local supercluster might effectively remove sources at distances greater than $60h^{-1}~Mpc$ in that plane. In any case, that correction made very little difference in dipole fits (see §6.2) so our conclusions remain the same.
Note that this limit could potentially conflict with previous determinations by Miyaji (1994) who found $\Omega_m^{0.6}/b_X(0) = f_{45}/3.5,$ where $f_{45}$ is the fraction of gravitational acceleration arising from $R \le 45 h^{-1}$ Mpc. This is consistent only for $f_{45} \sim 1$, which is larger than is usually assumed ($f_{45} \sim 0.5$). However, this limit comes from studies of a fairly small sample (16) of X-ray selected AGN and is subject to significant uncertainties of its own.
For typical biases suggested by the observed clustering ($b_X \sim 2.3$), our constraint suggests a somewhat high matter density, $\Omega_m > 0.37$, for $v_{60} \simeq 300$ km/s. This is consistent with the ISW constraint discussed below and also with previous analyses of bulk velocities which tend to indicate higher $\Omega_m$. However, if the bulk velocity is smaller and/or $\rho_X (0)$ larger, this constraint is weakened. In addition, we have assumed a constant X-ray bias. If the bias evolves with redshift, then the local value could be considerably smaller which would also weaken this bound.
The Integrated Sachs-Wolfe Effect and $\Omega_{\Lambda}$
--------------------------------------------------------
In models where the matter density is less than unity, microwave background fluctuations can be created very recently by the evolution of the linear gravitational potential. This is known as the late time integrated Sachs-Wolfe (ISW) effect. Photons gain energy as they fall into a potential well, and loose a similar amount of energy as they exit. However, if the potential evolves significantly as the photon passes through, the energy of the photons will be changed, leaving an imprint on the CMB sky. The spectrum is modified most on large scales where the photons receive the largest changes.
The CMB anisotropies created in this way are naturally correlated with the gravitational potential. Thus, we expect to see correlations between the CMB and tracers of the local ($z \sim 2$) gravitational potential such as the X-ray background (Crittenden & Turok 1996). These correlations are primarily on large scales such as those probed by the HEAO survey.
In an earlier paper, we searched for a correlation between the HEAO maps and maps of the CMB sky produced by COBE. We failed to find such a cross correlation and were able to use our limit to constrain the matter density and the X-ray bias (Boughn, Crittenden & Turok 1998, hereafter BCT). However, translating our measurement into a cosmological bound was ambiguous because the level of the intrinsic structure of the XRB was unknown at the time. With the observation of the X-ray ACF presented here, we are in a position to revisit the cosmological limits implied by these measurements.
To make cosmological constraints, we compare the observed X-ray/CMB cross correlation to those predicted by $\Lambda CDM$ models. As above, we normalize the CMB fluctuations using the band powers of COBE (Bond, Jaffe & Knox 1998) and also normalize the X-ray fluctuations as discussed in §7.1. The cross correlation analysis of BCT was performed with a coarser pixelization ($2.6^\circ \times 2.6^\circ$) than the ACF discussed above. We include this effect by using the numerically calculated pixelization window function. The COBE PSF used was that found by Kneissl & Smoot (1993) and we used a $2.9^\circ$ FWHM Gaussian for the underlying X-ray PSF (recall that the $3.04^\circ$ FWHM beam found above includes a $1.3^\circ \times 1.3^\circ$ pixelization.)
The calculation of the HEAO-COBE cross correlation was discussed in BCT and has not changed. The results are shown in Figure \[fig:cross\], along with predictions for three different values of $\Omega_\Lambda$. While the X-ray bias depends strongly on the Hubble parameter, the predicted cross correlation is only weakly dependent on it, changing only 10% for reasonable values of $H_0$. The cross correlation depends primarily on $\Omega_\Lambda$; no correlation is expected if there is no cosmological constant and the ISW effect increases as $\Omega_\Lambda$ grows. The error bars in Figure \[fig:cross\] are calculated from Monte Carlo simulations and arise primarily due to cosmic variance in the observed correlation. The error bars are significantly correlated.
The observed correlation is most consistent with there being no intrinsic cross correlation ($\Omega_\Lambda =0.0$). We set limits by calculating the likelihood of a model relative to this no correlation model. Using the frequentist criterion used in BCT, $\Omega_\Lambda \le 0.65$ at the 98% C.L., $\Omega_\Lambda \le 0.60$ at the 95%. C.L. Almost identical limits arise from a Bayesian approach, where the relative likelihoods are marginalized over, assuming a constant prior for $\Omega_\Lambda \ge 0$. Figure \[fig:rprob\] shows a one-dimensional slice through the likelihood surface, where only the cross correlation information has been used to calculate the likelihood.
One of the major assumptions we made in interpreting the above result is how the sources of the XRB are distributed in redshift. It is likely that current models of the luminosity function will have to be substantially modified as further deep observations of the sources of the XRB are made. However, as pointed out above, the ISW is relatively insensitive to the exact shape of the redshift distribution of luminosity. If the true distribution includes a substantial fraction of the luminosity at redshifts greater than 1, then the above results will not change dramatically. On the other hand, our constraint on $\Omega_\Lambda$ is quite sensitive to the value of the bias parameter. If the sources of the XRB should turn out to be unbiased, i.e., $b_X = 1$, then the constraint on $\Omega_\Lambda$ could be weakened dramatically. We hasten to add that such a low bias would require that the ACF of Figure 5 be reduced by more than a factor of four, which seems unlikely. Previous determinations of X-ray bias have resulted in a wide range of values, $1 < b_X < 7$ (see Barcons et al. 2000 and references therein). Its clear that firming up the value of $b_X$ and determining how it varies with scale and redshift will be required before the ISW effect can be unambiguously interpreted.
The above limit may be compared to what we found from cross correlating COBE with the NVSS radio galaxy survey (Boughn & Crittenden 2002). There we also found no evidence for correlations, and were able to put a 95 % C.L. limit of $\Omega_\Lambda \le 0.74$, with some weak dependence on the Hubble constant. While the above limit provides important confirmation of that result, it should be noted that these two limits are not entirely independent. Radio galaxies and the X-ray background are, indeed, correlated with each other (Boughn 1998).
An important source of noise in the cross correlation of Figure 7 is instrument noise of the COBE DMR receivers. In addition, the relatively poor angular resolution of the COBE radiometers reduce, somewhat, the amplitude of the ISW signal. Therefore, some improvement can be expected by repeating the analysis on future CMB maps, such as that soon to be produced by NASA’s MAP satellite mission. If such an analysis still finds the absence of an ISW effect, then the current $\Lambda CDM$ model would be in serious conflict with observational data if the X-ray bias can be similarly constrained. On the other hand, a positive detection would provide important evidence about the dynamics of the universe even if the X-ray bias remains uncertain.
Conclusions
===========
By carefully reconstructing the HEAO beam and analysing its auto-correlation function, we have been able to confirm the presence of intrinsic clustering in the X-ray background. This gives independent verification of the multipole analysis of Scharf et al. (2000) and the level of clustering we see is comparable. The clustering we see is in excess of that predicted by standard cold dark matter models and indicates that some biasing is needed. The amount of biasing required depends on the cosmological model and on how the bias evolves over time; if the bias is constant, typical models indicate that $b_X \simeq 2.$ The biases of galaxies, clusters of galaxies, radio sources, and quasars have yet to be adequately characterized and so whether or not the above X-ray bias is excessive is a question that, for the present, remains unanswered.
We have also confirmed, at the 2-3 $\sigma$ level, the detection of the Compton-Getting dipole in the X-ray background due to the Earth’s motion with respect to the rest frame of the CMB. However, we have been unable to confirm the presence of an intrinsic dipole in the XRB and have actually been able to exclude a significant part of the range reported by Scharf et al. (2000). While our dipole limit is still too small to conflict with any of the favored CDM models, combining our dipole limit with observations of the local bulk flow enable us to constrain $\Omega_m^{0.6}/b_X(0) > 0.24$. For constant bias models, this suggests a relatively large matter density, as is also seen in for other velocity studies; however, the uncertainty in this limit is still considerable.
With the observed X-ray clustering, large $\Lambda-CDM$ models predict a detectable correlation with the cosmic microwave background arising via the integrated Sachs-Wolfe effect. That we have not observed this effect suggests $\Omega_\Lambda \ls 0.60$. This is beginning to conflict with models preferred by a combination of CMB, LSS and SNIA data (e.g., de Bernardis et al. 2000 & Bahcall et al. 1999).
This work gives strong motivation for further observations of the large scale structure of the hard X-ray background. Better measurements of the full sky XRB anisotropy are needed, as is more information about the redshift distribution of the X-ray sources. This will be essential for cross correlation with the new CMB data from the MAP satellite and to bridge the gap between the CMB scales and those probed by galaxy surveys such as 2-dF and SDSS.
We would like to acknowledge Keith Jahoda who is responsible for constructing the HEAO1 A2 X-ray map and who provided us with several data-handling programs. We also thank Neil Turok for useful discussions, Ed Groth for a variety of analysis programs, and Steve Raible for his help with some of the analysis programs. RC acknowledges support from a PPARC Advanced Fellowship. This work was supported in part by NASA grant NAG5-9285.
Allen, J. Jahoda, K. & Whitlock, L. 1994, Legacy, 5, 27 Bahcall, N. Ostriker, J.P., Perlmutter, S. & Steinhardt, P. 1999, Science, 284,1481 Barcons, X., Carrera, F.J., Ceballos, M.T. & Mateos, S. 2000, Invited review presented at the Workshop X-ray Astronomy’99: Stellar endpoints, AGN and the diffuse X-ray background, astro-ph/0001182 Boldt, E. 1987, Phys. Rep., 146, 215 Bond, J. R., Jaffe, A. & Knox, L. 1998, Phys Rev D, 57, 2117B Boughn, S. 1998, ApJ, 499, 533 Boughn, S. 1999, ApJ, 526, 14 Boughn, S. & Crittenden, R. 2002, PRL 88, 1302 Boughn, S., Crittenden, R. & Turok, N. 1998, New Astron., 3, 275 (BCT) Carrera, F. et al. 1993, MNRAS, 260, 376 Comastri, A., Setti, G., Zamorani, G. & Hasinger, G. 1995, A & A, 296, 1 Compton, A. & Getting, I. 1935, Phys. Rev., 47, 817 Cowie, L. et al. 2002, ApJ, 566, L5 Cress, C. M. & Kamionkowski, M. 1998, MNRAS, 297, 486 Crittenden, R. & Turok, N. 1996, PRL 76, 575 Davis, M., Tonry, J., Huchra, J. & Latham, D. 1980, ApJ, 238, L113 de Bernardis et al. 2000, Nature, 404, 955 Fry, J.N., 1996, ApJ 461, L65 Gendreau, K. C. et al. 1995, PASJ, 47, L5 Giacconii, R. et al. 2001, ApJ, 551, 624 Gilli, R., Salvati, M. & Hasinger, G. 2001, A&A, 366, 407 Giommi, P. Perri, M., & Fiore F. 2000, A & A, 372, 799 Haslam, C.G.T. et al. 1982, A & A Supp., 47, 1 Iwan, D. et al. 1982, ApJ, 260, 111 Jahoda, K. 1993, Adv. Space Res., 13 (12), 231 Jahoda, K. 2001 - private communication Jahoda, K. & Mushotzky, R. 1989, ApJ, 346, 638 Kneissl, R. & Smoot, G. 1993, COBE note 5053 Lahav, O., Piran, T. & Treyer, M. A. 1997, MNRAS, 284, 499 Lahav, O, Santiago, B., Webster, A., Strauss, M., Davis, M., Dressler, A. & Huchra, J. 2000, MNRAS, 312, 166L Lahav, O., et al. 2002, MNRAS, 333, 961 Miyaji, T. 1994, Ph.D. thesis, Univ. Maryland Miyaji, T., Lahav, O., Jahoda, K. & Boldt, E. 1994, ApJ, 434, 424 Mushotzky, R. F., Cowie, L. L., Barger, A. J. & Arnaud, K. A. 2000, Nature, 404, 459 Mushotzky, R. & Jahoda, K. 1992, in: The X-ray Background, X. Barcons & A.C. Fabian eds, (Cambridge University Press) Peebles, P. J. E. 1993, Principles of Physical Cosmology, (Princeton: Princeton Univ. Press) Piccinotti, G., Mushotzky, R. F., Boldt, E. A., Holt, S. S., Marshall, F. E., Serlemitsos, P. J. & Shafer, R. A. 1982, ApJ, 253, 485 Scharf, C. A., Jahoda, K., Treyer, M., Lahav, O., Boldt, E. & Piran, T. 2000, ApJ, 544, 49 Rosati, P. et al. 2002, ApJ, 566,667 Shafer, R. A. 1993, Ph.D. thesis, Univ. Maryland (NASA TM 85029) Soltan, A. M., Hasinger, G., Egger, R., Snowden, S. & Truemper, J. 1996, A & A, 305, 17S Tegmark, M. & Peebles, P. J. E. 1998, ApJ, 500, L79 Treyer, M. A., Scharf, C. A., Lahav, O., Jahoda, K., Boldt, E. & Piran, T. 1998, ApJ, 509, 531 Tully, R. B. 1988, Nearby Galaxies Catalog, Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge Vikhlinin, A. & Forman, W. 1995, ApJ, 455L, 109 Voges, W. et al. 1996, IAU Circ., 6420, 2 White, R. & Stemwedel, S. 1992, Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems I, eds. D. Worrall, C. Biemesderfer & J. Barnes (San Francisco: ASP), 379 White, M. & Bunn, E. F. 1995, ApJ 450, 477
![The combined map from the HEAO1 A2 medium and high energy detectors, pixelized using the standard COBE quad cubed format ($1.3^\circ \times 1.3^\circ$ pixels.) The effective beam size is approximately $3^\circ$. The most visible features, the Galactic plane and the nearby bright sources, are removed from the maps we analyze. []{data-label="fig:heao"}](fig1.ps){height="5.0in"}
![The mean point spread function for the combined map found by averaging the individual PSFs of sixty strong HEAO1 point sources. The data is well fit by a Gaussian with FWHM of $3.04^\circ$.[]{data-label="fig:psf"}](fig2.ps){height="3.0in"}
![The auto-correlation function of the HEAO1 A2 map with bright sources and the Galactic plane removed and corrected for large-scale, high Galactic latitude structure. The dashed curve is that expected from beam smearing due to the PSF of the map while the solid curve includes a contribution due to clustering in the XRB (see §5).[]{data-label="fig:acf"}](fig3.ps){height="3.0in"}
![The residuals of the ACF fit from Figure 3, after the shot noise, PSF and a simple model of the intrinsic fluctuations have been removed. []{data-label="fig:resid"}](fig4.ps){height="3.0in"}
![The intrinsic ACF, with shot noise and PSF fits removed. For comparison, a simple $\theta^{-1}$ model for the intrinsic correlations is shown. The data beyond $9^\circ$ is not used because of uncertainty due to the fitting of the large scale structures. The model has been smoothed by the PSF and corrected for the removal of the large scale structures, which suppresses the correlations on scales larger than $10^\circ.$[]{data-label="fig:intrin"}](fig5.ps){height="3.0in"}
![The power spectrum for a range of cosmologies normalized to the observations ($H_0 = 70~km~s^{-1}Mpc^{-1}$.) The various cosmologies show a range of slopes, from $1.1 < \epsilon < 1.6 $ and the observations fix them at $\ell \simeq 5$. Also shown is the 95 % upper limit from the dipole, excluding cosmic variance. With cosmic variance, the limit shown is at the 80 % confidence level, and the 95 % upper limit is four times higher. The green line shows the suppression arising from beam smoothing, which smoothes scales $\ell > 50$. []{data-label="fig:x-cls"}](fig6.ps){width="3.0in"}
![ The calculated X-ray/CMB cross correlation. The error bars are highly correlated. Also shown are the predictions for three $\Lambda-CDM$ models with varying $\Omega_\Lambda$ ($H_0 = 70~km~s^{-1}Mpc^{-1}$.) []{data-label="fig:cross"}](fig7.ps){width="3.0in"}
![ The relative probability of the observed cross correlation for varying cosmological constant, with the Hubble constant fixed ($H_0 = 70~km~s^{-1}Mpc^{-1}$.) The best fit is for no correlation. []{data-label="fig:rprob"}](fig8.ps){width="3.0in"}
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'We have investigated structure and properties of small metal clusters using all-electron [*ab initio*]{} theoretical methods based on the Hartree-Fock approximation and density functional theory, perturbation theory and compared results of our calculations with the available experimental data and the results of other theoretical works. We have systematically calculated the optimized geometries of neutral and singly charged sodium clusters having up to 20 atoms, their multipole moments (dipole and quadrupole), static polarizabilities, binding energies per atom, ionization potentials and frequencies of normal vibration modes. Our calculations demonstrate the great role of many-electron correlations in the formation of electronic and ionic structure of small metal clusters and form a good basis for further detailed study of their dynamic properties, as well as structure and properties of other atomic cluster systems.'
address: 'Institut für Theoretische Physik der Johann Wolfgang Goethe-Universität, 60054 Frankfurt am Main, Germany'
author:
- 'Ilia A Solov’yov, Andrey V Solov’yov and Walter Greiner'
title: 'Structure and properties of small sodium clusters.'
---
Introduction
============
Atomic clusters and small nanoparticles have been recognized as new physical objects with their own properties relatively recently. This became clear after such experimental successes as the discovery of electron shell structure in metal clusters [@Knight84], observation of plasmon resonances in metal clusters [@Br89; @Selby89; @Selby91] and fullerenes [@Bertsch92; @Hertel92], formation of singly and doubly charged negative cluster ions [@Lutz] and many more others. The novelty of cluster physics is also greatly connected with the fact that cluster properties explain the transition from single atoms or molecules to solid state. Comprehensive survey of the field can be found in review papers and books, see e.g. [@deHeer93; @Brack93; @BrCo94; @Haberland94; @Guet97; @MetCl99; @LesHouches].
There are many different types of clusters, such as metallic clusters, fullerenes, molecular clusters, semiconductor clusters, organic clusters, quantum dots, positively and negatively charged clusters, which all have their own features and properties. In this paper we focus on the detailed systematic study of the structure and properties of small metal clusters and in particular sodium clusters using [*ab initio*]{} all-electron many-body theory methods.
So far, for sodium clusters, systematic calculations of cluster properties on the same level of theory as in our present work (i.e. all electron [*ab initio*]{}) have been performed only for clusters with $N \leq 10$ [@MetCl99; @Boustani87; @Bonacic88; @Boustani88; @Guest88; @Rayane99], where $N$ is a number of atoms in a cluster. In our work we extend this limit up to $N \leq 20$. Note that most of the cited papers are focused on the investigation of neutral cluster properties rather than ions. In our present work we perform systematic comparative analysis of properties of neutral and singly charged sodium clusters in the specified size range.
During the last decade, there were performed numerous experimental and theoretical investigations of the properties of small metal clusters as well as the processes with their involvement. Here we are not able to review even all essential results obtained in the field and only refer to those, which are related the most closely to the subject of our paper. In [@Knight84], it was experimentally proved that metal clusters have the shell electronic structure and the magic cluster numbers have been determined by observation of the sodium cluster abundances in mass spectra. Experimental study of electronic structure and properties of small metal clusters have been performed in [@Akeby90; @Knight85] (for review also see [@deHeer93; @BrCo94; @Haberland94; @MetCl99; @LesHouches]). In [@Akeby90], there have been measured the ionisation potentials for a sequence of small neutral and positively charged sodium metal clusters, which independently proved their shell structure. The dipole polarizabilities of sodium clusters have been experimentally determined in [@Knight85]. Dissociation energies of neutral and positively charged small sodium and potassium metal clusters have been measured in [@Br89a; @Br90; @Br91]. Dynamical properties of clusters have been studied by means of photon, electron and ion scattering. These methods are the traditional tools for probing properties and internal structure of various physical objects. Using these methods, for example, plasmon excitations in metal clusters [@Br89; @deHeer87] and fullerenes [@Hertel92] have been observed (for review also see [@deHeer93; @BrCo94]).
Metal clusters have also been studied theoretically. Structural properties of small metal clusters have been widely investigated using quantum chemistry methods. Here we refer to the papers [@Boustani87; @Bonacic88; @Boustani88; @Guest88; @Martins85; @Spieg98; @Nagueira99; @Gutierrez01], in which optimized geometries, binding energies, ionization potentials, electron structure and electron transport properties of small lithium and sodium clusters have been calculated. In these papers the systematic analysis of the cluster properties has been limited by cluster sizes $N \leq 10$. In the present paper we extend this limit up to $N \leq 20$ and perform systematic analysis of various cluster characteristics both for neutral clusters and singly charged cluster ions.
In a last few years, a number of papers have been devoted to the calculation of dipole static polarizabilities of neutral sodium and lithium clusters [@Rayane99; @Blundell00; @Kronik00; @Kummel00; @Manninen00]. Note that most of these studies have been performed within the cluster size range $N \leq 20$. The results of different theoretical approaches have been compared with the experimental data from [@Knight85]. However, only in [@Rayane99], calculations of the cluster geometries and polarizabilities have been performed on the same level of theory (i.e. all electron [*ab initio*]{}) as in our work and were limited by $N\leq 8$.
Alternatively, the jellium model for metal clusters was suggested. This model explains well enough the shell structure of metal clusters and their essential dynamic properties, such as plasmon excitations. Initially, jellium calculations for metal clusters were based on the density functional formalism with the use of pseudopotentials for the description of electron relaxation effects and lattice structure [@Martins81]. Fully self-consistent calculations for spherical jellium metal clusters have been performed within the framework of the spin-density-functional method [@Hintermann83] and the Kohn-Sham formalism for the self-consistent determination of electron wave functions [@Ekky84; @Ekky85]. The Hartree-Fock scheme for the self-consistent determination of the electron wave functions of spherical jellium metal clusters was also introduced later in [@GJ92; @IIKZ93]. This approach was generalized for axially deformed cluster systems in [@LSSCG00]. Dynamical jellium model for metal clusters, which treats simultaneously collective vibrational modes (volume vibrations, i.e. breathing, plus shape vibrations) of the ionic jellium background in a cluster, the quantized electron motion and interaction between the electronic and ionic subsystems was developed in [@GSG99; @GISG00].
The jellium model provides a very useful basis for studying various collision processes, such as photabsorption [@Ivanov96], photoionization [@Bertsch92; @Bertsch91; @C20-C60], elastic [@GCSG97; @GEMS98] and inelastic scattering [@GEMS98; @GIS97; @GISG98; @GIPS00], electron attachment [@CGIS98; @CGIS99], photon emission [@GS97; @GIS98] and others, involving metal clusters,. On the basis of the jellium model one can develop [*ab initio*]{} many-body theories, such as the random phase approximation with exchange or the Dyson equation method and effectively solve many-electron correlation problem even for relatatively large cluster systems containing up to 100 atoms or even more. Review of these methods in their application to the electron scattering of metal clusters one can find in [@AVSol]. As elucidated in the papers cited above, many-electron correlations are quite essential for the correct description of various characteristics of the cluster systems.
In spite of the fact that the jellium model with all its modifications is rather successful in explaining numerous phenomena involving metal clusters it obviously has its limits, because this model does not take into account the detailed ionic structure of clusters. The correspondence between predictions of the jellium model and the results of more advanced quantum chemistry calculations have not been performed in a systematic way so far. Partially, this is connected with the fact that quantum chemistry calculations are usually limited by small sizes of clusters, while the jellium model becomes adequate for larger cluster systems. Knowledge of the ranges of applicability of the jellium model and the level of its accuracy is important, because the jellium model often gives much more efficient theoretical basis particularly, when dealing with larger cluster systems.
In this paper we have undertaken detailed systematic theoretical study of structure and properties of sodium clusters beyond the jellium model using all-electron [*ab initio*]{} theoretical methods based on the Hartree-Fock approximation, density functional theory and perturbation theory, for clusters that size is large enough for jellium calculations. Namely, we have calculated optimized geometries of neutral and singly-charged sodium clusters consisting of up to 20 atoms, their multipole moments (dipole and quadrupole), static polarizabilities, binding energies per atom, ionization potentials and frequencies of normal vibration modes. We compare results of our calculations with the available experimental data, results of other theoretical works performed both within the framework of the jellium model and beyond, using quantum chemistry methods, and elucidate the level of accuracy of different theoretical approaches. Also, we demonstrate the great role of many-electron correlations in the formation of structure and properties of small metal clusters. Our results form a good basis for the detailed study of dynamic properties of small metal clusters as well as structure and properties of other atomic cluster systems.
Our calculations elucidate the level of accuracy of various theoretical schemes for the treatment of electronic structure in metal clusters, which is important to know and is not obvious in advance due to complexity of theoretical methods involved. Some characteristics (dipole and quadrupole moments or spectra of normal vibration modes, for example), which we have calculated in this paper are new and were not studied before, at least according to our knowledge. These characteristics, however, might be, important, for instance, when considering dynamics of a cluster beam in an external non-homogeneous electric or magnetic field. Indeed, namely, cluster multipole moments should be responsible for the cluster isomers separation in the non-homogeneous external fields. We analyse the connection between the principal values of the cluster quadrupole moments tensor and the cluster shape (oblate, prolate or triaxially deformed).
The frequencies of the surface and volume vibration modes have been determined in the spectra of the cluster normal vibration frequencies and their correspondence to the predictions of the dynamical jellium model [@GSG99; @GISG00] was established.
Our calculations have been performed with the use of the Gaussian 98 software package [@Gaussian98]. We have used the atomic system of units in this paper, $\hbar=m_e=|e|=1$ unless other units are not indicated.
Theoretical methods {#theory}
===================
In this work we are studying structure and properties of small sodium clusters on the basis of all-electron [*ab initio*]{} many-body theory methods. We calculate the optimized geometries of clusters consisting of up to $N \leq 20$ atoms, where $N$ is the number of atoms in the cluster. For the sequence of clusters with $N \leq 20$, we determine size dependence of the cluster ionization potentials, total energies, multipole moments (dipole and quadrupole), bonding distances and dipole polarizabilities. We also calculated and analyze vibration spectra of the clusters.
We have done these calculations using different theoretical schemes. We have calculated cluster characteristics in the all-electron Hartree-Fock approximation. This approximation does not take into account many-electron correlations in the system, which turn out to play essential role in the formation of clusters properties. Therefore, we also calculate all the characteristics using post Hartree-Fock theories accounting for many-electron correlations. Namely, this was done in the Møller and Plesset perturbation theory of the second and the fourth order and the three parameter Becke’s gradient-corrected exchange functional with the gradient-corrected correlation functional of Lee, Yang and Parr.
Below, we discuss theoretical methods used in our work. The aim of this discussion is to present essential ideas of the methods and give the necessary references, rather than to describe them in detail.
Hartree-Fock method (HF)
------------------------
In the Hartree-Fock approximation, the many-electron wave function of a cluster is expressed as antisymmetrized product of the single-electron wave functions, $\psi_i$, of cluster electrons, which are also often called molecular orbitals. The Hartree-Fock equation for the determination of the molecular orbitals $\psi_i$ reads as (see e.g. [@Lindgren]):
$$\left( - \Delta/2 + U_{ions} + U_{HF}\right) \psi_i \, = \,
\varepsilon_i \psi_i.
\label{HF}$$
Here, the first term represents the kinetic energy of the $i$-th electron, and $U_{ions}$ describes its attraction to the ions in the cluster. The Hartree-Fock potential $U_{HF}$ represents the Coulomb and the exchange interaction of the electron $i$ with other electrons in the cluster, $\varepsilon_i$ is the single electron energy.
In [*Gaussian 98*]{}, the molecular orbitals, $\psi_i$, are approximated by a linear combination of a pre-defined set of single-electron functions, $\chi_{\mu}$, known as basis functions. This expansion reads as follows:
$$\psi_i=\sum_{\mu = 1}^{N} c_{\mu i} \chi_{\mu},
\label{phi_i}$$
where coefficients c$_{\mu i}$ are the molecular orbital expansion coefficients, $N$ is the number of basis functions, which are chosen to be normalized.
The basis functions $\chi_{\mu}$ are defined as linear combinations of primitive gaussians:
$$\chi_{\mu}=\sum_{p} d_{\mu p}g_p,
\label{hi_mu}$$
where $d_{\mu p}$ are fixed constants within a given basis set, the primitive gaussians, $g_p= g(\alpha , {\bf r})$, are the gaussian-type atomic functions having the following form:
$$g(\alpha , {\bf r})=cx^ny^mz^l \e^{-\alpha r^2}
\label{g}$$
Here, $c$ is the normalization constant. The choice of the integers $n$, $m$ and $l$ defines the type of the primitive gaussian function: s, p, d or f (for details see [@Gaussian98_man]).
Substituting these expansions in the Hartree-Fock equations (\[HF\]), one can rewrite them in the form, known also as the Roothaan and Hall equations:
$$\sum_{\nu =1}^N(H_{\mu\nu}-\varepsilon_iS_{\mu\nu})c_{\nu i}=0 \\
\mu=1,2,...,N
\label{Roothaan}$$
Being written in the matrix form, this equation reads as:
$$HC=SC\varepsilon,
\label{Roothaan_matrix}$$
where each element is a matrix. Here, $\varepsilon$ is a diagonal matrix of orbital energies, each of its elements $\varepsilon_i$ is the single-electron energy of the molecular orbital $\psi_i$, H is the Hamiltonian matrix as it follows from (\[HF\]), S is the overlap matrix, describing the overlap between orbitals. For more details regarding this formalism see [@Gaussian98_man].
Equations (\[Roothaan\_matrix\]) are none linear and must be solved iteratively. The procedure which does so is called the [*Self-Consistent Field*]{} (SCF) method.
The above written equations consider the restricted Hartree-Fock method. For the open shell systems, the unrestricted Hartree-Fock method has to be used. In this case, the alpha and beta electrons with spins up and down are assigned to different orbitals, resulting in two sets of molecular orbital expansion coefficients:
$$\begin{aligned}
\psi_i^{\alpha} =\sum_{\mu = 1}^{N} c_{\mu i}^{\alpha} \chi_{\mu}
\nonumber
\\
\psi_i^{\beta} =\sum_{\mu = 1}^{N} c_{\mu i}^{\beta} \chi_{\mu},
\label{phi_i_unrestr}\end{aligned}$$
The two sets of coefficients result in two sets of the Hamiltonian matrices and the two sets of orbitals.
Møller-Plesset perturbation theory method ($MP_n$)
--------------------------------------------------
The Hartree-Fock theory provides an inadequate treatment of electrons motion within a molecular system, because it does not properly treat many-electron correlations. The many electron correlations can be accounted for using different methods. The most straightforward way for achieving this goal is based on the perturbation theory. Indeed, the total Hamiltonian, $H$, of the cluster can be divided into two parts
$$H= H_0 + V
\label{MP_base}$$
Here $ H_0$ is the Hamiltonian corresponding to the Hartree-Fock level of theory and $V$ is the residual interelectron interaction, which can be treated as a small perturbation.
Considering $V$ as a small perturbation one can construct the solution of the Schrödinger equation for many-electron system in an arbitrary order of the perturbation theory. The perturbation theory of this type is well known since the work by Møller-Plesset [@MP] and can be found in numerous textbooks on quantum mechanics (see e.g. [@LL3]).
Below we refer to this theoretical method as to the Møller-Plesset perturbation theory [@MP] of the second or forth order, $MP_2$ or $MP_4$. Indices here indicate the order of the perturbation theory.
Density functional methods (B3LYP)
----------------------------------
The density functional theory (DFT) is based upon a strategy of modelling electron correlation via general functionals of the electron density. Within the DFT one has to solve the Kohn-Sham equations, which read as (see e.g. [@deHeer93; @Brack93; @Haberland94; @Guet97; @MetCl99; @LesHouches])
$$\left( \frac{\hat p^2}2+U_{ions}+V_{H}+V_{xc}\right)
\psi_i =\varepsilon _i \psi _i,$$
where the first term represents the kinetic energy of the $i$-th electron, and $U_{ions}$ describes its attraction to the ions in the cluster, $V_{H}$ is the Hartree part of the interelectronic interaction: $$V_{H}(\vec r)=\left. \int \frac{\rho(\vec r\,')}{|\vec r-\vec r\,'|}
\, d\vec r\,'\right.,$$ and $\rho(\vec r\,')$ is the electron density: $$\rho(\vec r)=\sum_{\nu=1}^{N} \left|\psi_i(\vec r) \right|^2,$$
where $V_{xc}$ is the local exchange-correlation potential, $\psi_i$ are the electronic orbitals and $N$ is the number of electrons in the cluster.
The exchange-correlation potential is defined as the functional derivative of the exchange-correlation energy functional: $$V_{xc}=\frac{\delta E_{xc}[\rho]}{\delta \rho(\vec r)},$$
The approximate functionals employed by DFT methods partition the exchange-correlation energy into two parts, referred to as [*exchange*]{} and [*correlation*]{} parts:
$$E_{xc}[\rho]= E_x(\rho)+E_c(\rho)
\label{ex_core}$$
Physically, these two terms correspond to same-spin and mixed-spin interactions, respectively. Both parts are the functionals of the electron density, which can be of two distinct types: either [*local*]{} functional depending on only the electron density $\rho$ or [*gradient-corrected*]{} functionals depending on both $\rho$ and its gradient, ${\bf \nabla} \rho$.
In literature, there is a variety of exchange correlation functionals. Below, we refer only to those, which are related to the calculation performed in this work.
The local exchange functional is virtually always defined as follows:
$$E^{LDA}_x=-\frac{3}{2} (\frac{3}{4\pi})^{1/3} \int \rho^{4/3}d^3 {\bf r}
\label{LDA}$$
This form was developed to reproduce the exchange energy of a uniform electron gas. By itself, however, it is not sufficient for the adequate description of atomic clusters.
The gradient-corrected exchange functional introduced by Becke [@Becke88] and based on the LDA exchange functional reads as:
$$E^{B88}_x=
E^{LDA}_x-\gamma\int\frac{\rho^{4/3}x^2}{1+6\gamma sinh^{-1}x}d^3 {\bf r}
\label{becke}$$
where x=$\rho^{-4/3}|\nabla\rho|$ and $\gamma=0.0042$ is a parameter chosen to fit the known exchange energies of the noble gas atoms.
Analogously to the above written exchange functionals, there are local and gradient-corrected correlation functionals, for example, those introduced by Perdew and Wang [@PerWan] or by Lee, Yang and Parr [@LYP]. Their explicit expressions are somewhat lengthy and thus we do not present them here and refer to the original papers.
In the pure DFT, an exchange functional usually pairs with a correlation functional. For example, the well-known BLYP functional pairs Becke’s gradient-corrected exchange functional (\[becke\]) with the gradient-corrected correlation functional of Lee, Yang and Parr [@LYP].
In spite of the success of the pure DFT theory in many cases, one has to admit that the Hartree-Fock theory accounts for the electron exchange the most naturally and precisely. Thus, Becke has suggested [@Becke88] functionals which include a mixture of Hartree-Fock and DFT exchange along with DFT correlations, conceptually defining $E_{xc}$ as:
$$E^{mix}_{xc}=c_{HF}E^{HF}_x + c_{DFT}E^{DFT}_{xc},
\label{becke_hyb}$$
where $c_{HF}$ and $c_{DFT}$ are constants. Following this idea, a Becke-type three parameter functional can be defined as follows:
$$\begin{aligned}
E_{xc}^{B3LYP}&=&E^{LDA}_x + c_0(E^{HF}_x - E^{LDA}_X) +
c_x (E^{B88}_x- E^{LDA}_x) +
\nonumber
\\
&+&E^{VWN3}_c + c_c(E^{LYP}_c - E^{VWN3}_c)
\label{b3lyp}\end{aligned}$$
Here, $c_0=0.2$, $c_x=0.72$ and $c_c=0.81$ are constants, which were defined by fitting to the atomization energies, ionization potentials, proton affinities and first-row atomic energies [@Gaussian98_man]. $E^{LDA}_x$ and $E^{B88}_x$ are defined in (\[LDA\]) and (\[becke\]) respectively. $E^{HF}_x$ is the functional corresponding to Hartree-Fock equations (\[HF\]). The explicit form for the correlation functional $E^{VWN3}_c$ as well as for gradient-corrected correlation functional of Lee, Yang and Parr, $E^{LYP}_c$, one can find in [@VWN] and [@LYP] correspondingly. Note that instead of $E^{VWN3}_c$ and $E^{LYP}_c$ in (\[b3lyp\]) one can also use the Perdew and Wang correlation functional [@PerWan].
Geometry optimization {#Geometry}
---------------------
The cluster geometries, which we have calculated in our work, have been determined using the geometry optimization procedure. This procedure implies the calculation of the multidimensional potential energy surface for a cluster and then finding local minima on this surface. The key point for this search is fixing the starting geometry of the cluster, which could converge during the calculation to the local or global minimum. There is no unique way in achieving this goal with [*Gaussian 98*]{}.
In our calculations, we have created the starting geometries empirically, often assuming certain cluster symmetries. Note, that during the optimization process the geometry of the cluster as well as its initial symmetry sometimes change dramatically. All the characteristics of clusters, which we have calculated and presented in next section, are obtained for the clusters with optimized geometry.
In our calculations, we have made no assumptions on the core electrons in the optimized clusters, which means that all electrons available in the system, have been taken into account, when computing potential energy surface. For clusters with $N >10$, this process becomes rather computer time demanding. Thus, in this work we have limited our calculations by clusters consisting up to $N \leq 20$.
Normal vibrations
-----------------
Knowledge of the potential energy surface in the vicinity of a local minimum, allows one easily to determine corresponding normal vibration modes of the system. We have performed such calculation and determined the vibration energy spectrum for a number of clusters. Particular attention in this calculation has been paid to the identification of the breathing and the surface vibration modes and comparison their frequencies with those predicted in [@GSG99; @GISG00] for spherical sodium clusters on the basis of the dynamical jellium model.
Results of calculations and discussion
======================================
In this section we present the results of calculations performed with the use of methods described above. We have calculated the optimized geometries of neutral and singly charged sodium clusters consisting of up to 20 atoms, their multipole moments (dipole and quadrupole), static polarizabilities, binding energies per atom, ionization potentials and frequencies of the normal vibration modes. We compare results of our calculations with the available experimental data and the results of other theoretical works performed both within the framework of the jellium model and beyond, using quantum chemistry methods and establish the level of accuracy of different theoretical approaches. Particular attention is paid to the clusters in the range $10 < N < 20$, because some characteristics of the clusters in this size range have been calculated on the [*ab initio*]{} basis in our paper for the first time. Also, we demonstrate the great role of many-electron correlations in the formation of structure and properties of small metal clusters.
Geometry optimization of Na$_{n}$ and Na$_{n}^{+}$ clusters {#geom_opt}
-----------------------------------------------------------
Results of the cluster geometry optimization for neutral and singly charged sodium clusters consisting of up to 20 atoms shown in figures \[geom\_neutral\] and \[geom\_ion\] respectively. The cluster geometries have been determined using the methodology described in section \[theory\]. Namely, the optimization of the cluster geometries has been performed with the use of $B3LYP$ and $MP_2$ methods.
![ Optimized geometries of neutral sodium clusters $Na_2 - Na_{10}$ (part a), $Na_{11}- Na_{18}$ (part b) and $Na_{19}- Na_{20}$ (part c). The interatomic distances are given in angstroms. The label above each cluster image indicates its point symmetry group and the calculation method by which the cluster was optimized. []{data-label="geom_neutral"}](fig1c.eps)
![ Optimized geometries of singly charged sodium clusters $Na_2^+ - Na_{11}^+$ (part a) and $Na_{12}^+- Na_{21}^+$ (part b). The interatomic distances are given in angstroms. The label above each cluster image indicates the point symmetry group and the calculation method by which the cluster was optimized.[]{data-label="geom_ion"}](fig2b.eps)
For clusters with $N\leq 6$, we preferably used the $MP_2$ method. This method leads to the results, which are in a reasonable agreement with those derived by other methods (see e.g. [@Bonacic88; @Boustani88]). For example, the side bond length in the rhomboidal $Na_4$ cluster calculated in [@Bonacic88] by the all-electron Hartree-Fock method is equal to 3.74 Å, while in our case it is equal to 3.56 Å. The smaller diagonal value for $Na_4$ is equal to 3.25 Å in [@Bonacic88], while we determine it as 3.18 Å.
The $MP_2$ method becomes more and more computer time demanding with the growth cluster size. This happens due to increase in a number of integrals involved in the computations. It turns out that for larger cluster systems the $B3LYP$ method is more efficient. The accuracy of the $B3LYP$ method is comparable with the accuracy of the $MP_2$ method, as it is clear from the comparison of the $B3LYP$ and $MP_2$ cluster geometries with those computed in [@Bonacic88] by the configuration interaction method.
Clusters of a certain size can possess various isomer forms, those number grows dramatically with increasing cluster size. We illustrate the situation, and calculate several isomers of the the $Na_3$, $Na_6$, $Na_{10}$, $Na_{11}$ and $Na_{20}$ clusters. They all are presented in figure \[geom\_neutral\]. Note, that the linear and equilateral triangular $Na_3$ isomers, have not been described in the earlier papers [@Bonacic88; @Boustani87; @Boustani88] (see also [@Haberland94; @MetCl99; @LesHouches]), in which isosceles triangular isomers were considered. The comparison of properties (dipole and quadrupole moments, total energies, bonding distances) of these clusters will be given below.
On the example of the $Na_4$ cluster, we demonstrate how the multiplicity of an electronic state of the system can influence its geometry. Figure \[geom\_neutral\] shows that the $Na_4$ cluster has the rhomboidal geometry corresponding to the $D_{2h}$ point symmetry group, if the multiplicity of the cluster is equal to 1, while, for the multiplicity being equal to 3, the cluster has the quadratic geometry characterised by the $D_{4h}$ point symmetry group.
Sodium clusters with $N \leq 5$ have the plane structure, while for $N=6$ both plane and spatial isomers are possible. This feature is consistent with the jellium picture and can be explained from the minimization principle for the cluster surface. Indeed, the surface of small plane cluster isomers is less in comparison with the surface of their possible spatial forms.
Comparison of geometries of the neutral and singly-charged clusters presented in figures \[geom\_neutral\] and \[geom\_ion\] shows their significant difference. For smaller sizes ($N \leq 8$), singly-charged and neutral clusters have sometimes different point symmetry groups and bonding distances (see images of the $Na_4$, $Na_5$, $Na_6$ and $Na_8$ clusters and their ions). The alteration in the geometry of cluster ions occurs due to the excessive positive charge available in the system. The structural change of cluster ions becomes less profound with increasing cluster size, see clusters with $N \geq 10$, because the excessive positive charge in this case turns out to be insufficient to produce substantial change in a massive cluster, although sometimes (compare $Na_{15}$ and $Na_{15}^+$) noticeable change in the cluster geometry is also possible.
The striking difference in geometries of small singly charged and neutral clusters is closely linked to the problem of cluster fission. It is natural to assume that with increasing cluster charge small clusters should become unstable and fragment into two parts, while for larger cluster sizes one can expect quasi-stable configurations, which should decay via the fission process. Calculation of such configurations is an interesting task, because it may provide the essential information on the predominant fission channels in the system. We do not perform such an analysis in our work, but draw attention that geometries of the cluster ions, like $Na_4^+$, $Na_5^+$, $Na_6^+$ and $Na_{15}^+$, lead to the obvious hints on the possible fragmentation channels in these cluster systems.
Figure \[geom\_neutral\] shows that the clusters $Na_8$ and $Na_{20}$ have the higher point symmetry group $T_d$ as compared to the other clusters. This result is in a qualitative agreement with the jellium model. According to the jellium model [@Ekky84; @Ekky85; @GJ92; @IIKZ93; @LSSCG00], clusters with closed shells of delocalized electrons have the spherical shape, while clusters with opened electron shells are deformed. The jellium model predicts spherical shapes for the clusters with the magic numbers $N=8, 20, 34, 40 ...$, having respectively the following electronic shells filled: $ 1s^2 1p^6, 1d^{10}2s^2, 1f^{14}, 2p^6, ...$,.
We have also found the $T_d$ symmetry group isomer for the $Na_{10}$ cluster. However, this cluster isomer is not the lowest energy isomer of $Na_{10}$ (see table \[table1\]). The similar situation occurs in the jellium model, where the $ 1s^2 1p^6, 2s^2$ closed shell electronic configuration does not minimize the cluster total energy.
Note also, that both the $LDA$ and $HF$ jellium models predict some deviation from sphericity for the $Na_{18}$ cluster [@LSSCG00] having $1d$ subshell filled, which is a result of electron configurations mixing. This fact is also in a qualitative agreement with the results of our [*ab initio*]{} calculations. The point group symmetry of the $Na_{18}$ cluster, $C_{5v}$, is lower than $T_d$, which is the point symmetry group for the $Na_8$ and $Na_{20}$ clusters, and even lower than the point symmetry group for some opened shell clusters, like $Na_7$ and $Na_{19}$, having the point symmetry group $D_{5h}$.
Note that there are some clusters possessing relatively low point symmetry group, that nevertheless is quite close to the higher point symmetry group. The higher symmetry breaking is not occasional and can be explained via the Jahn-Teller effect [@LL3]. Such situation occurs, for example, in the $Na_{9}$ and $Na_{11}$ clusters, which posses the $C_{2v}$ point symmetry group, but their geometry is close to the geometry of the $D_{3h}$ group.
The jellium prediction on the sphericity of the magic clusters works not so well for cluster ions. Indeed, the geometry and the point symmetry group of $Na_9^+$ does not allow one to state the higher sphericity of this cluster as compared to its neighbours. The analysis of the quadrupole moments and cluster deformations performed below demonstrates this conclusion quite clearly. This happens because forces emerging in the cluster during its transition from neutral to singly charged state turns out to be insufficient to rearrange the cluster geometry from deformed to spherical one.
![Averaged bonding distance as a function of cluster size for optimized geometries of neutral sodium clusters. For some cluster numbers more than one isomer has been considered. In these cases, labels indicate the point symmetry group of the corresponding isomers. Geometries of the optimized clusters one can find in figure \[geom\_neutral\].[]{data-label="dist_neutral"}](fig3.eps)
![Averaged bonding distance as a function of cluster size for optimized geometries of singly charged sodium clusters. For some cluster numbers more than one isomer has been considered. In these cases, labels indicate the point symmetry group of the corresponding isomers. Geometries of the optimized clusters one can find in figure \[geom\_ion\].[]{data-label="dist_ion"}](fig4.eps)
We have found two isomers of the $Na_{20}$ cluster, which have rather regular structure and differ significantly one from another. The cluster geometries presented in figure \[geom\_neutral\] allow one to assume that there exist at least two independent paths of the cluster structure formation. Indeed, the following isomers $$Na_6^{C_{5v}} \rightarrow Na_7
\rightarrow Na_{10}^{C_{4v}}
\rightarrow Na_{13} \rightarrow
Na_{15} \rightarrow
Na_{16} \rightarrow Na_{17} \rightarrow Na_{18} \rightarrow Na_{19}
\rightarrow Na_{20}^{C_{2v}}
%\label{path1}
%\end{eqnarray}$$ probably belong to the chain leading to the formation of the $C_{2v}$ isomer of the $Na_{20}$ cluster, while the clusters $$Na_6^{D_{3h}} \rightarrow Na_8 \rightarrow Na_{9} \rightarrow
Na_{10}^{T_{d}} \rightarrow
Na_{11}^{C_{1}} \rightarrow Na_{12} \rightarrow Na_{14} \rightarrow Na_{20}^{T_{d}}
%\label{path2}
%\end{eqnarray}$$ form the path on which the $T_d$ isomer of the $Na_{20}$ cluster is formed. Figure \[geom\_neutral\] clearly shows the steps of the cluster formation process along these two paths. Although, for most of N, we have calculated isomers belonging to one path or another, it is natural to assume that the two different type of geometries exist for all N, similar to how it happens for $Na_6$ and $Na_{20}$ clusters. For clusters smaller than $Na_6$, one can not distinguish the two paths clearly enough as it is seen from figure \[geom\_neutral\]. Conclusions made for neutral clusters regarding the growing process are applicable to the great extent to singly charged cluster ions as it is clear from figure \[geom\_ion\], although cluster ions geometries sometimes differ substantially from their neutral prototypes.
Cluster geometries allow one easily to compute and analyze the average bonding distance as a function of cluster size. The result of this analysis for neutral and singly charged sodium clusters is presented in figures \[dist\_neutral\] and \[dist\_ion\]. These figures show how the average bonding distance converge to the bulk limit indicated in the figures by horizontal lines. When calculating the average bonding distance in a cluster, interatomic distances smaller than 4.1 Å have only been considered. This upper limit on the interatomic distances has been chosen as a distance, which is 10 per cent larger than to the bcc-lattice nearest neighbour distance in the bulk sodium.
Figures \[dist\_neutral\] and \[dist\_ion\] show that the dependence of the average bonding distance, $\langle R \rangle$, on cluster size is non-monotonous. For neutral clusters, one can see odd-even oscillations of $\langle R \rangle$ atop its systematic growth and approaching the bulk limit. These features have the quantum origin and can be explained by the delocalization of valence atomic electrons. Indeed, the odd-even oscillations arise due to the spin paring of the delocalised electrons. This type of behaviour is also typical for other cluster characteristics and will be discussed below in more detail. Relatively large increase of the average distance, seen for small sodium cluster ions with $N \leq 9$, is also qualitatively clear. It can be explained by the Coulomb instability developing in the cluster with increasing its ionization rate.
![The principal values of tensor $R_{ij}$ for optimized neutral sodium clusters as a function of cluster size calculated by the $B3LYP$ method. Squares, circles and triangles represent the $R_{xx}$, $R_{yy}$ and $R_{zz}$ tensor principal values respectively. For some clusters, more than one isomer has been considered. In these cases, labels indicate the point symmetry group of the corresponding isomers. Geometries of the optimized clusters one can find in figure \[geom\_neutral\].[]{data-label="R_ten_neutral"}](fig5.eps)
![The principal values of tensor $R_{ij}$ for optimized singly charged sodium clusters as a function of cluster size calculated by the $B3LYP$ method. Squares, circles and triangles represent the $R_{xx}$, $R_{yy}$ and $R_{zz}$ tensor principal values respectively. For some clusters, more than one isomer has been considered. In these cases, labels indicate the point symmetry group of the corresponding isomers. Geometries of the optimized clusters one can find in figure \[geom\_ion\].[]{data-label="R_ten_ion"}](fig6.eps)
Cluster shape can be characterized by the oblate, prolate or triaxial deformation. The prolate deformation of the cluster is characterized by larger distortion of the ionic charge distribution along z-axis as compared to distortions along x- and y axes. In the oblate deformation case the situation is opposite. Deformations of the ionic charge distribution in x- and y- directions are larger than in z-direction. In both cases the deformations along x- and y- directions are equal. The triaxial shape deformation is characterized by unequal distortions of the ionic charge distribution along x-, y- and z- directions. Often, however, two of three deformations are close to each other and this allows one to discuss the triaxially deformed prolate or oblate cases. Knowledge of the type of the cluster deformation is quite useful for the comparison with the jellium model results and the analysis of the metal cluster photon absorption spectra by metal clusters (see [@MetCl99]).
The type of cluster deformation can be easily determined by the principle values of the tensor $R_{ij}=\sum x_i x_j$. Here, the summation is performed over all ions in the system. The principle values of this tensor $R_{xx}$, $R_{yy}$ and $R_{zz}$ define the dimensions $R_{x}$, $R_{y}$ and $R_{z}$ of the ionic charge distribution in the cluster along the principle axes $x$, $y$ and $z$ via the relations: $R_{x}= \sqrt{R_{xx}/N}$, $R_{y}= \sqrt{R_{yy}/N}$ and $R_{z}= \sqrt{R_{zz}/N}$. Note that tensor $R_{ij}$ is closely connected with the cluster moment of inertia tensor and the quadrupole moment tensor of the ionic distribution.
In figures \[R\_ten\_neutral\] and \[R\_ten\_ion\] we present the principle values $R_{xx}$, $R_{yy}$ and $R_{zz}$ for a sequence of neutral and singly charged clusters respectively. Figures \[R\_ten\_neutral\] and \[R\_ten\_ion\] demonstrate how the cluster deformation change as a function of cluster size. Figure \[R\_ten\_neutral\] shows that all three principle values are equal for the tetrahedron group isomers of the magic clusters $Na_8$ and $Na_{20}$. This feature is in the qualitative agreement with the jellium model, which predicts spherical shapes for the magic clusters. In many cases two of three principal values of $R_{ij}$ are equal or nearly equal. Using the definition of the prolate and oblate cluster distortions given above and figures \[R\_ten\_neutral\] and \[R\_ten\_ion\], one can easily determine the type of cluster deformation. For example, clusters $Na_{2}$, $Na_{10}$, $Na_{18}$ and $Na_{19}$ have the prolate deformation along z-principle axis, because the following condition $R_{xx}= R_{yy} < R_{zz}$ is fulfilled. The clusters $Na_{6}$ and $Na_{7}$ possess the prolate deformation because in this case $R_{xx}= R_{yy} > R_{zz}$. Figures \[R\_ten\_neutral\] and \[R\_ten\_ion\] show that most of clusters are triaxially deformed. However, it is often possible to assign clusters triaxially deformed prolate or oblate shape, because two of three principle values are close to each other. Thus, for instance, $Na_{4}$, $Na_{15}$ are triaxialy prolate clusters, while $Na_{14}$ is a triaxialy oblate one. Figures \[R\_ten\_neutral\] and \[R\_ten\_ion\] also show the relative value of prolate and oblate deformations in various clusters.
One can define a tensor analogous to $R_{ij}$, but for electrons. We do not plot the principle values of such a tensor because they are very close in absolute value to the principle values shown in figures \[R\_ten\_neutral\] and \[R\_ten\_ion\] and could be traced from the principle values of the cluster total quadrupole moment tensor considered below in subsection \[q\_mom\].
Binding energy per atom for small neutral and singly-charged sodium clusters.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
The binding energy per atom for small neutral and singly-charged sodium clusters is defined as follows:
$$\begin{aligned}
E_b/N=E_1-E_N/N
\label{E_b}
\\
E_b^+/N= \left((N-1)E_1+E_1^+-E_N^+\right)/N,
\label{E_b^p}\end{aligned}$$
where $E_N$ and $E_N^+$ are the energies of a neutral and singly-charged N-atomic cluster respectively. $E_1$ and $E_1^+$ are the energies of a single sodium atom and an ion.
![Binding energy per atom for neutral sodium clusters as a function of cluster size. Circles represent the binding energies per atom calculated by the $B3LYP$ method, lower and upper triangles correspond to the energies obtained by the $MP_4$ method and in the $HF$ approximation respectively. Squares show the result of the configuration interaction approach from the work by Bonačić-Kotecký [*et al*]{} (for details see [@Bonacic88; @Guest88]). Some points in figure have labels, indicating the point symmetry group of the isomers represented. Geometries of the corresponding clusters one can find in figure \[geom\_neutral\].[]{data-label="binding_neutral"}](fig7.eps)
![Binding energy per atom for singly charged sodium clusters as a function of cluster size. Circles represent the binding energies per atom calculated by the $B3LYP$ method, lower and upper triangles correspond to the energies obtained by the $MP_4$ method and in the $HF$ approximation respectively. Squares show the result of the configuration interaction approach from the work by Bonačić-Kotecký [*et al*]{} (for details see [@Bonacic88; @Guest88]). Some points in figure have labels, indicating the point symmetry group of the isomers represented. Geometries of the corresponding clusters one can find in figure \[geom\_ion\].[]{data-label="binding_ion"}](fig8.eps)
Figures \[binding\_neutral\] and \[binding\_ion\] show the dependence of the binding energy per atom for neutral and singly-charged clusters as a function of cluster size. The energies of clusters have been computed using the $B3LYP$, $MP_4$ and $HF$ methods described in section \[theory\]. For clusters with $N \leq 8$, computations of the energies have been performed by the three methods for the sake of comparison. We wanted to compare the methods by their accuracy and computation efficiency. The results of our calculations have also been compared with those derived by the configuration interaction ($CI$) method in [@Bonacic88; @Boustani87; @Boustani88]). Figures \[binding\_neutral\] and \[binding\_ion\] demonstrate that the results of the $MP_4$ and $B3LYP$ methods are in a reasonable agreement with each other and with the $CI$ results. The $HF$ points significantly differ from the $MP_4$, $B3LYP$ and $CI$ ones, which demonstrates the importance of many-electron correlations, taken into account in the $MP_4$, $B3LYP$ and $CI$ methods and omitted in the $HF$ approximation. Note that the energy of $Na_2$, if computed in the pure $HF$ approximation, is close to zero, which means that bonding in this molecule takes place mainly due to many-electron correlations.
The energies of clusters larger than $Na_8$ and $Na_8^+$ have been computed by the $B3LYP$ method only, because this method is more efficient than $MP_4$ and the accuracy of both methods is comparable.
Figures \[binding\_neutral\] and \[binding\_ion\] demonstrate the even-odd oscillation behaviour in the dependence of binding energy on cluster size. Indeed, for singly charged clusters, odd numbers corresponding to the singlet multiplicity have higher energies as compared to their even neighbours. Analogous situation takes place for neutral clusters. In this case, even cluster numbers have higher binding energies as compared to their odd neighbours. Note that for neutral clusters this phenomenon occurs simultaneously with slight systematic growth of the binding energies per atom with increasing cluster size.
Figures \[binding\_neutral\] and \[binding\_ion\] also show that the binging energy per atom in the magic neutral clusters, $Na_8$ and $Na_{20}$, is a little higher as compared to other clusters of the close size. The similar situation takes place for the $Na_9^+$ cluster in the ionic case. This feature can be qualitatively understood on the basis of the jellium model: increasing the magic clusters binding energy takes place due to the delocalised electrons shell closure. Note that the binding energy per atom for the magic $Na_{21}^+$ turns out to be smaller than that for the neighbouring cluster ions. This happens because this particular cluster ion isomer is characterized by the $O_h$ point symmetry group. Cluster isomers based on this point symmetry group usually have the lower binding energy per atom as compared to the isomers based on the icosahedron point symmetry group like those with $N \geq 13$ shown in figures \[geom\_neutral\] and \[geom\_ion\].
Tables \[table1\] and \[table2\] given in \[appendix\] provide the accurate values of the cluster total energies calculated by $MP_4$, $B3LYP$ and $HF$ methods. For neutral clusters with $N \leq 8$, we also present the cluster energies calculated in [@Bonacic88] by the $CI$ method. The values given in these tables have been used to plot figures \[binding\_neutral\] and \[binding\_ion\]. For some clusters, energies of different symmetry isomers are also given in the tables.
Ionization potentials
---------------------
Let us now consider how the ionization potentials of sodium clusters evolve with increasing cluster size. Experimentally, such a dependence has been measured for sodium clusters in [@deHeer93; @Akeby90].
The ionization potential of a cluster consisting of N atoms is defined as a difference between the energy of the singly-charged and neutral clusters:
$$IP=E_N^+-E_N
\label{IP}$$
![Ionization potentials of neutral sodium clusters as a function of cluster size. Circles show the results derived by the $B3LYP$ method. Triangles and rhomboids represent the ionization potentials calculated by the $HF$ and $MP_4$ methods respectively. Filled and open squares are the experimental values taken from [@Akeby90] and [@deHeer93] respectively. For some clusters, more than one neutral and/or singly charged cluster isomer has been considered. In these cases, labels indicate the point symmetry group of the initial neutal and the final charged cluster isomers used for the calculation of the ionization potential.[]{data-label="ionization_potential"}](fig9.eps)
Figure \[ionization\_potential\] shows the dependence of the clusters ionization potential on N. Figure \[ionization\_potential\] demonstrates the comparison of the results derived by different methods, $B3LYP$, $MP_4$ and $HF$ (see section \[theory\]), with the experimental data from [@deHeer93] and [@Akeby90]. The results of the $B3LYP$ and $MP_4$ methods are in a reasonable agreement with the experimental data, while the ionization potentials calculated on the basis of the $HF$ approximation differ substantially from the experimental observations. This comparison shows the role of many-electron correlations in the formation of the cluster ionization potentials. The correlation effects are taken into account by the $B3LYP$ and $MP_4$ methods and omitted in the $HF$ approximation.
Figure \[ionization\_potential\] demonstrates that the ionisation potentials drop with increasing cluster size, which is consistent with predictions of the classical spherical droplet model. However, this process has many irregularities, which have quantum origin. Indeed, the dependencies derived by the $MP_4$ and $B3LYP$ methods as well as the experimental one have a prominent odd-even oscillatory tendency. The maxima in these dependences correspond to the even-N-clusters, which means their higher stability as compared to the neighbouring odd-N-clusters. This happens because the multiplicities of the even- and odd-N-clusters are different, being equal to one and two correspondingly. Interestingly enough that the $B3LYP$ method reproduces correctly even the experimentally observed irregularity in the odd-even oscillatory behaviour, which happens at $N=16$ and $N=17$, and some other minor details of the experimental data.
A significant step-like decrease in the ionization potential value happens at the transition from the dimer to the trimer cluster and also in the transition from $Na_8$ to $Na_9$. Such an irregular behaviour can be explained by the closure of the electronic 1s- and 1p-shells of the delocalized electrons in the clusters $Na_2$ and $Na_8$ respectively. The next significant drop in the ionization potential value takes place in the transition from the magic $Na_{20}$ to the $Na_{21}$ cluster.
Multipole moments {#q_mom}
-----------------
We have calculated multipole moments (dipole, quadrupole, octapole and hexadecapole) for the sodium clusters those geometry is shown in figures \[geom\_neutral\] and \[geom\_ion\]. In figures \[dip\_neutral\] and \[dip\_ion\], we plot the absolute values of the dipole moments for the neutral and singly charged sodium clusters as a function of cluster size.
![Dipole moments of the optimized neutral sodium clusters as a function of cluster size calculated by the $B3LYP$ method. For some clusters, more than one isomer has been considered. In these cases, labels indicate the point symmetry group of corresponding isomers. Geometries of the optimized clusters one can find in figure \[geom\_neutral\]. 1 Debye=0.3935 a.u.[]{data-label="dip_neutral"}](fig10.eps)
![Dipole moments for the optimized singly charged sodium clusters as a function of cluster size calculated by the $B3LYP$ method. For some clusters, more than one isomer has been considered. In these cases, labels indicate the point symmetry group of corresponding isomers. Geometries of the optimized clusters one can find in figure \[geom\_ion\].[]{data-label="dip_ion"}](fig11.eps)
The dipole moments of some sodium clusters (see figure \[dip\_neutral\]), which we predict in our paper, arise due to the fact that the electron charge distribution not always matches the ionic charge distribution and can be shifted with respect to the cluster centre of mass. Our calculations show that only clusters with the C-point symmetry groups, like the isosceles triangle isomers of $Na_3$, the pentagonal $Na_6$ pyramid isomer, $Na_{12}$, $Na_{18}$ and others, possess dipole moments. These clusters have either an axis of a certain order or a plane of symmetry, but no perpendicular symmetry elements (plains or axes). This rule remains correct even for the $Na_{20}$ cluster isomer with the symmetry $C_{2v}$, which has the closed shell configuration $1s^21p^61d^{10}2s^2$ of delocalised electrons according to the jellium model. Geometries of the cluster ions differ significantly from the geometries of the corresponding neutral clusters, but the rule formulated above on the appearance of the cluster dipole moments remain valid in this case also as it is clear from figure \[dip\_ion\].
![The principal values of quadrupole moment tensor for the optimized neutral sodium clusters as a function of cluster size calculated by the $B3LYP$ method. Squares, circles and triangles represent the $Q_{xx}$, $Q_{yy}$ and $Q_{zz}$ tensor principal values respectively. For some clusters, more than one isomer has been considered. In these cases, labels indicate the point symmetry group of corresponding isomers. Geometries of the optimized clusters one can find in figure \[geom\_neutral\].[]{data-label="quad_neutral"}](fig12.eps)
![The principal values of quadrupole moment tensor for the optimized singly charged sodium clusters as a function of cluster size calculated by the $B3LYP$ method. Squares, circles and triangles represent the $Q_{xx}$, $Q_{yy}$ and $Q_{zz}$ tensor principal values respectively. For some clusters, more than one isomer has been considered. In these cases, labels indicate the point symmetry group of corresponding isomers. Geometries of the optimized clusters one can find in figure \[geom\_ion\].[]{data-label="quad_ion"}](fig13.eps)
The principal values of the quadrupole moments tensor for the optimized neutral and singly charged clusters are presented in figures \[quad\_neutral\] and \[quad\_ion\] respectively. For clusters with an axis of symmetry, this axis has been chosen as z-axis of the coordinate system, in which the calculation of the quadrupole moments has been performed. The quadrupole moment tensor is defined as an average value of the following operator: $$Q_{ij}= \sum q (3x_i x_j -\delta_{ij}{\bf r}^2)
\label{quad}$$ Here, the summation is performed over all electronic and ionic charges in the cluster. Note that the trace of the tensor $Q_{ij}$ is equal to zero.
The ionic part of $Q_{ij}$ can be expressed via the components of the tensor $R_{ij}$ discussed in section \[geom\_opt\]. Note that the knowledge of $Q_{ij}$ and $R_{ij}$ allows one to construct easily the tensor analogous to $R_{ij}$, but for electrons. This might be useful for the analysis of deformations of electron density distribution in a cluster.
The quadrupole moment tensor can be expressed via the tensor $\tilde Q_{ij}=\langle\sum q x_i x_j \rangle$, characterising the averaged dimensions of the total charge distribution. Here, brackets mean averaging over the electronic charge distribution. The principal values of the tensor $\tilde Q_{ij}$ should be negative at least for neutral clusters, because electron density is spilled out of the cluster, which makes its distribution a little broader than the distribution of ions. The similar situation takes place for cluster ions, but in this case there is non-compensated positive charge in the system, which brings certain positive contribution to $\tilde Q_{ij}$ and makes the principal values of $\tilde Q_{ij}$ positive in some cases.
The numerical analysis performed in this work shows that for neutral sodium clusters the principal values of $\tilde Q_{ij}$ are always negative, while for the small cluster ions: $Na_2^+$, $Na_3^+$ and $Na_4^+$ ($C_{2v}$), some of the principal values are positive.
The principle values of the quadrupole moment tensor characterize the distortion of the total cluster charge distribution. Indeed, figure \[quad\_neutral\] shows that the $Na_8$ and $Na_{20}$ tetrahedron group isomers have the zero quadrupole moments, which reflect the closeness to sphericity of the magic clusters. Our calculations demonstrate that for some open shell clusters like $Na_{11}$ and $Na_{12}$ the quadrupole moments turn out to be rather small, although the ionic charge distribution in these clusters has the prominent deformation as it is clear from figures \[geom\_neutral\] and \[R\_ten\_neutral\]. The small quadrupole moments in these clusters is the result of compensation of the electron and ion components of $Q_{ij}$.
The quadrupole moments diagram allows one to make some conclusions on the type of the shape of the total charge distribution in a cluster. The averaged dimensions of the cluster total charge distribution in x-, y- and z- directions can be characterized by quantities $Q^\parallel_z =\tilde Q_{zz} = \langle \sum e z^2 \rangle$, $Q^\perp_x = \tilde Q_{xx} =\langle \sum e x^2 \rangle$ and $Q^\perp_y= \tilde Q_{yy} = \langle\sum e y^2 \rangle$. Here, the summation is performed over all electrons and ions in the cluster and brackets mean averaging. These quantities are connected with the quadrupole moments tensor defined in (\[quad\]). Indeed, in both the prolate and oblate cases, when $Q^\perp_x = Q^\perp_y = Q^\perp$ and $Q^\parallel_z = Q^\parallel$, the principal values of the tensor $Q_{ij}$ read as
$$\begin{aligned}
Q_{zz}& = & 2 (Q^\parallel - Q^\perp)
\nonumber
\\
Q_{xx}& = & ( Q^\perp - Q^\parallel ) =- \frac{ Q_{zz}}{2}
\nonumber
\\
Q_{yy}&=& Q_{xx} = - \frac{ Q_{zz}}{2}
\label{quad_prol}\end{aligned}$$
These equations define the important relationships between the principal values of the quadrupole moments tensor in the oblate and prolate cases and help understanding the quadrupole moments diagrams shown in figures \[quad\_neutral\] and \[quad\_ion\].
Equations (\[quad\_prol\]) show that the sign of the principal values $Q_{xx}$, $Q_{yy}$ and $Q_{zz}$ depends on the relative value of $Q^\parallel$ and $Q^\perp$. With the use of equations (\[quad\_prol\]) and the cluster quadrupole moment diagrams shown in figures \[quad\_neutral\] and \[quad\_ion\], one can easily analyse the total charge distribution of the clusters shown in figures \[geom\_neutral\] and \[geom\_ion\]. Note that conclusions made on the shape of the total charge distribution and the shape of ionic component (see figures \[R\_ten\_neutral\] and \[R\_ten\_ion\]) sometimes differ significantly one from another for some clusters. For example, the ionic charge distribution in the $Na_{12}$ cluster has a prolate shape, while the total charge distribution is oblate.
The quadrupole moments of singly charged sodium clusters differ substantially from those for the corresponding neutral ones. The excessive positive charge leads to the rearrangement of the cluster structure and to the appearance of the quadrupole moment in the cluster ions like $Na_8^+$ and $Na_{20}^+$. Although, the electron exchange-correlation force in a cluster turns out to be insufficient to change the cluster geometry so significantly to make the magic cluster ion $Na_9^+$, having the closed shell electronic structure of delocalised electron, spherical-like without quadrupole moment. Instead, $Na_9^+$ remains a noticeable deformation.
Let us now discuss the idea for which the cluster multipole moments play the crucial role and consider the possibility of the cluster isomers separation by placing the mass selected cluster beam in the inhomogeneous external field. As we have seen from the calculations presented above, different cluster isomers of the same mass often possess different structure and as a result of that different multipole moments (dipole or quadrupole). However, such cluster isomers are indistinguishable in the nowadays experiments with mass selected cluster beams. They can nevertheless be separated if one puts the mass selected cluster beam in the inhomogeneous external field. Let us estimate this effect for the characteristic values of the dipole and quadrupole moments calculated above.
From the dipole moments diagrams shown in figures \[dip\_neutral\] and \[dip\_ion\] one can conclude that the difference in dipole moments for some cluster isomers can be as large as $1 Debye$ and for the quadrupole often it is about $40 Debye\cdot$Åor even larger. The force acting on the cluster with the dipole moment ${\bf D}$ in an external inhomogeneous electric field ${\bf E}({\bf r})$ is equal to [@LL2] $${\bf F}^D({\bf r})= {\bf \nabla}
\{ {\bf D} \cdot {\bf E} ({\bf r}) \}.
\label{f_dip}$$ The components of the force acting on the cluster with quadrupole moment $Q_{ij}$ is as follows [@LL2] $$F^Q_{i}({\bf r})= {\bf \nabla}_i
\{ \frac{ Q_{jk}}{6} {\bf \nabla}_j E_k ({\bf r}) \}.
\label{f_quad}$$ Here, the summation is assumed over the repeated indices j and k of the vector and tensor components in the right hand side of (\[f\_quad\]).
Let us introduce the time period $\tau$ during which the cluster beam passes the inhomogeneous electric field. One can estimate the distance $\Delta$ on which isomers will be separated during this period of time as $\Delta \sim F \tau^2 /2 M$, where $M$ is the mass of the isomer considered and $F$ is the force acting on either the dipole (see (\[f\_dip\])) or quadrupole (see (\[f\_quad\])) moment of the cluster. Substituting in these equations the characteristic values for the dipole and quadrupole moments, assuming that the inhomogeneity of the electric field is about $\nabla E \sim 5 \cdot 10^3 V/cm^2$, one derives from (\[f\_dip\]) (\[f\_quad\]) that during the period $\tau \sim 10^{-3} s$ the isomers with $N=3$ and $\delta D\sim 1 Debye$ become separated on $\Delta \sim 0.7 mm$ and that $\Delta \sim 2.8 mm$ for $\delta Q\sim 40 Debye \cdot$Å, $\tau\sim 10 s$, $N=5$ and no dipole moment.
These estimates demonstrate that one can create significant separation distances for reasonably short periods of time with the electric field strengths and their gradients achievable in laboratory conditions. The experiments with mass selected and isomer separated cluster beams could provide the most accurate information on the structure and properties of atomic clusters.
Polarizabilities
----------------
We have calculated the polarizabilities for the optimized neutral sodium clusters (see figure \[geom\_neutral\]) as a function of cluster size. Results of this calculation are shown in figure \[polar\]. In this figure, we also plot experimental points from [@Knight85]. Calculation of the polarizabilities has been performed by the $B3LYP$ method. Figure \[polar\] demonstrates quite reasonable agreement of the $B3LYP$ results with the experimental data.
![Static mean polarizability per atom for neutral sodium clusters normalized to the polarizability of a single sodium atom. Circles show the results derived in this work by the $B3LYP$ method. For some clusters, more than one isomer has been considered. In these cases, labels indicate the point symmetry group of corresponding isomers. Stars and triangles represent the polarizabilities calculated in [@Rayane99] and [@Kummel00] respectively. Squares are the experimental values taken from [@Knight85].[]{data-label="polar"}](fig14.eps)
In figure \[polar\] we also compare the polarizabilities calculated in our work with those derived by other theoretical methods [@Rayane99; @Kummel00]. This figure demonstrates a satisfactory agreement of the results of different approaches with each other and with the experimental data. This comparison is quite important, because in our work as well as in [@Rayane99] the polarizabilities have been calculated using all electron [*ab initio*]{} approach, while in [@Kummel00] they were obtained with the use of pseudopotentials. Note that our points are closer to the experimental values than those from [@Rayane99], in spite of the fact that both calculations have been performed on the basis of the density functional theory. The difference between the two schemes of calculation arise in the form of the density functional and the emploied set of the basis functions. In [@Rayane99], the so-called Perdew-Wang-91 density functional [@PerWan] was used, while we applied its $B3LYP$ form.
Let us also compare the polarizabilities for the $Na_8$ and $Na_{20}$ clusters calculated in the random phase approximation with exchange in the spherical jellium model, $\alpha_{Na_8}= 755 a.u.$ and $\alpha_{Na_{20}}= 1808 a.u.$ [@Guet95], with our results: $\alpha_{Na_8}= 797 a.u.$ and $\alpha_{Na_{20}}= 1964 a.u.$ The closeness of the values show that the detailed ionic core structure does not influence much the value of the clusters polarizabilities. This comparison shows that the jellium model turns out to be quite a reasonable approximation.
Figure \[polar\] shows that the disagreement between theoretical and experimental points is not always less than the experimental error bars. Such a disagreement might indicate that for certain $N$ there have been experimentally detected cluster isomers other than those calculated in our work. For example, the calculated value $\alpha_{Na_6}^{C_{5v}}= 659 a.u.$ lies beyond the experimental error bars, while $\alpha_{Na_6}^{D_{3h}}=706.876 a.u.$ is within the range of the experimental error.
Note that the polarizabilities of clusters $Na_{8}$, $Na_{10}$ and $Na_{20}$, possessing the $T_d$ point symmetry group, surpass a little the corresponding experimental values, being quite close to them. For the $Na_{8}$ and $Na_{10}$ clusters, the disagreement of the theoretical and experimental values is within the range of the experimental error. The similar situation occurs for the $Na_{14}$ cluster, characterized by the $C_{2v}$ point symmetry group. This cluster likely belongs to the cluster chain leading to the formation of the tetrahedron $Na_{20}$ cluster from the tetrahedron $Na_{8}$ one (see our discussion in section \[geom\_opt\]). Such a situation allows us to assume that the polarizabilities of other clusters of this chain, which we have not analized in this paper, because they are energetically not favorable, will be also quite close to the experiment.
Normal vibration modes
----------------------
Using the $B3LYP$ method, we have calculated the normal vibration frequencies for the optimized neutral sodium clusters. The results of this calculation are shown in figure \[norm\_freq\]. In this figure, we indicate the point symmetry group for those clusters for which more than one cluster isomer has been considered (see figure \[geom\_neutral\]). Numerous frequencies shown in figure \[norm\_freq\] are degenerate or nearly degenerate. This explains why the total number of frequencies for most of clusters is less than the number of vibrational degrees of freedom available in the system. In the more symmetric clusters, like $Na_7$, $Na_8$, $Na_{10}$ or $Na_{20}$, the rate of generacy of the normal vibration modes is higher.
![Normal vibration frequencies calculated by the $B3LYP$ method for the neutral sodium clusters with $N \leq 20$. For each cluster we mark the breathing mode in the spectrum by dotted line and the surface quadrupole vibration modes by dashed lines. The number near some of the lines indicate the degeneracy of the corresponding mode. Note that we make this only for quadrupole surface vibration modes.[]{data-label="norm_freq"}](fig15.eps)
![Surface and volume vibration modes for the selected neutral sodium clusters. Number near each cluster image indicates the frequency of the corresponding normal vibration mode. The values are given in $cm^{-1}$.[]{data-label="norm_mod"}](fig16.eps)
Knowledge of normal vibration modes and their frequencies is important for physical understanding and quantitative description of the relaxation of electron plasmon excitations in metal clusters [@GISG00]. One can visualize normal vibration modes, showing the directions and amplitudes of the atoms displacements by corresponding vectors. Since it is difficult to show all such pictures in this paper due to their large number. We focus instead only on the two types of modes breathing and quadrupole surface vibration modes. Namely these modes have been considered in [@GISG00] within the dynamical jellium model [@GSG99] for the treatment of the electron-phonon coupling in the spherical metal clusters $Na_{20}$, $Na_{40}$ and $Na_{92}$.
In this paper, we discuss the appearance of these specific vibration modes in a cluster system and compare their frequencies with the predictions made in [@GISG00] on the basis of the jellium model. For this purpose, we have analysed all calculated vibration modes and identified the breathing and three quadrupole vibrations for each cluster. In figure \[norm\_mod\], we present images of the breathing and quadrupole vibration modes for some clusters to illustrate the way, how the identification of the modes has been performed. This figure shows that the identification made is definite enough.
The results of this analysis are shown in figure \[norm\_freq\], where for each cluster we mark the breathing mode in the spectrum by dotted line and the surface quadrupole vibration modes by dashed lines. The number near some of the lines indicate the degeneracy of the corresponding modes. Note that we make this only for quadrupole surface vibration modes. The degeneracy rate and the number of quadrupole surface vibration modes can be easily understood with the help of the cluster images shown in figure \[geom\_neutral\]. This figure shows that the prototype of the breathing mode exists already in the $Na_3$ and $Na_4$ clusters. For the $Na_4$ cluster, one can identify the quadrupole surface vibration mode, although it is meaningful to discuss surface vibrations only for the $Na_6$ cluster and larger. Figure \[norm\_freq\] shows the frequencies of the breathing and surface vibration modes decrease systematically with increasing cluster size, although this decrease has numerous irregularities, particularly for the clusters with $N < 8$. The frequency of the breathing mode decreases faster with the growth of $N$ than the frequency of the quadrupole surface vibration mode.
Let us compare the calculated frequencies of the breathing and surface vibration modes with the predictions of the jellium model. In [@GISG00], it was shown that the breathing vibration mode frequencies calculated for the spherical $Na_{20}$, $Na_{40}$ and $Na_{92}$ respectively within the framework of the dynamical jellium model are quite close to the values derived from the phonon dispersion law for metals [@Kittel]
$$\Omega^2=\frac{3v_F^2k^2}{M_{Na}(9+k^2v_F^2r_0^3)},
\label{v_freq}$$
where $M_{Na}=4.2\cdot 10^4$ is the mass of sodium atom, $v_F=(9\pi
/4)^{1/3}/r_0$ is the velocity of cluster electrons on the Fermi surface, $r_0$ is the Wigner-Seitz radius. In the long wave limit, equation (\[v\_freq\]) reduces to the Bohm-Staver formula for the velocity of sound, $d\Omega /dk=v_F/\sqrt{3M_{Na}}\approx 3\cdot
10^5cm/s$. This number is quite close to the real value of the velocity of sound in the bulk sodium: $3.2\cdot 10^5cm/s$.
Using the dispersion low (\[v\_freq\]), we estimate the breathing mode frequencies for the magic $Na_8$ and $Na_{20}$ clusters. The results of this calculation are as follows $\Omega_{Na_8}= 104.09 cm^{-1}$, $\Omega_{Na_{20}}= 80.49 cm^{-1}$. In this calculation we have used $r_0= 4$.
The frequency values obtained from (\[v\_freq\]) are close to those presented in figure \[norm\_freq\], $\Omega_{Na_8}=127.15 cm^{-1}$, $\Omega_{Na_{20}}=78.11 cm^{-1}$. The agreement of the frequencies is rather good for the $Na_{20}$ cluster case. For $Na_{8}$, the agreement is reasonable, but not as good as for $Na_{20}$. Some disagreement arises due to the fact that the Wigner-Seitz radius for the $Na_{8}$ cluster is about 10% smaller than its bulk value. Indeed, substituting $r_0=3.6$ in (\[v\_freq\]) one derives $\Omega_{Na_{8}}=127.10 cm^{-1}$, which is in the nearly perfect agreement with the [*ab initio*]{} result. The decrease of the Wigner-Seitz radius can be easily understood from the analysis of the cluster geometry shown in figure \[geom\_neutral\].
Now let us compare the quadrupole surface vibration mode frequencies calculated in our paper (see figure \[norm\_freq\]) with those following from the dynamical jellium model. According to [@GISG00], the quadrupole surface vibration frequencies, $\Omega_2$, for the spherical $Na_{20}$, $Na_{40}$ and $Na_{92}$ clusters are equal to $56.48 cm^{-1}$, $48.41 cm^{-1}$ and $32.28 cm^{-1}$, respectively. The value of the quadrupole surface vibration frequency for the $Na_{20}$ cluster calculated in the present work is equal to $63.15 cm^{-1}$, which is rather close to the value predicted in [@GISG00].
The values of the quadrupole surface vibration frequencies calculated for $Na_{20}$, $Na_{40}$ and $Na_{92}$ show relatively slow decrease with the growth cluster size. Extrapolating these values towards smaller cluster sizes, we derive frequency values, which are consistent with those shown in figure \[norm\_freq\]. This comparison demonstrates that the jellium model calculation of the surface vibration frequencies is in a reasonable agreement with the more accurate [*ab initio*]{} many-body theory.
The comparison of the jellium model results with those derived by the more accurate [*ab initio*]{} many-body theory is important, because it forms theoretical background for the jellium model calculations in larger cluster systems, for which [*ab initio*]{} methods are hardly possible. The comparison with the jellium model, which we performed in this paper, can be extended towards larger cluster sizes and other collective modes of ions motion.
Conclusion
==========
In this paper we have calculated the optimized structure and various characteristics of sodium clusters consisting of up to 20 atoms. We have used three different methods: $B3LYP$, $MP_4$ and $HF$. It was demonstrated that the first two methods due to accounting for many-electron correlations provide much better agreement with the available experimental data and theoretical results based of the configuration interaction method as compared to that for the Hartree-Fock approximation. This was checked for various cluster characteristics: cluster geometries, binding energies per atom and the ionization potentials.
We have also calculated and analyzed the dependence of the ionic component and total quadrupole moments of sodium clusters as a function of their size. It was demonstrated that the cluster shapes characterized by the quadrupole moments are in a reasonable agreement with the predictions of the jellium model and the results of the experimental observations.
We have determined the normal vibration modes and their frequencies for a number of clusters and demonstrated their qualitative agreement with the predictions based on the jellium model.
The results of this work can be extended in various directions. One can use the similar methods to study structure and properties of various types of clusters. It is interesting to extend calculations towards larger cluster sizes and perform more comparison with the results following from the jellium model and other simplified theories, based either on pseudopotentials or effective interatomic potentials. A lot of novel problems arise, when considering collisions and electron excitations in the clusters with the optimized geometries. These and many more other problems on atomic cluster physics can be tackled with the use of methods considered in our work.
Acknowledgements
================
The authors acknowledge support from the INTAS, the Volkswagen Foundation, the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation and DAAD.
References {#references .unnumbered}
==========
[99]{}
Knight W D, Clemenger K, de Heer W A , Saunders W A , Chou M Y and Cohen M L 1984 [*Phys. Rev. Lett.*]{} [**52**]{} 2141 Bréchignac C, Cahuzac Ph, Carlier F, Leygnier J 1989 [*Chem. Phys. Lett.*]{} [**164**]{} 433 Selby K, Vollmer M, Masui J, Kresin V, de Heer W A, and Knight W D 1989 [*Phys. Rev.*]{} B [**40**]{} 5417 Selby K, Kresin V, Masui J, Vollmer M, de Heer W A, Scheidemann A, Knight W D 1991 [*Phys. Rev.*]{} B [**43**]{} 4565 Bertsch G F, Bulcac A, Tomanek D, Wang Y 1992 [*Phys. Rev. Lett.*]{} [**67**]{} 1991 Hertel I V, Steger H, de Vries J, Weisser B, Menzel C, Kamke B and Kamke W 1992 [*Phys. Rev. Lett*]{} [**68**]{} 784 Herlert A, Krückeberg S, Schweikhard L, Vogel M, Walther C 1999 [*Physica Scripta*]{} T [**80**]{} 200 de Heer W A 1993 [*Rev. Mod. Phys.*]{} [**65**]{} 611 Brack M 1993 [*Rev. Mod. Phys.*]{} [**65**]{} 677 Bréchignac C, Connerade J P 1994 [*J.Phys.B:At.Mol.Opt.Phys.*]{} [**27**]{} 3795 Haberland H (ed.) 1994 [*Clusters of Atoms and Molecules, Theory, Experiment and Clusters of Atoms*]{} (Springer Series in Chemical Physics [**52**]{}) (Berlin: Springer) Näher U, Bjørnholm S, Frauendorf S, Garcias F and Guet C 1997 [*Physics Reports*]{} [**285**]{} 245 Ekardt W (ed.) 1999 [*Metal Clusters*]{} (New York: Wiley) Proceedings of the Les Houches 2000 Summer School [*Atomic Clusters and Nanoparticles*]{} July 2000 (Les Houches, France) (to be published in EDP Sciences and Springer Verlag) Boustani I, Pewestorf W, Fantucci P, Bonačić-Kotecký V, Kotecký J 1987 [*Phys. Rev.*]{} B [**35**]{} 9437 Bonačić-Kotecký V, Fantucci P, Kotecký J 1988 [*Phys. Rev.*]{} B [**37**]{} 4369 Boustani I, Kotecký J 1988 [*J. Chem. Phys.*]{} [**88**]{} 5657 Bonačić-Kotecký V, Boustani I, Guest M F, Kotecký J 1988 [*J. Chem. Phys.*]{} [**89**]{} 4861 Rayane D [et al.]{} 1999 [*Eur. Phys. J.*]{} [**D9**]{} 243 Akeby H, Panas I, Petterson L G M, Siegbahn P, Wahlgreen U 1990 [*J. Chem. Phys.*]{} [**94**]{} 5471 Knight W D, Clemenger K, de Heer W A, Saunders W A 1985 [*Phys. Rev.*]{} B [**31**]{} 2539 Br[é]{}chignac C, Cahuzac Ph, Leygnier J and Weiner J 1492 [*J. Chem. Phys.*]{} [**90**]{} 1492 Br[é]{}chignac C, Cahuzac Ph, Carlier F, de Frutos M and Leygnier J 1990 [*J. Chem. Phys.*]{} [**93**]{} 7449 Br[é]{}chignac C, Cahuzac Ph, Carlier F, Leygnier J and Sarfati A 1991 [*Phys. Rev.*]{} B [**44**]{} 11386 de Heer W A, Selby K, Kresin V, Masui J, Vollmer, Chatelain A and Knight W D 1987 1805 Martins J L, Buttet J and Car R 1985 [*Phys. Rev.*]{} B [**31**]{} 1804 Spiegelmann F, Poteau R, Montag B, Reinhard P-G, 1998 [*Physics Letters*]{} [**A242**]{} 163 Nogueira F, Martins J L and Fiolhais C, 1999 [*Eur. Phys. J.*]{} [**D9**]{} 229 Gutié rrez R, Grossmann F, Knospe O, Schmidt R 2001 [*Phys. Rev.*]{} [**A64**]{} 013202 Blundell S A, Guet C, Rajendra R Zope 2000 [*Phys. Rev. Lett.*]{} [**84**]{} 4826 Kronik L, Vasiliev I and Chelikowsky J R 2000 [*Phys. Rev.*]{} [**B62**]{} 9992 Kü mmel S, Berkus T, Reinhard P-G and Brack M 2000 [*Eur. Phys. J.*]{} [**D11**]{} 239 Kü mmel S, Akola J and Manninen M 2000 [*Phys. Rev. Lett.*]{} [**84**]{} 3827 Martins J L, Car R and Buttet J 1981 [*Surf. Sci.*]{} [**106**]{} 265 Hintermann A and Manninen M 1983 B [**27**]{} 7262 Ekardt W 1984 [*Phys. Rev.*]{} B [**29**]{} 1558 Ekardt W 1985 B [**32**]{} 1961 Guet C and Johnson W R 1992 B [**45**]{} 283 Ivanov V K, Ipatov A N, Kharchenko V A, Zhizhin M L 1993 [*Pis’ma JETPh*]{} (in Russian) [**58**]{} 649; 1994 A [**50**]{} 1459 Lyalin A G, Semenov S K, Solov’yov A V, Cherepkov N A and Greiner W 2000 3653 Gerchikov L G, Solov’yov A V, Greiner W 1999 [*International Journal of Modern Physics E*]{} [**8**]{} 289 Gerchikov L G, Ipatov A N, Solov’yov A V and Greiner W 2000 [*J. Phys. B: At. Mol. Opt. Phys.*]{} [**33**]{} 4905-4926 Ivanov V K 1996 [*Correlations in Clusters and Related Systems*]{} ed. J-P Connerade (Singapore: Worls Scientific) pp 73-91 Bertsch G F, Bulgac A, Tomanek D and Wang Y 1991 [*Phys. Rev. Lett.*]{} [**67**]{} 2690 Ivanov V K, Kashenock G Yu, Polozkov R G, Solov’yov A V 2001 [*accepted as Letter to the Editor in J. Phys. B: At. Mol. Opt. Phys.*]{} Gerchikov L G, Connerade J P, Solov’yov A V and Greiner W 1997 [*J. Phys. B: At. Mol. Opt. Phys.*]{} [**30**]{} 4133-4161 Gerchikov L G, Efimov P V, Mikoushkin V M and Solov’yov A V 1998 [*Phys. Rev. Lett.*]{} [**81**]{} 2707-2710. Gerchikov L G, Ipatov A N and Solov’yov A V 1997 [*J. Phys. B: At. Mol. Opt. Phys.*]{} [**30**]{} 5939-59359 Gerchikov L G, Ipatov A N, Solov’yov A V and Greiner W 1998 [*J. Phys. B: At. Mol. Opt. Phys.*]{} [**31**]{} 3065-3077 Gerchikov L G, Ipatov A N, Polozkov R G and Solov’yov A V 2000 [*Phys. Rev.*]{} A [**62**]{} 043201 Connerade J P, Gerchikov L G, Ipatov A N and Solov’yov A V 1998 [*J. Phys. B: At. Mol. Opt. Phys.*]{} [**31**]{} L27-L34 Connerade J P, Gerchikov L G, Ipatov A N and Solov’yov A V 1999 [*J. Phys. B: At. Mol. Opt. Phys.*]{} [**32**]{} 877-894 Gerchikov L G and Solov’yov A V 1997 [*Z. Phys. D: Atoms, Molecules, Clusters*]{} [**42**]{} 279-287 Gerchikov L G, Ipatov A N and Solov’yov A V 1998 [*J. Phys. B: At. Mol. Opt. Phys.*]{} [**31**]{} 2331-2341 Solov’yov A V, “Electron scattering on metal clusters and fullerenes”, in Proceedings of the Les Houches 2000 Summer School [*Atomic Clusters and Nanoparticles*]{} July 2000 (Les Houches, France) (to be published in EDP Sciences and Springer Verlag) Frisch M J, Trucks G W and [*et al*]{} 1998 [*Gaussian 98*]{} (Revision A.9) Gaussian Inc. Pittsburgh PA Lindgren I and Morrison J 1986 [*Atomic Many-Body Theory*]{} (Springer-Verlag, New York Heidelberg Berlin). James B. Foresman and Æleen Frisch [*Exploring Chemistry with Electronic Structure Methods*]{} 1996 (Pittsburgh, PA: Gaussian Inc) Møller C and Plesset M S 1934 [*Phys. Rev.*]{} [**46**]{}, 618 Landau L D and Lifshitz E M 1965 [*Quantum Mechanics*]{} (London: Pergamon) Becke A D 1988 [*Phys. Rev.*]{} A [**38**]{}, 30098 Burke K, Perdew J P and Wang Y, in Electronic Density Functional Theory: Recent Progress and New Directions, Ed. Dobson J F, Vignale G and Das M P 1998 (Plenum) Lee C, Yang W and Parr R G 1988 a functional of the electron density“, [*Phys. Rev.*]{} B [**37**]{} 785 Vosko S H, Wilk L and Nusair M 1980 critical analysis”, [*Canadian J. Phys.*]{} [**58**]{} 1200 Landau L D and Lifshitz E M 1959 [*The Classical Theory of Fields*]{} (London: Pergamon) Madjet M, Guet C and Johnson W R 1995 [*Phys. Rev.*]{} A [**51**]{} 1327 Kittel C 1967 [*Introduction to Solid state Physics*]{} (London: John Wiley & Sons)
Tables {#appendix}
======
In Appendix, we present tables of the essential cluster characteristics. The binding energies per atom for neutral and singly charged clusters are compiled in tables \[table1\] and \[table2\]. The principal values of the quadrupole moment tensor for neutral and singly charged clusters are presented in tables \[table3\] and \[table4\].
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: |
In nanophotonics, multipole approach has become an indispensable theoretical framework for analyzing subwavelength meta-atoms and their radiation properties. Thus far, induced multipole moments have frequently used to illustrate the radiating properties of the meta-atoms, but they are excited at a specific illumination and do not fully represent anisotropic meta-atoms. On the other hand, dynamic polarizability ($\boldsymbol{\alpha}$) tensors contain complete scattering information of the meta-atoms, but have not often been considered due to complicated retrieval procedures. In this study, we suggest that exact higher-order $\boldsymbol{\alpha}$-tensor can be efficiently obtained from $\mathbf{T}$-matrix using simple basis transformation. These higher-order $\boldsymbol{\alpha}$-tensors are necessary to describe recently reported coupled plasmonic and high-refractive-index particles, which we demonstrate from their retrieved $\boldsymbol{\alpha}$-tensors. Finally, we show that description of meta-atoms using $\boldsymbol{\alpha}$-tensors incorporated with multiple-scattering theory vastly extends the applicability of the multipole approach in nanophotonics, allowing accurate and efficient depiction of complicated, random, multi-scale systems.
Usage
: Preprint.
author:
- Jungho Mun
- Sunae So
- Jaehyuck Jang
- Junsuk Rho
bibliography:
- 'apssamp.bib'
title: 'Describing meta-atoms using the exact higher-order polarizability tensors'
---
Introduction
============
Under the paradigm of metamaterial, its constituent meta-atoms and their configurations determine the material properties. The meta-atoms have been efficiently analyzed using the multipole decomposition technique [@Muhlig2011; @Grahn2012], because a few low-order multipole moments efficiently reconstruct the electromagnetic radiation and the relevant physics from a subwavelength localized current-charge source. Due to this feature, the multipole approach has become an useful and indispensable tool for nanophotonics [@Liu2017]. Manipulation of light in the nanoscale has been facilitated by interference of multipole radiations, which provides the underlying principles behind many optical phenomena and relevant applications. Notably, the multipole approach has given insights on directional scattering [@Liu2018], lattice Kerker effects [@Babicheva2017], non-radiating anapoles [@Gurvitz2019; @Baryshnikova2019], lattice invisiblity effects [@Terekhov2019], Fano-like resonances [@Gallinet2011a; @Suryadharma2019], optical anti-ferromagnetism [@Liu2017], optical nonlinearity [@Smirnova2016], radiative heat transfer, weak localization [@Mishchenko2008], photonic topological insulators [@Pocock2018], and bound states in the continuum [@Sadrieva2019].
Formulation of multipole radiation is a textbook problem [@Jackson1999], but given the importance of the multipole approach, expressions for multipoles are still under research [@Alaee2018; @Fruhnert2017; @Grahn2012] with possibility on toroidal multipoles as an extra multipole family [@Savinov2019; @Gurvitz2019]. In general, the multipoles under discussion are excited at a specific illumination, but they do not provide complete information of highly anisotropic meta-atoms. On the other hand, dynamic polarizability $\boldsymbol{\alpha}$ tensor (or transition $\mathbf{T}$ matrix) maps the induced multipole modes at arbitrary incident fields, and has been used to treat scattering objects in many different fields including optics, acoustics, and astrophysics [@DeVries1998; @Mishchenko2008; @Mishchenko2010]. In nanophotonics, analysis of meta-atoms based on their $\mathbf{T}$-matrix started to become remarked rather recently [@Fruhnert2017; @Suryadharma2017]. It has been pointed out that complicated coupled configurations involving multiple meta-atoms can be efficiently studied by describing the meta-atoms in terms of $\boldsymbol{\alpha}$-tensor (or $\mathbf{T}$-matrix) and using the multiple-scattering theory (MST) [@Fruhnert2017]. Electromagnetically coupled discrete scattering objects can be self-consistently treated to describe for collective responses of multiple particles [@DeAbajo1999; @Stout2008; @Stout2011] and periodic particle arrays [@DeAbajo2007; @Baur2018; @Evlyukhin2010; @Babicheva2018; @Babicheva2019; @MahdiSalary2017; @Watson2017], and this approach significantly reduces the calculation loads for complicated, random [@Rahimzadegan2019; @Jenkins2018], or multi-scale systems [@Pattelli2018; @Govorov2010; @Wu2015].
In the following work, we first discuss induced multipoles in different expressions: approximate Cartesian, exact Cartesian, and spherical multipoles, where exact Cartesian and spherical multipoles are essentially identical with different choice of basis [@Alaee2018]. In the next section, we present expression of local fields and field gradients in terms of spherical multipoles. This naturally leads us to obtain transformation between $\boldsymbol{\alpha}$-tensor and $\mathbf{T}$-matrix. This basis transformation is used to analyze meta-atoms based on their $\boldsymbol{\alpha}$-tensors, whose properties can be intuitively interpreted due to the Cartesian basis. Finally, we show that the MST allows efficient and accurate description of electromagnetically coupled meta-atoms, and that analytic scattering objects can be implemented under the multipole approach.
Exact Cartesian multipoles
==========================
In standard electrodynamic textbooks, the spherical multipoles appear from the multipole decomposition of electromagnetic fields using the vector spherical wave functions (VSWFs) as the basis [@Jackson1999]. Because the VSWFs span the vector fields satisfying the transverse Helmholtz type equations, the electromagnetic fields in a homogeneous media can be exactly reconstructed, and the renowned Mie theory is also based on this expansion. Because of the difficulty in interpreting the spherical basis, the spherical multipoles are not directly analyzed per se, but their associated scattering power or radiation fields are.
Therefore, multipole approach in nanophotonics most frequently utilizes the approximate expressions for localized charge-current density multipoles in the Cartesian basis, which are sufficiently straightforward and resemble the expressions in electrostatics and magnetostatics. Despite their popularity, the approximate Cartesian multipoles cannot *exactly* reconstruct the electrodynamic radiation fields and the related scattering phenomena [@Alaee2018]. Scattering from subwavelength nanoparticles with moderate refractive-index generally shows good agreement, but the error grows for larger particles and high-refractive-index particles. This error has been corrected by toroidal multipoles, which appear from multipole decomposition of the localized current sources [@Gurvitz2019; @Talebi2018; @Baryshnikova2019; @Evlyukhin2016]. However, it has been pointed out that the radiation fields from toroidal multipoles do not have independent (orthogonal) basis to those from electric and magnetic multipoles [@Alaee2018]. Therefore, it is controversial whether to treat the toroidal multipoles as the third multipole family [@Savinov2019], or as a correction to the basic Cartesian multipoles.
Recently, exact expressions for the localized charge-current density multipoles in the Cartesian basis up to MQ were developed without relying on the toroidal multipoles [@Alaee2018; @Fernandez-Corbaton2015]. For completeness, we present expressions of the exact Cartesian multipoles up to MO as
$$\begin{aligned}
\begin{split} d^E_\alpha &=
-\frac{1}{i\omega}
\int{{\mathrm{d}^3\mathbf{r}~}\Bigg\{
J_\alpha j_0(kr)
+\frac{k^2}{2}\Big[3 {\mathbf{(r \cdot J)}}r_\alpha-r^2J_\alpha\Big]
\frac{j_2(kr)}{(kr)^2}
\Bigg\}}
\end{split}\\
\begin{split} d^M_\alpha &=
\frac{3}{2}
\int{{\mathrm{d}^3\mathbf{r}~}{\mathbf{(r \times J)}}_\alpha \frac{j_1(kr)}{kr}}
\end{split}\\
\begin{split} Q^E_{\alpha\beta} &=
-\frac{3}{i\omega}
\int{\mathrm{d}^3\mathbf{r}~}{\Bigg\{}
\Big[r_\alpha J_\beta + r_\beta J_\alpha
-\frac{2}{3}\delta_{\alpha\beta}{\mathbf{(r \cdot J)}}\Big]
\frac{j_1(kr)}{kr}\\
&\hspace{5mm}
+2k^2\Big[5{\mathbf{(r \cdot J)}}r_\alpha r_\beta
-r^2(r_\alpha J_\beta+r_\beta J_\alpha)
-r^2\delta_{\alpha\beta}{\mathbf{(r \cdot J)}}\Big]
\frac{j_3(kr)}{(kr)^3}
{\Bigg\}}
\end{split}\\
\begin{split} Q^M_{\alpha\beta} &= 5
\int{{\mathrm{d}^3\mathbf{r}~}{\Big[}
r_\alpha {\mathbf{(r \times J)}}_\beta + r_\beta {\mathbf{(r \times J)}}_\alpha
{\Big]}
\frac{j_2(kr)}{(kr)^2}
}
\end{split}\\
\begin{split} O^E_{\alpha\beta\gamma} &=
-\frac{10}{i\omega}
\int{\mathrm{d}^3\mathbf{r}~}{\Bigg\{}
\Big[r_\alpha r_\beta J_\gamma +r_\beta r_\gamma J_\alpha +r_\gamma r_\alpha J_\beta \\
&\hspace{10mm}
-\frac{1}{5}\delta_{\alpha\beta}(r^2J_\gamma+2{\mathbf{(r \cdot J)}}r_\gamma)
-\frac{1}{5}\delta_{\beta\gamma}(r^2J_\alpha+2{\mathbf{(r \cdot J)}}r_\alpha)
-\frac{1}{5}\delta_{\gamma\alpha}(r^2J_\beta+2{\mathbf{(r \cdot J)}}r_\beta)\Big]
\frac{j_2(kr)}{(kr)^2}\\
&\hspace{5mm}
+\frac{3k^2}{4}
\Big[7{\mathbf{(r \cdot J)}}r_\alpha r_\beta r_\gamma
-r^2(r_\alpha r_\beta J_\gamma +r_\beta r_\gamma J_\alpha +r_\gamma r_\alpha J_\beta)\\
&\hspace{10mm}
+\frac{1}{5}\delta_{\alpha\beta}r^2(r^2J_\gamma+5{\mathbf{(r \cdot J)}}r_\gamma)
+\frac{1}{5}\delta_{\beta\gamma}r^2(r^2J_\alpha+5{\mathbf{(r \cdot J)}}r_\alpha)
+\frac{1}{5}\delta_{\gamma\alpha}r^2(r^2J_\beta+5{\mathbf{(r \cdot J)}}r_\beta)\Big]
\frac{j_4(kr)}{(kr)^4}
{\Bigg\}}
\end{split}\\
\begin{split} O^M_{\alpha\beta\gamma} &=
\frac{35}{2}
\int{\mathrm{d}^3\mathbf{r}~}{\Big[}
r_\alpha r_\beta {\mathbf{(r \times J)}}_\gamma
+r_\beta r_\gamma {\mathbf{(r \times J)}}_\alpha
+r_\gamma r_\alpha {\mathbf{(r \times J)}}_\beta\\
&\hspace{5mm}
-\frac{1}{5}\delta_{\alpha\beta}r^2{\mathbf{(r \times J)}}_\gamma
-\frac{1}{5}\delta_{\beta\gamma}r^2{\mathbf{(r \times J)}}_\alpha
-\frac{1}{5}\delta_{\gamma\alpha}r^2{\mathbf{(r \times J)}}_\beta
{\Big]}
\frac{j_3(kr)}{(kr)^3}
\end{split}
\end{aligned}$$
where $\alpha, \beta, \gamma = x, y, z$, and the multipoles are symmetrical and traceless [@Gurvitz2019]. The familiar approximate Cartesian multipoles and toroidal multipoles can be readily obtained by taking the long wavelength limit [@Alaee2018]. See Appendix \[appendix:multipoles\] for more details on Cartesian multipoles.
An important result from Ref. [@Alaee2018] is that the exact Cartesian multipoles can be expressed from the spherical multipoles. They have identical physical meaning, but are expressed in different basis, which can be systematically transformed to each other as
$$\begin{aligned}
\begin{split} \mathbf{d}^E&=\frac{\sqrt{3 \pi} E_0}{\eta \omega k^2} \bar{\bar{\mathrm{O}}}_1\mathbf{b}^E_1
\end{split}&
\begin{split} \mathbf{d}^M&=\frac{\sqrt{3 \pi} E_0}{i \eta k^3} \bar{\bar{\mathrm{O}}}_1\mathbf{b}^M_1
\end{split}\\
\begin{split} \mathbf{Q}^E&=\frac{\sqrt{20 \pi} E_0}{\eta \omega k^3} \bar{\bar{\mathrm{O}}}_{2}\mathbf{b}^E_2
\end{split}&
\begin{split} \mathbf{Q}^M&=\frac{\sqrt{20 \pi} E_0}{i \eta k^4} \bar{\bar{\mathrm{O}}}_{2}\mathbf{b}^M_2
\end{split}\\
\begin{split} \mathbf{O}^E&=\frac{\sqrt{105 \pi} E_0}{\eta \omega k^4} \bar{\bar{\mathrm{O}}}_{3}\mathbf{b}^E_3
\end{split}&
\begin{split} \mathbf{O}^M&=\frac{\sqrt{105 \pi} E_0}{i \eta k^5} \bar{\bar{\mathrm{O}}}_{3}\mathbf{b}^M_3
\end{split}
\end{aligned}$$
\[eqn:multipole\]
where $\mathbf{d}^p = [d^p_x, d^p_y, d^p_z]^\top$, $\mathbf{Q}^p = [Q^p_{xx}, Q^p_{xy}, Q^p_{xz}, Q^p_{yy}, Q^p_{yz}]^\top$, $\mathbf{O}^p = [O^p_{xxx}, O^p_{xxy}, O^p_{xxz}, O^p_{xyy}, O^p_{xyz}, O^p_{yyy}, O^p_{yyz}]^\top$, $\mathbf{b}^{p}_{n} = [b^{p}_{n,-n},b^{p}_{n,-n+1},\cdots,b^{p}_{n,n-1},b^{p}_{n,n}]^\top$ with superscript $p$ = $E$ or $M$ denoting electric or magnetic multipoles, respectively. The basis transformation matrices are introduced as
$$ \bar{\bar{\mathrm{O}}}_1
=\begin{bmatrix}
1 & 0 & -1 \\
-i & 0 & -i \\
0 & \sqrt{2} & 0
\end{bmatrix}$$
$$ \bar{\bar{\mathrm{O}}}_2=
\begin{bmatrix}
1 & 0 & -\sqrt{2/3} & 0 & 1 \\
-i & 0 & 0 & 0 & i \\
0 & 1 & 0 & -1 & 0 \\
-1 & 0 & -\sqrt{2/3} & 0 & -1 \\
0 & -i & 0 & -i & 0
\end{bmatrix}$$ $$ \bar{\bar{\mathrm{O}}}_3=
\begin{bmatrix}
1 & 0 & -\sqrt{3/5} & 0 & \sqrt{3/5} & 0 & -1 \\
-i & 0 & i\sqrt{1/15} & 0 & i\sqrt{1/15} & 0 & -i \\
0 & \sqrt{2/3} & 0 & -\sqrt{4/5} & 0 & \sqrt{2/3} & 0 \\
-1 & 0 & -\sqrt{1/15} & 0 & \sqrt{1/15} & 0 & 1 \\
0 & -i\sqrt{2/3} & 0 & 0 & 0 & i\sqrt{2/3} & 0 \\
i & 0 & i\sqrt{3/5} & 0 & i\sqrt{3/5} & 0 & i \\
0 & -\sqrt{2/3} & 0 & -\sqrt{4/5} & 0 & -\sqrt{2/3} & 0
\end{bmatrix}$$
The transformation relations for ED, MD, EQ cases (Eqns. \[eqn:multipole\]a–c) can be found in previous work [@Muhlig2011; @Grahn2012], although the expression for exact Cartesian multipoles has only been published recently [@Alaee2018; @Fernandez-Corbaton2015].
Finally, the farfield radiated fields from the multipoles are
$$\begin{aligned}
\begin{split} \mathbf{E} &=
\frac{k^2}{4\pi\epsilon} \frac{e^{ikr}}{r}
{\Bigg[}
\mathbf{n} \times (\mathbf{d}^E \times \mathbf{n})
-\frac{ik}{2} \mathbf{n} \times(\hat{Q}^E \times \mathbf{n})
-\frac{k^2}{4} \mathbf{n} \times(\hat{O}^E \times \mathbf{n})
{\Big]}\\
&\hspace{5mm}
+\frac{\eta k^2}{4\pi} \frac{e^{ikr}}{r}
{\Bigg[}
\mathbf{d}^M \times \mathbf{n}
-\frac{ik}{2} (\hat{Q}^M \times \mathbf{n})
-\frac{k^2}{4} (\hat{O}^M \times \mathbf{n})
{\Big]}
\end{split}\\
\begin{split} \mathbf{H} &=
-\frac{\omega k}{4\pi} \frac{e^{ikr}}{r}
{\Bigg[}
\mathbf{d}^E \times \mathbf{n}
-\frac{ik}{2} (\hat{Q}^E \times \mathbf{n})
-\frac{k^2}{4} (\hat{O}^E \times \mathbf{n})
{\Big]}\\
&\hspace{5mm}
+\frac{k^2}{4\pi} \frac{e^{ikr}}{r}
{\Bigg[}
\mathbf{n} \times (\mathbf{d}^M \times \mathbf{n})
-\frac{ik}{2} \mathbf{n} \times (\hat{Q}^M \times \mathbf{n})
-\frac{k^2}{4} \mathbf{n} \times (\hat{O}^M \times \mathbf{n})
{\Big]}
\end{split}
\end{aligned}$$
\[eqn:radiationfield\]
where $\hat{Q}^p_\alpha = Q^p_{\alpha\beta}n_\beta$ and $\hat{O}^p_\alpha = O^p_{\alpha\beta\gamma}n_\beta n_\gamma$. Total radiation power by multipoles is $$ \begin{split}
P &=
\frac{\omega k^3}{12 \pi \epsilon} \sum_{\alpha}{|d^E_\alpha|^2}
+ \frac{\omega k^5}{160 \pi \epsilon} \sum_{\alpha\beta}{|Q^E_{\alpha\beta}|^2}
+ \frac{\omega k^7}{1680 \pi \epsilon} \sum_{\alpha\beta\gamma}{|O^E_{\alpha\beta\gamma}|^2}\\
&\hspace{5mm}
+ \frac{\eta k^4}{12 \pi} \sum_{\alpha}{|d^M_\alpha|^2}
+ \frac{\eta k^6}{160 \pi} \sum_{\alpha\beta}{|Q^M_{\alpha\beta}|^2}
+ \frac{\eta k^8}{1680 \pi} \sum_{\alpha\beta\gamma}{|O^M_{\alpha\beta\gamma}|^2}
\end{split}
\label{eqn:power}$$ Note that the proportionality constants in Eqns. \[eqn:radiationfield\] and \[eqn:power\] are different from previous work [@Evlyukhin2016], but the reconstructed scattered fields satisfying the Maxwell’s equations should be identical regardless of the choice of the notations. Also, the notations of the spherical multipoles and VSWFs differ by publications, and our expression is given in Appendix \[appendix:proportionality\].
Extended point polarizability and T-matrix
==========================================
Many optical phenomena have been successfully resolved from induced multipoles, but they are given at a specific illumination. In general, the induced moments are not invariant under the interaction with other particles or under different external excitation fields. Considering that meta-atoms generally have strong anisotropy and can therefore exhibit different induced multipoles depending on its environment and excitation fields, the induced moments obtained from a specific situation do not consistently represent the inherent properties of the meta-atoms.
Hence, a different quantity is required to consistently describe an identical particle in an isolated state, nearby other particles, or in a lattice, and $\boldsymbol{\alpha}$-tensor serves for this purpose. $\boldsymbol{\alpha}$-tensor is defined as a response tensor linearly relating the local fields to the induced multipoles, so it is irrelevant of excitation conditions and allows us to calculate the induced moments at arbitrary incident fields. This feature allows us to calculate the collective responses of coupled particles using MST, which we discuss in later sections. However, $\boldsymbol{\alpha}$-tensor is usually truncated at dipole order [@Arango2013; @Asadchy2014; @Liu2016], and higher-order $\boldsymbol{\alpha}$-tensor, which includes higher-order multipole moments and field gradients [@Arango2014], is rarely utilized due to the complicated retrieval process if not for spheres with isotropic responses [@Babicheva2019].
These higher-order multipole transitions have been systematically treated using $\mathbf{T}$-matrix, which linearly relates the spherical multipoles of incident field to those of scattered field and is expressed in matrix form as
$$\begin{bmatrix}
\mathbf{b}^E \\ \mathbf{b}^M
\end{bmatrix}
=\begin{bmatrix}
\mathbf{T}^{E}_{E} & \mathbf{T}^{M}_{E} \\
\mathbf{T}^{E}_{M} & \mathbf{T}^{M}_{M}
\end{bmatrix}
\begin{bmatrix}
\mathbf{a}^E \\ \mathbf{a}^M
\end{bmatrix}$$
$$\mathbf{T}^{p}_{p'}
=\begin{bmatrix}
\mathbf{T}^{p1}_{p'1} & \mathbf{T}^{p1}_{p'2} & \cdots \\
\mathbf{T}^{p2}_{p'1} & \mathbf{T}^{p2}_{p'2} & \\
\vdots & & \ddots
\end{bmatrix}$$
where $\mathbf{T}^{np}_{n'p'}$ is a $(2n+1) \times (2n'+1)$ matrix corresponding to the transition from multipole order $n$ of mode $p$ to $n'$ of $p'$. $\mathbf{a}^p$ and $\mathbf{b}^p$ are vectors containing spherical multipoles of incident and scattered fields, respectively [@Mishchenko1996].
Analogous to the exact Cartesian multipoles and the spherical multipoles, $\boldsymbol{\alpha}$-tensor and $\mathbf{T}$-matrix are identical but with different choice of basis. To transform between them, we additionally need to express the local fields and field gradients in terms of spherical multipoles, which we present using the same transformation matrices as
$$\begin{aligned}
\begin{split} \mathbf{E}
&=\frac{i E_0}{\sqrt{12 \pi}}
\bar{\bar{\mathrm{O}}}_1
\mathbf{a}^E_1
\end{split}&
\begin{split} \mathbf{H}
&=\frac{E_0}{\eta \sqrt{12 \pi}}
\bar{\bar{\mathrm{O}}}_1
\mathbf{a}^M_1
\end{split}\\
\begin{split} \frac{1}{k}\Diamond\mathbf{E}
&=\frac{i E_0}{\sqrt{80 \pi}}
\bar{\bar{\mathrm{O}}}_{2}
\mathbf{a}^E_2
\end{split}&
\begin{split} \frac{1}{k}\Diamond\mathbf{H}
&=\frac{E_0}{\eta \sqrt{80 \pi}}
\bar{\bar{\mathrm{O}}}_{2}
\mathbf{a}^M_2
\end{split}\\
\begin{split} \frac{1}{k^2}\Diamond^2\mathbf{E}&=\frac{i E_0}{\sqrt{420 \pi}} \bar{\bar{\mathrm{O}}}_{3}\mathbf{a}^E_3
\end{split}&
\begin{split} \frac{1}{k^2}\Diamond^2\mathbf{H}&=\frac{E_0}{\eta \sqrt{420 \pi}} \bar{\bar{\mathrm{O}}}_{3}\mathbf{a}^M_3
\end{split}
\end{aligned}$$
\[eqn:field\]
where $\mathbf{E} = [E_x, E_y, E_z]^\top$, $\Diamond\mathbf{E} = [\partial_xE_x, (\partial_xE_y+\partial_yE_x)/2, (\partial_xE_z+\partial_zE_x)/2, \partial_yE_y, (\partial_yE_z+\partial_zE_y)/2]^\top$, and $$\Diamond^2\mathbf{E}
=
\begin{bmatrix}
\partial_x^2E_x -\frac{1}{5}\nabla^2E_x \\
\frac{1}{3}(\partial_x^2E_y+2\partial_x\partial_yE_x) -\frac{1}{15}\nabla^2E_y \\
\frac{1}{3}(\partial_x^2E_z+2\partial_x\partial_zE_x) -\frac{1}{15}\nabla^2E_z \\
\frac{1}{3}(\partial_y^2E_x+2\partial_x\partial_yE_y) -\frac{1}{15}\nabla^2E_x \\
\frac{1}{3}(\partial_x\partial_yE_z + \partial_y\partial_zE_x + \partial_z\partial_xE_y) \\
\partial_y^2E_y -\frac{1}{5}\nabla^2E_y \\
\frac{1}{3}(\partial_y^2E_z+2\partial_y\partial_zE_y) -\frac{1}{15}\nabla^2E_z
\end{bmatrix}$$
Now, $\boldsymbol{\alpha}$-tensor and $\mathbf{T}$-matrix can be transformed to each other. However, $\boldsymbol{\alpha}$-tensor is expressed in SI units if Eqns. \[eqn:field\] and \[eqn:multipole\] are directly used. Because $\boldsymbol{\alpha}$-tensor in SI units have different units per components and are difficult to be compared, we use $\boldsymbol{\alpha}$-tensor in units of volume defined as $$\alpha^{pn}_{p'n'} = \frac{6\pi}{ik^3} \bar{\bar{\mathrm{O}}}_{n'} \mathbf{T}^{pn}_{p'n'} \bar{\bar{\mathrm{O}}}_{n}^{-1}
\label{eqn:T2a}$$ Note that similar expressions for isotropic (scalar) dipolar [@Arango2013; @Liu2016] and quarupolar objects [@Babicheva2019] can be found in literature. $\mathbf{T}$-matrix is inversely obtained from $\boldsymbol{\alpha}$-tensor as $$\mathbf{T}^{pn}_{p'n'} = \frac{ik^3}{6\pi} \bar{\bar{\mathrm{O}}}_{n'}^{-1} \alpha^{pn}_{p'n'} \bar{\bar{\mathrm{O}}}_{n}
\label{eqn:a2T}$$ Eqns. \[eqn:T2a\] and \[eqn:a2T\] are the central results of this study, which we use to express exact higher-order $\boldsymbol{\alpha}$-tensors in units of volume (see Appendix \[appendix:units\] for more details).
$\boldsymbol{\alpha}$-tensor or $\mathbf{T}$-matrix contains information on particle symmetries and conservation laws, as well as complete information on scattering by a particle. Symmetry refers to the invariance upon certain operations, and includes rotational symmetry, mirror symmetry, parity and time-reversal symmetry, and reciprocity. $N$-fold rotational symmetry and mirror symmetry can be confirmed by checking if $\mathbf{T}$-matrix or $\boldsymbol{\alpha}$-tensor is invariant under the transformation. For Onsager reciprocal system, $\mathbf{T}$-matrix elements satisfy the following relationship: $(T^{pn}_{p'n'})^{m}_{m'}=(-1)^{m+m'}(T^{p'n'}_{pn})^{-m'}_{-m}$. This expression has been used to check the accuracy of numerically calculated $\mathbf{T}$-matrix in literature [@Mishchenko1996]. $\boldsymbol{\alpha}$-tensor of reciprocal dipolar particles satisfy: $\alpha_{e1}^{e1} = (\alpha_{e1}^{e1})^\top$, $\alpha_{m1}^{m1} = (\alpha_{m1}^{m1})^\top$, and $\alpha_{e1}^{m1} = (\alpha_{m1}^{e1})^\top$ [@Sersic2011]. The parity operation is given as $\mathbf{r}\rightarrow-\mathbf{r}$. Upon the parity operation, $\mathbf{E}\rightarrow-\mathbf{E}$, $\mathbf{H}\rightarrow\mathbf{H}$, $\nabla\rightarrow-\nabla$. Also, electric multipoles ($a^E_{nm}$ and $b^E_{nm}$) have parity of $(-1)^n$, and magnetic multipoles ($a^M_{nm}$ and $b^M_{nm}$) have $(-1)^{n-1}$. From which, we see that $\mathbf{T}^{En}_{En'}$ and $\mathbf{T}^{Mn}_{Mn'}$ have parity of $(-1)^{n+n'}$, and $\mathbf{T}^{En}_{Mn'}$ and $\mathbf{T}^{Mn}_{En'}$ has $(-1)^{n+n'+1}$. The corresponding $\boldsymbol{\alpha}$-tensor components have the same parity. Also, parity is closely related to the concept of true chirality, or reciprocal parity-odd [@Barron1986]. Note that chirality of chiral molecules have been embedded in the magneto-electric coupling term [@Govorov2010], which attributes to the reciprocal parity-odd property. By breaking the reciprocity, it is possible to undergo false chirality, which is nonreciprocal, parity-odd [@Barron1986; @Asadchy2014; @Asadchy2019]. A lossless particle has no intrinsic absorption, so its extinction equals to scattering. For a lossless particle, $\mathbf{T}^{\dag}\mathbf{T}=-\frac{1}{2}(\mathbf{T}^{\dag}+\mathbf{T})$, where the superscript ${\dag}$ denotes Hermitian conjugate [@Waterman1971]. This expression has also been used to check the accuracy of $\mathbf{T}$-matrix for lossless particles in literature [@Mishchenko1996]. $\boldsymbol{\alpha}$-tensor of lossless dipolar particles satisfy: $\frac{k^3}{6\pi} \alpha^\dag \alpha = \frac{1}{2i}(\alpha^\dag - \alpha)$, which reduces to the optical theorem $\frac{k^3}{6\pi}|\alpha|^2 = \mathrm{Im}(\alpha)$ for dipolar scalar $\alpha$ [@Sersic2011]. Studies on properties of higher-order $\boldsymbol{\alpha}$-tensor is currently lacking and remains future research.
Meta-atoms and metaphotonics
============================
In metamaterials and metaphotonics, manipulation of light at the nanoscale utilizes optically resonant subwavelength meta-atoms, whose properties have generally been analyzed by dipolar $\boldsymbol{\alpha}$-tensor [@Arango2013; @Asadchy2014; @Liu2016]. However, recently emerged high-refractive-index particles [@Kuznetsov2012; @Evlyukhin2010; @Babicheva2017; @Babicheva2018; @Terekhov2019] and coupled plasmonic systems [@Fruhnert2017; @Arango2014] often involve higher-order multipole transitions. It should be noted that $\mathbf{T}$-matrix of meta-atoms can be systematically retrieved for arbitrary multipole order [@Fruhnert2017], but detailed analysis on their properties from their $\mathbf{T}$-matrix is difficult due to the spherical basis, while retrieval of higher-order $\boldsymbol{\alpha}$-tensor can be cumbersome [@Arango2014]. In this section, we analyze several meta-atoms from their $\boldsymbol{\alpha}$-tensors, which are transformed from $\mathbf{T}$-matrix using Eqn. \[eqn:T2a\]. We will show that higher-order $\boldsymbol{\alpha}$-tensor are necessary to describe anisotropic meta-atoms, whose properties can be more intuitively analyzed due to the Cartesian basis. Refer to Fig. \[fig:alpha\] for the interpretation of $\boldsymbol{\alpha}$-tensor. In addition, $\boldsymbol{\alpha}$-tensor allows analysis on several particle properties including anisotropy, symmetries, spectral modal resonances, and origin of chirality and optical magnetism.
![Structure of $\boldsymbol{\alpha}$-tensor. $\alpha_{p'n'}^{pn}$ corresponds to the transition from incident multipole order $n$ of type $p$ to induced multipole order $n'$ of type $p'$, and the incident and induced Cartesian modes are denoted outside the parenthesis. For instance, $(\alpha_{e1}^{e1})_{x}^{y}$ relates incident $E_y$ to induced $d_x^E$; $(\alpha_{m2}^{e1})_{yz}^{x}$ relates incident $E_x$ to induced $\Diamond_{yz}^{M} = (\partial_{y}H_{z}+\partial_{z}H_{y})/2$; $(\alpha_{m1}^{m2})_{y}^{xy}$ relates incident $\Diamond_{xy}^{M} = (\partial_{x}H_{y}+\partial_{y}H_{x})/2$ to induced $d_y^M$.[]{data-label="fig:alpha"}](Fig_alpha.pdf)
![Plasmonic double-bars. (a) Schematics. (b) Retrieved $\boldsymbol{\alpha}$-tensor at $\lambda=530~\text{nm}$. (c) Multipole-decomposed scattering cross-section at x-polarized planewave incidence propagating in y-direction. (d) Spectra of $(\alpha_{e1}^{e1})_{x}^{x}$, $(\alpha_{m1}^{m1})_{z}^{z}$, $(\alpha_{e2}^{e2})_{xy}^{xy}$, and $(\alpha_{e2}^{m1})_{xy}^{z}$. Geometrical parameters are: radius 20 nm, length 100 nm, and gap distance 20 nm.[]{data-label="fig:PDB"}](Fig_PDB.png)
Hybridized plasmonic structures can exhibit higher-order multipole modes even with subwavelength feature sizes [@Arango2014; @Fruhnert2017]. Among them, plasmonic double bars (PDB) has exhibited strong MD mode even at the visible regime [@Dolling2005]. Multipole-decomposed scattering cross-section exhibits broad ED resonance at 490 nm and sharp EQ and MD resonances at 530 nm (Fig. \[fig:PDB\]c), and the origins of the multipolar modes can be analyzed from retrieved $\boldsymbol{\alpha}$-tensor (Fig. \[fig:PDB\]b) and spectra of its components (Fig. \[fig:PDB\]d). The broad ED resonance is easily attributed to $(\alpha_{e1}^{e1})_{x}^{x}$, and the sharp EQ and MD resonances are spectrally attributed to $(\alpha_{m1}^{m1})_{z}^{z}$, $(\alpha_{e2}^{e2})_{xy}^{xy}$, and $(\alpha_{e2}^{m1})_{xy}^{z}$. Analysis from $\boldsymbol{\alpha}$-tensor allows us to see that PDB has different origin of optical magnetism from split-ring resonators [@Arango2013; @Liu2016] and high-refractive-index spheres (see Appendix \[appendix:t-matrix\] for more details). Importantly, only a few components are dominant in the retrieved $\boldsymbol{\alpha}$-tensor, making the analysis easier (Fig. \[fig:PDB\]b). This simplification partly comes from the particle symmetry. Notably, the parity symmetry removes the half of the components: $\alpha_{e1}^{e2}$, $\alpha_{e2}^{e1}$, $\alpha_{e1}^{m1}$, $\alpha_{m1}^{e1}$, $\alpha_{e2}^{m2}$, $\alpha_{m2}^{e2}$, $\alpha_{m1}^{m2}$, and $\alpha_{m2}^{m1}$. Strong anisotropicity of the meta-atom further simplifies the $\boldsymbol{\alpha}$-tensor, especially in the Cartesian basis. In addition, the reciprocity enforces $(\alpha_{m1}^{e2})_{z}^{xy}$ = $(\alpha_{e2}^{m1})_{xy}^{z}$. Interestingly, $(\alpha_{m1}^{m1})_{z}^{z}$, $(\alpha_{e2}^{e2})_{xy}^{xy}$, and $(\alpha_{e2}^{m1})_{xy}^{z}$ have very similar spectral feature resembling Lorentzian resonances, indicating that some components may additionally be coupled together possibly using singular value decomposition technique [@Suryadharma2019] or modular analysis [@Asadchy2019].
![(a) The schematics of twisted double-bars. (b) Retrieved $\boldsymbol{\alpha}$-tensor at $\lambda=520~\text{nm}$. (c) Extinction and (d) circular dichroism at planewave incidence propagating in $x$-, $y$-, and $z$-directions. (e) Spectra of $(\alpha_{e1}^{e1})_{x}^{x}$, $(\alpha_{e1}^{e1})_{z}^{z}$, $(\alpha_{e2}^{e1})_{xy}^{z}$, $(\alpha_{e1}^{m1})_{z}^{z}$, and $(\alpha_{m1}^{m1})_{z}^{z}$. Geometrical parameters are: radius 20 nm, length 100 nm, gap distance 20 nm, and twist angle 45$^\circ$.[]{data-label="fig:TDB"}](Fig_TDB.png)
Plasmonic chiral particles have exhibited chiral responses far-exceeding those from natural materials. Among them, a twisted double-bars (TDB) has been widely used to generate exceptionally strong chiral responses [@Auguie2011], which we assess from circular dichroism (CD). Different from PDB, TDB is geometrically chiral, and therefore parity-odd, and $\alpha_{e1}^{m1}$, $\alpha_{m1}^{e1}$, $\alpha_{e2}^{e1}$, and $\alpha_{e1}^{e2}$ transition components are now allowed. An important property of TDB is strongly anisotropic CD, which is only visible for the light propagation parallel to the twist-axis ($\hat{y}$). Interestingly, this anisotropic CD cannot be explained by dipolar $\boldsymbol{\alpha}$-tensor alone, because $(\alpha_{e1}^{m1})_{z}^{z}$ and $(\alpha_{m1}^{e1})_{z}^{z}$ contribute to chiral response for both $\mathbf{k \parallel x}$ and $\mathbf{k \parallel y}$. We confirmed that $(\alpha_{e2}^{e1})_{xy}^{z}$ and $(\alpha_{e1}^{e2})_{z}^{xy}$ are necessary for this anisotropic CD; they constructively contribute to CD for $\mathbf{k \parallel y}$ (red line, Fig. \[fig:TDB\]d), whereas destructively for $\mathbf{k \parallel x}$ and pretty much eliminating the total CD (black line, Fig. \[fig:TDB\]d). We do not explicitly show this, but we mention that their contributions can be quantified by directly calculating CD from their retrieved $\boldsymbol{\alpha}$-tensor. Here, TDB clearly shows that higher-order multipole transition is necessary for describing plasmonic meta-atoms and reconstructing ansotropic chiral responses even in far-fields, as well as in near-fields [@Mun2019].
![(a) The schematics of Si quadrumer. (b) The retrieved $\boldsymbol{\alpha}$-tensor at $\lambda$ = 520 nm. (c) Multipole-decomposed scattering cross-sections at $\mathbf{E}_\mathrm{inc} = \hat{x}e^{ikz}$. (d) Spectra of $(\alpha_{m2}^{m2})_{xx}^{xx}$, $(\alpha_{m2}^{m2})_{xy}^{xy}$, $(\alpha_{m2}^{m2})_{xz}^{xz}$, $(\alpha_{m2}^{m2})_{xz}^{xx}$, and $(\alpha_{e1}^{m2})_{x}^{yz}$.[]{data-label="fig:HDQ"}](Fig_HRI.png)
Finally, we briefly discuss high-refractive-index nanoparticles, which are actively researched topic due to their higher-order multipolar modes. In general, subwavelength plasmonic nanoparticles exhibit dominant ED mode, but high-refractive-index nanoparticles often exhibit dominant higher-order modes. For instance, Si quadrumer exhibits strong MD mode exceeding ED near 520 nm (Fig. \[fig:HDQ\]c). In addition, broad MQ response was observed between 420 and 520 nm. We analyzed the origin of MQ response from the $\boldsymbol{\alpha}$-tensor components that can contribute to the MQ mode (Fig. \[fig:HDQ\]b,d). Although the MQ mode shows a broad response, it originates from the sum of many resonances (Fig. \[fig:HDQ\]d). This example shows that deeply fundamental properties of meta-atoms may be analyzed from their higher-order $\boldsymbol{\alpha}$-tensors.
Multiple-scattering theory and electromagnetically coupled systems
==================================================================
In the previous section, we have shown that higher-order $\boldsymbol{\alpha}$-tensor is necessary for analyzing isolated meta-atoms and interpreting their interaction with light. Additionally, $\boldsymbol{\alpha}$-tensor can be used to model interacting meta-atoms for further research. In literature, self-consistent coupled multipole equations have been formulated using the Green’s tensor to illustrate periodic 2D arrays of plasmonic [@DeAbajo2007; @Auguie2008; @Swiecicki2017; @Babicheva2018] and dielectric [@Evlyukhin2010; @Babicheva2019] spheres, and finite [@Martikainen2017; @Draine1994] or random [@Watson2017] systems. In this approach, electromagnetic interactions between scattering objects are taken into account without any approximation, while single scattering objects are described by $\boldsymbol{\alpha}$-tensors approximated to low-order multipole orders. This approach is simplified version of superposition $\mathbf{T}$-matrix method (STMM), which has been extensively studied for coupled spheres [@DeAbajo1999; @Stout2008; @Stout2011]. Earlier studies have usually incorporated small spheres, whose $\boldsymbol{\alpha}$ can be easily obtained using the quasistatic approximation (see Appendix \[appendix:quasistatic\] for more details), to study their interaction with light and with nearby scattering objects or molecules [@Govorov2010; @Wu2015]. However, meta-atoms with complicated multipolar transitions can also be modelled into $\boldsymbol{\alpha}$-tensors, which are then inserted into the MST [@Watson2017], potentially allowing studies on more complicated physics, e.g., Fano resonances [@Gallinet2011a; @Suryadharma2019] and hybridization of particle and lattice resonances in 2D [@MahdiSalary2017; @Baur2018; @Terekhov2019; @Kwadrin2014] and 3D [@Liu2008; @Kim2017] arrays. In this section, we reconstruct several physical phenomena arising in electromagnetically coupled meta-atoms simply by implementing $\boldsymbol{\alpha}$-tensors into the MST, and discuss the advantages of this method.
![Reconstructed optically coupled systems using $\boldsymbol{\alpha}$-tensors and MST. (a,b) Plasmon-coupling between two coupled nanorods at different coupling configurations, and (c) Fano resonance between dark and bright elements. The nanorods in (a,b) are approximated as $\boldsymbol{\alpha}$-tensor with only $(\alpha_{e1}^{e1})_{x}^{x}$; the bright element in (c), as $(\alpha_{e1}^{e1})_{y}^{y}$; the dark element in (c), as $(\alpha_{e1}^{e1})_{x}^{x}$, $(\alpha_{m1}^{m1})_{z}^{z}$, $(\alpha_{m1}^{e2})_{z}^{xy}$, $(\alpha_{e2}^{m1})_{yz}^{z}$, and $(\alpha_{e2}^{e2})_{xy}^{xy}$ (see Fig. \[fig:PDB\]b). The configurations are illustrated in the schematics on the left sides. The scattering cross-sections calculated at different center-to-center distances $g$ are on the right sides. Dashed-lines and cross-marks are the reference solutions calculated using STMM and FEM, respectively. The nanorods in (a,b) and the dark element in (c) have $a$ = 10 nm and $c$ = 40 nm, and the bright element in (c) has $a$ = 13 nm and $c$ = 50 nm.[]{data-label="fig:toymodel"}](Fig_toymodel.png)
First, electromagnetically coupled two plasmonic nanorods are illustrated using MST (Fig. \[fig:toymodel\]a and b), where only $(\alpha_{e1}^{e1})_{x}^{x}$ component is considered in their $\boldsymbol{\alpha}$-tensors. Such closely situated plasmonic particles are strongly coupled, resulting strong spectral resonance shift. Spectral red-shift (Fig. \[fig:toymodel\]a) and blue-shift (Fig. \[fig:toymodel\]b) can be reconstructed depending on the configuration of the coupled nanorods. This phenomena can be intuitively interpreted by plasmon hybridization theory (PHT) [@Nordlander2004]; the induced charge density configuration in Fig. \[fig:toymodel\]a becomes stable by the hybridization redshifting the resonance, whereas the configuration in Fig. \[fig:toymodel\]b becomes unstable blue-shifting the resonance. However, PHT is based on the quasistatic approximation, so quantitative analysis is difficult for large, complicated systems. Another widely used theoretical framework for interpreting coupled optical systems is the coupled mode theory (CMT), which approximates the scattering objects as harmonic oscillators that are coupled to each other. However, CMT relies on fitting procedure to retrieve the relevant parameters and requires experimental or simulated results to begin with, so the CMT cannot be used to provide new information. In addition, it is of question whether the fitted parameters from the simple coupled harmonic oscillators can reliably represent the vectorial nature of electromagnetic coupling. Another widely studied phenomena arising in electromagnetically coupled systems is Fano-like resonance, where a dark element is coupled to a bright element. The dark element cannot be directly excited by the incident field, but the coupling between the dark mode and the bright mode allows the dark mode to be indirectly excited. To reconstruct this phenomena, we mimicked the dolmen configuration [@Gallinet2011a] using a dark element with two horizontal nanorods and a bright element with a vertical nanorod (Fig. \[fig:toymodel\]c). Only $(\alpha_{e1}^{e1})_{y}^{y}$ component is considered for the bright element, and $(\alpha_{e1}^{e1})_{x}^{x}$, $(\alpha_{m1}^{m1})_{z}^{z}$, $(\alpha_{e2}^{m1})_{xy}^{z}$, $(\alpha_{m1}^{e2})_{z}^{xy}$, and $(\alpha_{e2}^{e2})_{xy}^{xy}$ components are considered for the dark element as Fig. \[fig:PDB\]. The calculated scattering cross-section shows a dip near 570 nm, where the dark element has resonance, and this dip grows larger as $g$ becomes smaller due to the stronger coupling between the dark and bright elements.
The spectra calculated using multipole methods using the truncated $\boldsymbol{\alpha}$-tensors (solid lines) show excellent quantitative agreement with the reference (dashed-lines and cross-marks), but the error grows larger as $g$ decreases (Fig. \[fig:toymodel\]). This is because multipoles are efficient in describing long-range interactions but not in describing strong coupling between plasmonic particles in near-field [@Park2014], which requires an increasingly large number of multipole order for accurate description [@Stout2008]. Still, the collective responses between plasmonic particles situated in a reasonably far distance and dielectric particles [@DeAbajo1999] can be efficiently and accurately described under the multipole approach.
Importantly, the multipole approach has superior computational efficiency compared to the traditional numerical methods, such as finite-difference time-domain and finite-element methods. Noticeably, this approach has shown significant potentials for rigorously studying electromagnetic problems involving disordered, aperiodic [@Rahimzadegan2019; @Jenkins2018; @Pinheiro2017], and multi-scale systems with a large number of particles ($N$>10,000) over a large volume [@Pattelli2018]. Especially, aperiodic metasurfaces [@MahdiSalary2017; @Rahimzadegan2019; @Jenkins2018] and random media [@Pinheiro2017] could be accurately studied using this method, and optimization [@Forestiere2012] and dataset construction for deep-learning neural networks [@So2019] would significantly benefit from this approach. In addition, the multipole approach can implement localized shaped beams from simple Gaussian beams [@Novotny2009] to highly focused [@AlvaroRanhaNeves2006] and helical beams [@Wu2015; @Wang2017], providing a versatile framework to rigorously study spin-orbit interactions. Therefore, the multipole approach could be used to rigorously study electromagnetic phenomena arising in complex, disordered media consisting of discrete scattering objects.
Toy models
==========
![(a,b) Completely decoupled dipolar dual particles at (a) LCP and (b) RCP incidences. Inset spectra are absorption by LDP (red) and RDP (blue). (c) Randomly dispersed dual particles at LCP incidence. Inset spectra are the sums of absorption by LDP (red) and RDP (blue). The positions of LDPs and RDPs are denoted by circled letters L and R, respectively.[]{data-label="fig:dual"}](Fig_dual.png)
In previous examples, $\boldsymbol{\alpha}$-tensors of realistic particles were considered, but it is also possible to consider $\boldsymbol{\alpha}$-tensors of arbitrary particles without information on their physical geometric parameters. Recently, Fernandez-Corbaton, et al. proposed the concept of dual particles, which are excited by light with one helicity, re-radiates light with the same helicity, and are completely transparent to light with the opposite helicity. They also proposed that two oppositely dual particles are completely uncoupled to each other, and a media consisting of dual particles with a single handedness will be completely transparent to one helicity and opaque to the other helicity [@Fernandez-Corbaton2016]. Demonstration of this concept is difficult, because purely dual particles have not been discovered, although approximately dual particles have been studied [@Fernandez-Corbaton2016; @Fruhnert2017]. Still, we can theoretically investigate the concepts above using $\boldsymbol{\alpha}$-tensors and MST, because arbitrary $\boldsymbol{\alpha}$-tensors without physical parameters can be devised, which cannot be done using the traditional numerical methods. Dual particles at dipole approximation have $\alpha_{e1}^{e1}$ = $\alpha_{m1}^{m1}$ = $\pm\alpha_{e1}^{m1}$ = $\pm\alpha_{m1}^{e1}$, where $\pm$ corresponds to left- (LDP) and right-dual particles (RDP), which interact with left- (LCP) and right-circularly-polarized lights (RCP), respectively.
In this section, we implemented dual particles using isotropic (scalar), dipolar $\boldsymbol{\alpha}$-tensors with Lorentzian resonance. We confirmed that two oppositely dual particles are completely uncoupled with each other, and only LDP is excited at LCP incidence (Fig. \[fig:dual\]a), and RDP is excited at RCP incidence (Fig. \[fig:dual\]b). This is because LDP is excited by LCP and re-radiates LCP, which cannot excite RDP. In a mixture of LDPs and RDPs, RDPs are completely transparent upon LCP incidence, and LDPs are electromagnetically coupled.
This section shows $\boldsymbol{\alpha}$-tensors as a powerful method to treat symmetries and conservation laws at the microscopic level (single scattering object) without dealing with the geometrical parameters. In fact, implementation of $\boldsymbol{\alpha}$-tensors without their relevant geometrical structures has been performed in literature to treat realistic molecules at weak excitations [@Novotny2009], where the molecules were approximated as $\boldsymbol{\alpha}$-tensors and implemented in the framework of MST to study plasmon-enhanced circular dichroism [@Govorov2010] and helical dichroism [@Wu2015].
Conclusions
===========
In summary, we have introduced the systematic transformation between $\boldsymbol{\alpha}$-tensor in the Cartesian basis and $\mathbf{T}$-matrix in the spherical basis using the basis transformation between the exact Cartesian and the spherical multipoles (Eqn. \[eqn:multipole\]) and between the local fields and field gradients and the spherical multipoles (Eqn. \[eqn:field\]). In general, characterization of meta-atoms using $\boldsymbol{\alpha}$-tensor has been limited to dipolar regime, but recent advances in nanophotonics and metamaterials utilize higher-order multipole transitions coming from coupled plasmonic and high-index dielectric nanoantennas. These scattering systems with higher-order multipole transitions can be interpreted at a fundamental level using higher-order $\boldsymbol{\alpha}$-tensor, which can be easily obtained from $\mathbf{T}$-matrix using the facile basis transformation. Incorporated with the MST, the multipole approach can be a versatile theoretical framework in nanophotonics to rigorously investigate optical phenomena arising in coherently coupled multi-body systems [@Mishchenko2008]. Here, the well-defined symmetries and conservation laws can be treated at the microscopic level (single scattering object) using $\boldsymbol{\alpha}$-tensors, and the electromagnetic interaction between them are treated using the Green’s tensors. It is worthwhile to note that the potential applicability of $\boldsymbol{\alpha}$-tensor (or $\mathbf{T}$-matrix) into the MST has been mentioned in many previous papers, but only spherical particles have been generally considered. By simply taking nonspherical structured meta-atoms into account, the multipole approach can be extended into many different applications.
The multipole approach is especially advantageous for complicated, random, multi-scale problems due to computational efficiency, and analytic scattering objects, such as realistic molecules and dual particles, can also be implemented. We hope this study may serve as a fundamental reference for the multipole approach in nanophotonics. Moreover, the uniquitity of the multipole approach allows this work applicable to other fields including acoustics, astronomy, and remote sensing.
Notes on approximate Cartesian multipoles {#appendix:multipoles}
=========================================
The exact Cartesian multipoles *exactly* reconstruct multipole radiations of the localized current sources with arbitrary sizes, but their expressions (Eqn. 1) are rather unfamiliar. The expressions of the familiar approximate Cartesian multipoles can be obtained by taking the long-wavelenght limit [@Alaee2018] as:
$$\begin{aligned}
\begin{split} d^E_\alpha &=
-\frac{1}{i\omega}
\int{{\mathrm{d}^3\mathbf{r}~}J_\alpha}
\end{split}\\
\begin{split} d^M_\alpha &=
\frac{1}{2}
\int{{\mathrm{d}^3\mathbf{r}~}{\mathbf{(r \times J)}}_\alpha}
\end{split}\\
\begin{split} Q^E_{\alpha\beta} &=
-\frac{1}{i\omega}
\int{\mathrm{d}^3\mathbf{r}~}\Big[r_\alpha J_\beta + r_\beta J_\alpha
-\frac{2}{3}\delta_{\alpha\beta}{\mathbf{(r \cdot J)}}\Big]
\end{split}\\
\begin{split} Q^M_{\alpha\beta} &=
\int{{\mathrm{d}^3\mathbf{r}~}[r_\alpha {\mathbf{(r \times J)}}_\beta + r_\beta {\mathbf{(r \times J)}}_\alpha]
}
\end{split}\\
\begin{split} O^E_{\alpha\beta\gamma} &=
-\frac{2}{i\omega}
\int{\mathrm{d}^3\mathbf{r}~}\Big[r_\alpha r_\beta J_\gamma +r_\beta r_\gamma J_\alpha +r_\gamma r_\alpha J_\beta \\
&\hspace{5mm}
-\frac{1}{5}\delta_{\alpha\beta}(r^2J_\gamma+2{\mathbf{(r \cdot J)}}r_\gamma)
-\frac{1}{5}\delta_{\beta\gamma}(r^2J_\alpha+2{\mathbf{(r \cdot J)}}r_\alpha)\\
&\hspace{5mm}
-\frac{1}{5}\delta_{\gamma\alpha}(r^2J_\beta+2{\mathbf{(r \cdot J)}}r_\beta)\Big]
\end{split}\\
\begin{split} O^M_{\alpha\beta\gamma} &=
\frac{1}{6}
\int{\mathrm{d}^3\mathbf{r}~}{\Big[}
r_\alpha r_\beta {\mathbf{(r \times J)}}_\gamma
+r_\beta r_\gamma {\mathbf{(r \times J)}}_\alpha
+r_\gamma r_\alpha {\mathbf{(r \times J)}}_\beta\\
&\hspace{5mm}
-\frac{1}{5}\delta_{\alpha\beta}r^2{\mathbf{(r \times J)}}_\gamma
-\frac{1}{5}\delta_{\beta\gamma}r^2{\mathbf{(r \times J)}}_\alpha
-\frac{1}{5}\delta_{\gamma\alpha}r^2{\mathbf{(r \times J)}}_\beta
{\Big]}
\end{split}
\end{aligned}$$
Interestingly, toroidal multipoles can also be recovered from the higher-order terms [@Alaee2018].
In addition, we numerically confirmed the transformation between the exact Cartesian multipoles and the spherical multipoles. The exact Cartesian multipoles (solid lines) and the approximate Cartesian multipoles (dashed lines) were calculated numerically using FEM and were compared with the exact Cartesian multipoles transformed from the spherical multipoles that were calculated analytically using the Mie theory. Two cases: a smaller sphere with lower refractive-index (Fig. \[fig:benchmark\]a) and a larger sphere with higher refractive-index (Fig. \[fig:benchmark\]b) were compared. The exact Cartesian multipoles that were numerically calculated (dashed lines) and those transformed from the analytically calculated spherical multipoles (solid lines) agree very well for both smaller and larger spheres. For the larger sphere, the approximate Cartesian multipoles deviate strongly from the exact Cartesian multipoles.
![Induced multipoles of (a) a small dielectric sphere with $R=50~\text{nm}$ and $n=2$ and (b) a large sphere with $R=300~\text{nm}$ and $n=3$. Dashed line: the numerically calculated exact Cartesian multipoles; dot-dashed line: the numerically calculated approximate Cartesian multipoles; solid line: the exact Cartesian multipoles transformed from the analytically calculated spherical multipoles; black: real; red: imaginary.[]{data-label="fig:benchmark"}](Fig_benchmark.pdf){width="\linewidth"}
Notes on the proportionality constants {#appendix:proportionality}
======================================
It should be noted that the proportionality constants for multipoles are rather arbitrary, but the reconstructed multipole radiations satisfying the Maxwell’s equations should be identical, for which the proportionality constants are compensated by the expressions for the multipole radiations (Eqn. 4).
Due to the same reason, the proportionality constants for the spherical multipoles are also arbitrary. In general, the spherical multipoles are not expressed explicitly, but the vector spherical wave functions (VSWFs) are given, from which the spherical multipoles are obtained using the orthogonality of the VSWFs. Note that expressions for VSWFs differ by publications, and our expression is
$$\begin{aligned}
\begin{split}
\mathbf{M}^{(i)}_{nm}(k\mathbf{r}) &= i\gamma_{nm}z_n^{(i)}(kr)(i\pi_{nm}\hat{e}_\theta-\tau_{nm}\hat{e}_\phi)e^{im\phi}
\end{split}\\
\begin{split}
\mathbf{N}^{(i)}_{nm}(k\mathbf{r}) &= i\gamma_{nm}\Big[n(n+1)\frac{z_n^{(i)}(kr)}{kr}P_n^m(\cos{\theta})\hat{e}_r\\
&+\frac{1}{kr}\frac{d[kr z_n^{(i)}(kr)]}{d(kr)}(\tau_{nm}\hat{e}_\theta+i\pi_{nm}\hat{e}_\phi)\Big]e^{im\phi}
\end{split}\\
\begin{split}
\tau_{nm}(\theta) &= \frac{d}{d\theta} P_n^m(\cos{\theta})
\end{split}\\
\begin{split}
\pi_{nm}(\theta) &= \frac{m}{\sin{\theta}}P_n^m(\cos{\theta})
\end{split}\\
\begin{split}
\gamma_{nm} &= \sqrt{\frac{(2n+1)(n-m)!}{4\pi n(n+1)(n+m)!}}
\end{split}
\end{aligned}$$
where superscripts (1) and (+) refer to the regular and singular spherical waves, respectively; $z_n^{(+)}(kr) = h_n^{(1)}(kr)$ and $z_n^{(1)}(kr) = j_n(kr)$. The spherical multipoles can also be obtained from the localized current sources [@Jackson1999; @Grahn2012]. The incident and scattered fields are reconstructed as
$$ \mathbf{E}_\mathrm{sca} = E_0\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\sum_{m=-n}^{n}{[b^E_{nm}\mathbf{N}^{(+)}_{nm}(k\mathbf{r})+b^M_{nm}\mathbf{M}^{(+)}_{nm}(k\mathbf{r})]}$$
$$ \mathbf{E}_\mathrm{inc} = E_0\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\sum_{m=-n}^{n}{[a^E_{nm}\mathbf{N}^{(1)}_{nm}(k\mathbf{r})+a^M_{nm}\mathbf{M}^{(1)}_{nm}(k\mathbf{r})]}$$
Units of polarizability tensors {#appendix:units}
===============================
The $\boldsymbol{\alpha}$-tensor linearly relates the fields and field gradients at the origin to the induced multipoles as: $$\begin{bmatrix}
\mathbf{d}^E \\
\mathbf{Q}^E \\
\mathbf{d}^M \\
\mathbf{Q}^M
\end{bmatrix}
=
\begin{bmatrix}
\alpha^{\mathbf{E}}_{\mathbf{d}^E} & \alpha^{\Diamond\mathbf{E}}_{\mathbf{d}^E} & \alpha^{\mathbf{H}}_{\mathbf{d}^E} & \alpha^{\Diamond\mathbf{H}}_{\mathbf{d}^E} \\
\alpha^{\mathbf{E}}_{\mathbf{Q}^E} & \alpha^{\Diamond\mathbf{E}}_{\mathbf{Q}^E} & \alpha^{\mathbf{H}}_{\mathbf{Q}^E} & \alpha^{\Diamond\mathbf{H}}_{\mathbf{Q}^E} \\
\alpha^{\mathbf{E}}_{\mathbf{d}^M} & \alpha^{\Diamond\mathbf{E}}_{\mathbf{d}^M} & \alpha^{\mathbf{H}}_{\mathbf{d}^M} & \alpha^{\Diamond\mathbf{H}}_{\mathbf{d}^M} \\
\alpha^{\mathbf{E}}_{\mathbf{Q}^M} & \alpha^{\Diamond\mathbf{E}}_{\mathbf{Q}^M} & \alpha^{\mathbf{H}}_{\mathbf{Q}^M} & \alpha^{\Diamond\mathbf{H}}_{\mathbf{Q}^M} \\
\end{bmatrix}
\begin{bmatrix}
\mathbf{E} \\
\Diamond\mathbf{E} \\
\mathbf{H} \\
\Diamond\mathbf{H}
\end{bmatrix}$$ This definition, however, is expressed in SI units. The $\boldsymbol{\alpha}$-tensor in SI units has different units per components as can be seen in the dipolar $\boldsymbol{\alpha}$-tensor: $$\begin{bmatrix}
\mathbf{d}^E \\ \mathbf{d}^M
\end{bmatrix}
=
\begin{bmatrix}
\alpha^{\mathbf{E}}_{\mathbf{d}^E} & \alpha^{\mathbf{H}}_{\mathbf{d}^E} \\
\alpha^{\mathbf{E}}_{\mathbf{d}^M} & \alpha^{\mathbf{H}}_{\mathbf{d}^M}
\end{bmatrix}
\cdot
\begin{bmatrix}
\mathbf{E} \\ \mathbf{H}
\end{bmatrix}
\label{eqn:alpha_SI}$$ The components of $\boldsymbol{\alpha}$-tensor in SI unit can differ by several orders, so they cannot be compared directly. Therefore, the normalized $\boldsymbol{\alpha}$-tensor in units of volume is used in this work, which at dipole regime is expressed as: $$\begin{bmatrix}
\mathbf{d}^E/\epsilon \\
\eta \mathbf{d}^M
\end{bmatrix}
=
\begin{bmatrix}
\alpha^{e1}_{e1} & i\alpha^{m1}_{e1} \\
-i\alpha^{e1}_{m1} & \alpha^{m1}_{m1}
\end{bmatrix}
\cdot
\begin{bmatrix}
\mathbf{E} \\
\eta \mathbf{H}
\end{bmatrix},
\label{eqn:alpha_vol}$$ where $\alpha^{e1}_{e1} = \alpha^{\mathbf{E}}_{\mathbf{d}_e}/\epsilon$, $i\alpha^{m1}_{e1} = \alpha^{\mathbf{H}}_{\mathbf{d}_e}/(\epsilon\eta)$, $-i\alpha^{e1}_{m1} = \eta \alpha^{\mathbf{E}}_{\mathbf{d}_m}$, and $\alpha^{m1}_{m1} = \alpha_{\mathbf{H}}^{\mathbf{d}_m}$. The $\boldsymbol{\alpha}$-tensor components in SI units can be easily obtained from Eqn. 2 and 7. For instance, ED–ED transition term can be expressed as $\alpha^{\mathbf{E}}_{\mathbf{d}_e} = (\frac{\sqrt{3\pi}E_0}{\eta\omega k^2}\bar{\bar{\mathrm{O}}}_1) \mathbf{T}_{E1}^{E1} (\frac{iE_0}{\sqrt{12\pi}}\bar{\bar{\mathrm{O}}}_1)^{-1} = \frac{6\pi\epsilon}{ik^3} \bar{\bar{\mathrm{O}}}_1 \mathbf{T}^{E1}_{E1} \bar{\bar{\mathrm{O}}}_{1}^{-1} = \epsilon \alpha^{e1}_{e1}$. The other transition components in SI units can also be obtained in a similar manner.
Quasistatic polarizablities {#appendix:quasistatic}
===========================
The multipole approach has been successful in providing simple analytic form for describing small nanoparticles. This allowed modelling small dielectric, plasmonic, or chiral nanospheres for many different phenomena including plasmon-enhanced scattering, optical trapping, and chiral optical forces, to name a few. In this section, we compare quasistatic polarizability expressions with the exact polarizability. The quasistatic expressions can be applied to very small nanoparticles and do not describe higher-order multipole contributions that arise in near-field interactions or larger particles or clusters.
Notably, subwavelength nanospheres have often been expressed by the quasistatic polarizability $$\alpha = 4\pi R^3 \frac{\epsilon_r-1}{\epsilon_r+2},$$ where $\epsilon_r$ is the relative permittivity. Note that the quasistatic expression normalized by the sphere volume is independent of the radius. For a small Ag sphere with $R$ = 10 nm, the quasistatic limit (solid line) shows good agreement with the exact polarizability (dashed line), but for a larger Ag sphere with $R$ = 30 nm, the exact polarizability shows red-shifted and broadened resonance due to the larger radiative damping, which the quasistatic model cannot incorporate (Fig. \[fig:qs\_nanosphere\]).
![Polarizability of a Ag sphere normalized by its volume. Solid line: quasistatic; dashed line: exact, small ($R$ = 5 nm); dot-dashed line: exact, large ($R$ = 30 nm); black: real; red: imaginary.[]{data-label="fig:qs_nanosphere"}](Fig_qs_nanosphere.pdf)
The quasistatic expression for polarizability of subwavelength nanorods was only recently reported as simple analytic form [@Moroz2009; @Majic2017]
$$\begin{aligned}
\begin{split}
\alpha_{x}^{x} &= 4\pi a^2c \frac{\epsilon_r-1}{3+3L_x(\epsilon_r-1)}
\end{split}\\
\begin{split}
\alpha_{z}^{z} &= 4\pi a^2c \frac{\epsilon_r-1}{3+3L_z(\epsilon_r-1)}
\end{split}\\
\begin{split}
L_z &= \frac{1-e^2}{e^2}{\Big[}\frac{1}{2e}\ln{\frac{1+e}{1-e}}-1{\Big]}
\end{split}\\
\begin{split}
L_x &= (1-L_z)/2
\end{split}
\end{aligned}$$
where the focal length $f=\sqrt{c^2-a^2}$ and the eccentricity $e=f/c$. Note that the quasistatic expression for nanorod normalized by its volume also is independent of the size, but only depends on the eccentricity. For the short-axis mode, the quasistatic and exact polarizabilities agree well (Fig. \[fig:qs\_nanorod\]a). For the long-axis mode, quasistatic polarizability (solid line) agrees well with the exact polarizability of the small nanorod (dashed line), but the exact polarizability of the larger nanorod shows red-shifted and broadened response due to the larger radiative damping (Fig. \[fig:qs\_nanorod\]b).
![Polarizabilities (a) $\alpha_{xx}$ and (b) $\alpha_{zz}$ of an Ag nanorod. Solid line: quasistatic; dashed line: exact, small ($a$ = 1 nm and $c$ = 5 nm); dot-dashed line: exact, large ($a$ = 10 nm and $c$ = 50 nm); black: real; red: imaginary.[]{data-label="fig:qs_nanorod"}](Fig_qs_nanorod.pdf){width="\linewidth"}
Beyond the ED approximation, the quasistatic polarizabilities of a chiral sphere is given as [@Canaguier-Durand2015]
$$\alpha_{e}= 4\pi R^3 \frac{(\epsilon_r-1)(\mu_r+2)-\kappa^2}{(\epsilon_r+2)(\mu_r+2)-\kappa^2}$$
$$\alpha_{m}= 4\pi R^3 \frac{(\mu_r-1)(\epsilon_r+2)-\kappa^2}{(\mu_r+2)(\epsilon_r+2)-\kappa^2}$$
$$\alpha_{c}= 4\pi R^3 \frac{3\kappa}{(\epsilon_r+2)(\mu_r+2)-\kappa^2}$$
where $\mu_r$ and $\kappa$ are relative relative permeability and chirality parameter of the chiral sphere, respectively. The quasistatic and exact polarizabilities of a small nonmagnetic chiral sphere agree very well (Fig. \[fig:qs\_chiral\]).
![Polarizabilities (a) $\alpha_e$ and (b) $\alpha_c$ of a chiral sphere with $R=10~\text{nm}$. Solid line: quasistatic; dashed line: exact; black: real; red: imaginary.[]{data-label="fig:qs_chiral"}](Fig_qs_chiralsphere.pdf){width="\linewidth"}
Appendix: T-matrix retrieval {#appendix:t-matrix retrieval}
============================
Up to arbitrary multipole orders, $\mathbf{T}$-matrix of several particle systems can be analytically calculated including notably spheres from Mie coefficients, chiral spheres [@Wu2012], homogeneous anisotropic spheres [@Stout2007], and even nonlocal spheres and coreshells [@David2011], and $\mathbf{T}$-matrix of a system of multiple particles can also be defined [@Mishchenko2010]. In general, $\mathbf{T}$-matrix of nonspherical particles should be calculated numerically using Extended Boundary Condition Method [@Mishchenko2002], Discrete-Sources Null-Field Method [@Doicu2006], or FEM [@Fruhnert2017]. In this work, we used FEM to extract $\mathbf{T}$-matrix of meta-atoms for its convenient implementation. However, it should be noted that FEM is very costly for calculating $\mathbf{T}$-matrix compared to surface-integral methods [@Mishchenko2002; @Doicu2006], because they require only particle surfaces to be discretized, whereas FEM requires larger simulation domains including the PML and the spacer between the particle surface and the PML.
The retrieved $\mathbf{T}$-matrix is then used to obtain exact higher-order $\boldsymbol{\alpha}$-tensor. The retrieved $\mathbf{T}$-matrix (or $\boldsymbol{\alpha}$-tensor) can be analytically treated to efficiently calculate orientation-averaged optical responses, or inserted in the multiple-scattering theory to calculate coherently coupled optical responses between discrete scattering objects.
T-matrix and polarizability-tensors of meta-atoms {#appendix:t-matrix}
=================================================
Meta-atoms in the main text
---------------------------
![$\mathbf{T}$-matrices of the meta-atoms discussed in the main text: (a) plasmonic double-bar in Fig. 2, (b) twisted double-bar in Fig. 3, and (c) Si quadrumer in Fig. 4.[]{data-label="fig:main"}](Fig_main.png)
Here, we present $\mathbf{T}$-matrices of meta-atoms, whose $\boldsymbol{\alpha}$-tensors are presented in the main text. Compared to the $\boldsymbol{\alpha}$-tensors with only a few components are visible (Fig. 2b and 3b), $\mathbf{T}$-matrices show more complicated structures, which are difficult to interpret (Fig. \[fig:main\]a,b) because of the spherical basis. On the other hand, meta-atoms with rotational symmetries about $z$-axis show similar level of complexity in their $\mathbf{T}$-matrices and $\boldsymbol{\alpha}$-tensors (Fig. \[fig:main\]c). In later parts, we demonstrate analysis of meta-atoms from their retrieved $\boldsymbol{\alpha}$-tensors.
Plasmonic nanorod
-----------------
![(a) $(\alpha_{e1}^{e1})_{x}^{x}$ and (b) $(\alpha_{e1}^{e1})_{z}^{z}$ of a plasmonic nanorod oriented in $x$-direction (shown in inset), and its (c) $\boldsymbol{\alpha}$-tensor and (d) $\mathbf{T}$-matrix at $\lambda$ = 660 nm.[]{data-label="fig:nanorod"}](Fig_PNR.png){width="80mm"}
First, we analyze a plasmonic nanorod with strongly anisotropic response, which is excited when the incident electric field is parallel to the nanorod axis. This long-axis mode is also known to be strongly redshifted compared to the short-axis mode. The retrieved $\boldsymbol{\alpha}$-tensor of a Ag nanorod clearly demonstrates this feature (Fig. \[fig:nanorod\]a,b). ED response in nanorod-axis ($x$) direction is red-shifted and stronger as can be seen from $(\alpha_{e1}^{e1})_{x}^{x}$ than in short-axis direction shown in $(\alpha_{e1}^{e1})_{z}^{z}$, which is blue-shifted and far weaker than $(\alpha_{e1}^{e1})_{x}^{x}$. In addition, a plasmonic nanorod has only one dominant $\boldsymbol{\alpha}$-tensor component (note that the colorbar is in logarithmic scale). This strongly anisotropic response of a plasmonic nanorod allows it to be safely approximated as a point polarizable anisotropic element with $(\alpha_{e1}^{e1})_{x}^{x}$ present as in Fig. 5 in the main text.
High-index dielectric spheres
-----------------------------
![(a) Multipole-decomposed scattering cross-sections of a Si sphere with $R=70~\text{nm}$. (b) $\boldsymbol{\alpha}$-tensor at $\lambda=580~\text{nm}$, and spectra of (c) $(\alpha_{e1}^{e1})_{x}^{x}$ and (d) $(\alpha_{m1}^{m1})_{x}^{x}$.[]{data-label="fig:dielectric_sphere"}](Fig_Si_sphere.png){width="84mm"}
Recently, high-refractive-index dielectric nanoparticles have been noted for their low loss and higher-order multipole modes coming from Mie-like resonances [@Kuznetsov2012]. A small Si sphere with $R=70~\text{nm}$ by planewave incidence shows strong MD radiation at 580 nm (Fig. \[fig:dielectric\_sphere\]a). The ED and MD resonances originates from $\alpha_{e1}^{e1}$ and $\alpha_{m1}^{m1}$, respectively. Due to the isotropic response coming from the spherical symmetry, only diagonal terms appear in $\boldsymbol{\alpha}$-tensor (Fig. \[fig:dielectric\_sphere\]b).
Split-ring resonators
---------------------
![Ag split-ring resonator. (a) Multipole-decomposed scattering cross-section at x-polarized planewave incidence propagating in z-direction. (c) Retrieved $\boldsymbol{\alpha}$-tensor at 480 nm. (b) Extinction = $\sigma_\mathrm{ext}^{+}+\sigma_\mathrm{ext}^{-}$ and Circular dichroism = $\sigma_\mathrm{ext}^{+}-\sigma_\mathrm{ext}^{-}$, where $\sigma_\mathrm{ext}^{\pm}$ are extinction cross-sections at obliquely incident left- and right-circularly-polarized planewaves. (d) Spectra of $(\alpha_{e1}^{e1})_{x}^{x}$, $(\alpha_{e1}^{e1})_{y}^{y}$, $(\alpha_{m1}^{e1})_{z}^{x}$, and $(\alpha_{e2}^{e1})_{xy}^{x}$. $R=30~\text{nm}$, $r=10~\text{nm}$, $\theta=60^\circ$.[]{data-label="fig:SRR"}](Fig_SRR.png){width="84mm"}
A split-ring resonator (SRR) is one of the most widely studied elements for achieving optically magnetic responses. Interestingly, the origin of this magnetic dipole mode can be explained from the retrieved $\boldsymbol{\alpha}$-tensor (Fig. \[fig:SRR\]b). Incident $x$-polarized electric field on SRR generates current loop in $xy$-plane, which corresponds to magnetic dipole moment oriented in z-direction. This transition is visible in the $(\alpha_{m1}^{e1})_{z}^{x}$ component, which shows transition from $E_x$ into $d^m_z$. However, it should be noted that the magnetic response of SRR is rather weak in visible regime due to large Ohmic losses [@Dolling2005], as can be seen from the weak scattering cross-section intensities (Fig. \[fig:SRR\]a).
Another interesting property from SRR is extrinsic chirality, or helicity dependent chiral response from a geometrically achiral structure at obliquely incident field [@Sersic2012]. It is counter-intuitive that an achiral structure can undergo chiral interaction. Extrinsic chirality occurs because incident field has a defined wavevector, which is not included in the mirror plane of the system. At oblique incidence, two resonances at 480 nm and 680 nm are observed (Fig. \[fig:SRR\]c), which corresponds to dominantly $(\alpha_{e1}^{e1})_{x}^{x}$ and $(\alpha_{e1}^{e1})_{y}^{y}$, respectively. However, the two modes cannot explain extrinsic chirality at the oblique incidence (Fig. \[fig:SRR\]d). From the retrieved $\boldsymbol{\alpha}$-tensor, this extrinsic chirality comes from magneto-electric coupling term $(\alpha_{m1}^{e1})_{z}^{x}$ [@Sersic2012; @Hu2016]. It should be noted that this magneto-electric coupling term disappears for asymmetric SRR [@Liu2016] due to even-parity.
Helicoids
---------
![(a) The schematics of Au helicoid with side length 50 nm. (b) The retrieved $\boldsymbol{\alpha}$-tensor at 580 nm. (c) Extinction and circular dichorism. (d) Spectra of $(\alpha_{e1}^{e1})_{x}^{x}$, $(\alpha_{e1}^{m1})_{x}^{x}$, $(\alpha_{e2}^{e2})_{xx}^{xx}$, and $(\alpha_{e2}^{e2})_{xy}^{xy}$.[]{data-label="fig:helicoid"}](Fig_helicoid.png){width="84mm"}
Finally, we present $\boldsymbol{\alpha}$-tensor of an interesting system with 4-fold rotational symmetry without inversion symmetry. Such system was recently demonstrated in Au helicoids synthesized in solution-phase [@Lee2018]. Due to the 4-fold rotational symmetry in 3D space, only diagonal terms appear in dipole order with degenerate $xx$, $yy$, and $zz$ components. Notably, chiral response is preserved even with this high symmetry. Due to the small size of this particle, dipolar order is sufficient to describe both achiral and chiral responses (Fig. \[fig:helicoid\]c) from the imaginary parts of $(\alpha_{e1}^{e1})_{x}^{x}$ and $(\alpha_{e1}^{m1})_{x}^{x}$, respectively (Fig. \[fig:helicoid\]d). Finally, EQ–EQ transition terms also appear and may become nonnegligible at larger sizes [@Lee2018].
Funding {#funding .unnumbered}
=======
This work is financially supported by the National Research Foundation (NRF) grants (Grants No. NRF2019R1A2C3003129, No. CAMM-2019M3A6B3030637, No. NRF-2019R1A5A8080290, No. NRF-2018M3D1A1058998, and No. NRF-2015R1A5A1037668) funded by the Ministry of Science and ICT (MSIT), Korea. S.S. acknowledges global Ph.D. fellowship (Grant No. NRF-2017H1A2A1043322) from the NRF-MSIT, Korea. J.J. acknowledges a fellowship from Hyundai Motor Chung Mong-Koo Foundation.
Disclosures {#disclosures .unnumbered}
===========
The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'Intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) provides highly conformal dose distributions through the application of multiple, angularly spaced fields, each applying an ad-hoc pattern of spatially varying particle fluences. In particular, Bragg peaks are simultaneously optimized for all the fields. Once the number and the direction of the fields are set, the dose distribution of the IMPT plan is determined by the dose constraints assigned to specific organs-at-risk (OARs) surrounding the tumour. In this work, we introduce a new feature for the OARs, called *opacity*, aimed at improving the quality and the robustness of IMPT plans, by modifying, in the pre-optimization stage, the fluence of the pencil beams, that intersect those structures. The proposed IMPT planning strategy is addressed to those clinical cases, where metallic prothesis or fast density-varying organs can compromise the stability of the dose distribution. We show how the usage of this additional parameter can lead to more accurate IMPT plans with respect to the situation in which only dose constraints are adopted. **Keywords**: Proton therapy, IMPT, dose constraints, pencil beam modulation, Siddon algorithm, robustness, metal implants, fast varying cavities.'
author:
- 'F. Arcadu'
bibliography:
- 'opacity.bib'
date: 'February 16, 2015'
title: |
**Introducing the “opacity” for IMPT planning:\
can it improve robustness and quality of plans?**
---
Proposed method
===============
Pencil beam based treatment
---------------------------
Treatment plans usually involve more the one proton field in order to guarantee dose homogeneity over the target volume and to increase the stability of the plan. The active scanning technique [@Pedroni1995] allows, in particular, to control the dose deposition of each focused pencil beam within the patient volume; this implies that a field is conceived as the collection of all the single dose spots delivered for a specific position of the patient with respect to the nozzle. Thank to this peculiarity, the active scanning enables the construction of complex-shaped dose distributions. Once the number and direction of the proton fields are selected for a treatment, there are two different planning strategies implemented for active scanning based gantries: *single field uniform dose (SFUD)* [@Scheib1993], implying a superposition of the individually optimized dose distributions; *intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT)* [@Lomax1999], consisting in a simultaneous optimization of all the fields. The latter modality can often provide better tradeoffs between the dose coverage of the target and the sparing of the organs at risk.
IMPT optimization
-----------------
The IMPT optimization consists in the following problem [@Albertini2011]: $$\boldsymbol{\omega} = \operatorname*{\arg\!\min}_{\boldsymbol{\omega}} F(\boldsymbol{\omega})$$
$$F(\boldsymbol{\omega}) = \sum\limits_{i_{t}}^{}\left(P_{i_{t}}-D_{i_{t}}(\boldsymbol{\omega})\right)^{2} +
\sum\limits_{i_{o}}^{}g_{i_{o}}^{2}\:\left(P_{i_{o}}-D_{i_{o}}(\boldsymbol{\omega})\right)^{2}
\label{impt-functional}$$
where the first sum runs on the voxel indices of the target $\{i_{t}\}$ and the second one on the voxel indices of the OARs $\{i_{o}\}$, $P_{j}$ and $D_{j}$ are respectively the prescribed and the computed dose for the $j$-th voxel, $\{g_{i_{o}}\}$’s are weights chosen by the planner and $\boldsymbol{\omega} = \{\omega_{1},\cdots,\omega_{N}\}$ corresponds to the fluences of the pencil beams. The iterative minimizer of (\[impt-functional\]) is with the OAR dose constraints, applied through the weights $\{g_{i_{o}}\}$ and with $\boldsymbol{\omega}^{(0)}$, such that each field is characterized by a flat spread-out bragg peak (SOBP) [@Bortfeld1996] within the target volume. Since the number and direction of the fields have been already fixed and the pre-optimized fluences $\boldsymbol{\omega}^{(0)}$ are automatically computed on the basis of the target volume, the dose constraints are the only leverage left at disposal of the planner to modify the resulting dose distribution.
Opacity concept
---------------
The *opacity* is defined as a quality of the OARs in relation to the pencil beams and has to be considered as a simple weight ranging in \[0,1\]. The opacity level (OL) of an OAR is thought to modify the pre-optimized fluences $\boldsymbol{\omega}^{(0)}$ of the pencil beams, whose trajectory (the straight line connecting the Bragg peak position to the leaving point at the nozzle) intersects voxels of such structure. We indicate with $\{k_{n}\} \subseteq \{1,\cdots,N\}$ the list of indices referring to the subset of pencil beams crossing the $n$-th OAR. If the OL = 0, the OAR is considered to be “transparent” and the pencil beams intersecting the structure are left unaltered, $\{\tilde{\omega}_{k_{n}}\} = \{\omega_{k_{n}}\}$; if the OL = 1, the OAR is completely “opaque” and $\{\tilde{\omega}^{(0)}_{k_{n}}\} = 0$; when OL $ = \alpha \in (0,1)$ is “partially opaque” and the pencil beam fluences are penalized in the following way: $$\tilde{\omega}^{(0)}_{\bar{k}_{n}} = \alpha \cdot l_{\bar{k}_{n}} \cdot \omega^{(0)}_{\bar{k}_{n}}
\hspace*{0.6cm} \forall \bar{k}_{n} \in \{k_{n}\} \hspace*{0.3cm},
\label{smooth-penalization}$$ where $l_{\bar{k}_{n}}$ corresponds to the path length travelled by the $\bar{k}_{n}$-th pencil beam inside the $n$-th OAR. Clearly, in this latter case, the longer the path length inside the OAR, the more the initial fluence of the pencil beam will be decreased. The three cases are shown in Fig.\[opacity-levels\]. The OL’s represent essentially an additional degree of freedom at disposal of the planner to change the starting conditions and, therefore, to steer the outcome of the IMPT optimization. The dose constraints modify $\boldsymbol{\omega}^{(0)}$ according to the dose released by the pencil beam to the OAR, whereas the OL’s acts on the basis of the pencil beam trajectory in relation to the OAR. The OL’s penalization requires the knowledge of all the voxel indices that are crossed by every pencil beam. This computation is efficiently performed by an optimized version of the Siddon algorithm [@Jacobs1998], commonly adopted for the fast calculation of radiological paths.
{width="6.0in"}
Materials
=========
IMPT plans of different indications and tumour sites have been re-optimized using the OL penalization and the resulting plans were compared to the delivered ones. In the following, we offer a description of the clinical cases that were selected for this simulation and of the analysis used to benchmark the robustness of the dose distributions.
Patient with metallic cage
--------------------------
The first clinical case concerns a patient with an external metallic cage. Patients with neck tumours may undego surgery before any radiotherapic treatment with protons and a cage is, therefore, required, to stabilize the head to the neck. Since no calibration curve of the cage material is available for dose calculation, no pencil beam has to cross the metallic structure to prevent any wrong placement of Bragg peak inside the patient volume. The strategy followed in the nominal treatment (PLAN-NOM) was to draw safety volumes around the metallic rods and to apply hard dose constraint to such volumes of interest (VOIs), as shown in Fig.\[plan-metallic-cage\], such that the pencil beams of the four fields (F1, F2, F3, F4) involved in the treatment were safe from hitting the rods. The plan has been re-calculated by replacing the safety VOIs and related dose constraints with the effective contours of the rods, set with OL = 1. In a first attempt, the direction of the fields were kept the same (PLAN-OL-1) and , then, an other plan was generated by considering a wider angular spacing between F1-F2 and F3-F4 (PLAN-OL-2). The angular increase of the new fields with respect to the nominal ones was of 10.
Fields crossing nasal cavities
------------------------------
In some clinical cases, the optimal proton fields planned for a treatment cross anatomical cavities to deliver dose to the target volume. Cavities, like the nose or the bowel, may undergo relevant density changes between the day of the treatment and the acquisition of the CT image (used to calculate the dose distributions for all the treatment fractions). Since the pencil beams crossing the cavity encounter a different density object, they may be affected by not negligible range uncertanties; in particular, they will undershoot, in case of a density increase, and overshoot, in the opposite situation. The case of a treatment with fields crossing the nasal cavity has been taken into consideration. The field directions of the nominal plan are shown in Fig.\[field-nasal-cavity-plan\]; the frontal fields F1 and F2 encounter the nasal cavity to reach the target volume. To evaluate the stability of the IMPT plan, first, the original CT image was modified to simulate the extreme scenarios, of the cavity being completely empty (HU = 0) and filled with mucus (HU $\simeq$ 30), as shown in Fig.\[nasal-cavities\]; the original plan (PLAN-NOM) and the plan with OL penalization (PLAN-OL), where an OL $\in (0,1)$ was selected for the nose VOI, were re-computed for both extreme scenarios, to evaluate the potential variation range with respect to the planning CT. We named PLAN-NOM-H and PLAN-NOM-L, respectively, the difference between the nominal plan recomputed on the CT with low and high density nasal cavity and the plan computed on the original CT and we did similarly for the extreme scenario plans with OL penalization (PLAN-OL-H and PLAN-OL-L).
Head and neck tumour
--------------------
One common indication for proton therapy centers is represented by tumours extending both in the head and neck. As the tumour extends over a relatively big area, the treatment can result rather toxic for many organs at risk. These cases are usually treated with four fields, as shown in Fig.\[head-neck-fields-1\]: two coming from the front, aimed at covering the target volume at the level of the shoulders, two coming from behind, supposed to deliver the dose in the head part of the tumour. The drawback of this geometry is that, despite the dose constraints, the front fields irradiate OARs inside the head and, in the same way, the back fields release high dose to the shoulders, without being crucial for target coverage in that point. The OL penalization is, here, exploited to switch off the fields in selected areas and to test a new field geometry. In PLAN-OL-1, two artificial VOIs were drawn at the level if the shoulders and were assigned with OL = 1, to switch off, respectively, the posterior fields irradiating that area. In PLAN-OL-2, two addional artificial VOIs are created at the level of the head and set with OL = 1, to switch off the anteriori fields in the part of the patient volume and a fifth intra-cranial field is added to compensate for the target coverage, as shown in Fig.\[head-neck-intracranial-field\].
{width="3.5in"}
[0.3]{} 
[0.3]{} 
[0.3]{} 
[0.3]{} 
[0.3]{} 
[0.3]{} 
{width="3.5in"}
Results
=======
The results of the simulations performed with the OL penalization are here shown and compared to the nominal plans, described in the previous section.
Patient with metallic cage
--------------------------
Both plans with OL penalization have been re-calculated by dropping the dose constraints on the safety margins drawn around the metallic rods and by setting the VOIs of the actual rod contours with OL = 1. In this way, all pencil beams crossing even a voxel of such strutures are completely switched off and they cannot be activated in the subsequent optimization. In Fig.\[metallic-cage-plan-1\], the dose distributions of PLAN-NOM and PLAN-OL-1 are shown, but it is from tables \[table-metallic-cage-1\] that we get an insight regarding the main differences of the plans. In PLAN-OL-1, the dose coverage of the clinical target volume (CTV) improves significantly leading to an increase of +5.4% of the volume reached by 100% of the prescribed dose ($\mathbf{V_{100}}$). Moreover, left and right parotis, the myelon and the brainstem are characterized by a substantial decrease in both the maximum and the mean dose ($\mathbf{D_{max}}$, $\mathbf{D_{mean}}$) in PLAN-OL-1. The improved sparing of the parotis is well represented by the comparison of the cumulative DVHs in Fig.\[metallic-cage-parotis-dvh-1\], where the red line refers to PLAN-NOM and the blue one to PLAN-OL-1. PLAN-OL-2 was conceived with more angularly spaced fields than the original F1, F2, F3, F4; this configuration would have been not feasible without the OL penalization, since the tough constraints of the rod safety margins would have prevented a homogeneous coverage of the target volume, leading necessarily to underdosed areas in the periphery of the CTV and high dose peaks in the middle. Fig.\[metallic-cage-plan-2\] shows the dose distributions of PLAN-NOM and PLAN-OL-2, whereas results are summarized in tables \[table-metallic-cage-2\]. Despite the fact the increase of $\mathbf{V_{100}}$ is less accentuated in PLAN-OL-2 than in PLAN-OL-1, the improved target coverage is visible in the comparison of the cumulative DVHs of the CTV in Fig.\[metallic-cage-parotis-ctv-2\], whereas no difference was noticeable in the cumulative DVH of PLAN-OL-1 compared to PLAN-NOM. This new field configuration provides a remarkable sparing of the left and right parotis and the brainstem at the cost of decreasing the improvement concerning the myelon.
[0.3]{} 
[0.3]{} 
[0.3]{} 
[0.3]{} 
[0.3]{} 
[0.3]{} 
{width="3.5in"}
[0.3]{} 
[0.3]{} 
CTV PTV
--------------------- -- ------- -- ------- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
$\mathbf{D_{mean}}$ +0.7% +1.2%
$\mathbf{V_{100}}$ +5.4% +7.2%
$\mathbf{D_{max}}$ $\mathbf{D_{mean}}$
------------------ -- -------------------- -- --------------------- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
Right parotis -1.7% -1.1%
Left parotis -3.3% -2.7%
Myelon center -2.5% -0.4%
Brainstem center -1.8% -1.7%
5 pt
CTV PTV
--------------------- -- ------- -- ------- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
$\mathbf{D_{mean}}$ +0.9% +1.2%
$\mathbf{V_{100}}$ +1.5% +3.4%
$\mathbf{D_{max}}$ $\mathbf{D_{mean}}$
------------------ -- -------------------- -- --------------------- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
Right parotis -3.4% -2.4%
Left parotis -6.0% -1.4%
Myelon center -1.3% -0.5%
Brainstem center -2.1% -1.8%
5 pt
Fields crossing the nasal cavities
----------------------------------
To re-calculate the plan on the original CT with OL penalization, the VOI of the nasal cavity was drawn and set with an OL = 0.5, meaning that pencil beams were decreased in fluence proportionally to their path length inside the VOI, according to formula (\[smooth-penalization\]). In the nominal plan, no dose constraints or other countermeasures were taken into consideration to deal with the potential density changes of the nasal cavities, since they lie close to the target volume and any dose constraint would severely affect the target coverage. Fig.\[nasal-cavity-plan\] shows the dose distribution of PLAN-NOM and PLAN-OL, that were computed on the original CT. The plans result to be identical up to differences of 0.2%, as far as concerns both the target coverage and the sparing of the OARs. When PLAN-NOM and PLAN-OL are re-computed on the extreme scenario CTs of Fig.\[nasal-cavities\] and the difference between each of these extreme-case plan and the corresponding reference ones are considered, interesting results emerge. Fig.\[nasal-cavity-plan\] shows PLAN-NOM-H and PLAN-OL-H, whereas tables \[table-nasal-cavity\] highlights the fact that in both scenarios the target coverage is more remarkably more robust for PLAN-OL than for PLAN-NOM, since $\mathbf{V_{100}}$ improves by 3.1% in the high-density nose cavities case and by +5.3% in the other one.
[0.3]{} 
[0.3]{} 
[0.3]{} 
[0.3]{} 
CTV
--------------------- -- ------- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
$\mathbf{D_{mean}}$ +0.4%
$\mathbf{V_{100}}$ +3.1%
CTV
--------------------- -- ------- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
$\mathbf{D_{mean}}$ +0.5%
$\mathbf{V_{100}}$ +5.3%
Head and neck tumour
--------------------
In this clinical case, the OL penalization is aimed at optimizing the same fields of the nominal plan (PLAN-OL-1) and at testing a new treatment configuration (PLAN-OL-2). By comparing the dose distributions of PLAN-NOM and PLAN-OL-1 at the level of the shoulders in Fig.\[head-neck-plan-1\], it is noticeable how the dose in PLAN-OL-1 results better confined inside the CTV. This fact determines a remarkable improvement in the sparing of the esophagus and the spinal cord, as reported in Table \[table-head-neck-1\] and in Fig.\[head-neck-dvh-1\], where the comparison between the cumulative DVHs of the two plans are shown. No relevant changes concern the coverage of the target volume, since $\mathbf{D_{mean}}$ differs by 0.3% from the nominal plan. These results clearly show that switching off the posterior fields at the level of the shoulders allows to achieve a better sparing of some OARs, while keeping the same irradiation level for the tumour. In PLAN-OL-2, a different field geometry has been investigated: the posterior fields are switched off at the level of the shoulders, the anterior ones at the level of the head and a fifth intracranial field is added (Fig.\[head-neck-intracranial-field\]). The goal was to achieve a better preservation of the OARs inside the head. The dose distributions (Fig.\[head-neck-plan-2\]) share a very similar coverage of the target volume, but they are characterized by substantial differences in the dose delivered to the OARs, as shown by Table \[table-head-neck-2\]. In fact, the huge improvements in the sparing of the chiasm, right lens (Fig.\[head-neck-dvh-2\]a), left lens (\[head-neck-dvh-2\]b), left inner ear and the spinal cord (considering in first place the decrease of $\mathbf{D_{max}}$) are followed by a significant increase of the peak dose inside the thyroid and the mean dose to the brainstem. In this case, PLAN-OL-2 is not necessarily superior to PLAN-NOM, but it is undeniable that the OL penalization has allowed the planner to test a scenario, that the simple enforcement of the dose constraints would not have provided.
[0.3]{} 
[0.3]{} 
[0.3]{} 
[0.3]{} 
$\mathbf{D_{max}}$ $\mathbf{D_{mean}}$
----------------- -- -------------------- -- --------------------- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
Right inner ear -0.3% -1.2%
Esophagus / -2.2%
Spinal cord -0.2% -3.2%
Brainstem -1.0% -0.6%
5 pt
[0.3]{} 
[0.3]{} 
[0.3]{} 
[0.3]{} 
\
5 pt
[0.3]{} 
$\mathbf{D_{max}}$ $\mathbf{D_{mean}}$
-------------------- -- -------------------- -- --------------------- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
Right lens -9.0% -7.1%
Left lens -3.9% -4.1%
Left inner ear -2.6% +0.3%
Left parotis gland -0.2% -3.9%
Thyroid +2.7% +4.9%
Spinal cord -2.0% +2.0%
Brainstem -1.9% +9.5%
Chiasm -13.9% -4.3%
5 pt
Discussion
==========
In this work, we have introduced the concept of *opacity* as a quality assigned to VOIs and aimed at steering the outcome of the IMPT planning by changing the starting condition of the optimization. In particular, the opacity level (OL) of a VOI is a weight ranging in \[0,1\] and is used to penalize the initial fluence of the pencil beams crossing the voxels of such structure: when OL = 0, the VOI is transparent and no penalization is performed; when 0 $<$ OL $<$ 1, the pencil beams are decreased in fluence proportionally to their path length inside the VOI; when OL = 1, they are totally switched off. We have shown how this simple additional feature can lead to dose distributions of higher quality and robustness within the framework the IMPT treatment planning. Three different clinical cases were taken into consideration to show the potential advantage of adopting the OL penalization in the pre-optimization stage: a patient with a post-surgery metallic cage, a treatment where fields cross the nasal cavities and the case of a complex head and neck tumour. Concerning the first clinical case, the opacity tool has shown to perfectly tackle the presence of metallic structures: the safety margins and hard dose constraint on the metal are replaced with the actual contour of the structure and set with OL = 1. This approach has lead to a plan, where both the coverage of the target volume and the sparing of some OARs have improved. The strategy to handle the metallic cage can be re-proposed for golden teeth or any other prothesis, whose composition and, therefore, calibration curve are not known. As far as regards the second clinical case, the OL penalization has provided a more robust dose distribution in relation to the possible density changes inside the nasal cavities. Since the the plan does not change when OL is set to a specific value in (0,1), we obtain a simple way to guarantee the stability of the treatment. This approach may be applied for any other anatomical cavity, placed close to the tumour and that can undergo substantial density variations within the treatment frametime. For the case of the head and neck tumour, we have shown how the opacity allows to optimize the usage of each single field, especially when dealing with a tumour mass of complex shape and considerable extension. We have also pointed out how the opacity can easily shape the fields in order to test treatment scenario, that would not be possible to achieve only through dose constraints. In conclusion, the opacity is a leverage that be used by the planner to mould the IMPT dose distributions, when seeking for the best tradeoff between target coverage and sparing of the OARs. It is no meant to replace the dose constraints, but rather to be played as an additional card in the IMPT treatment planning.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'The first-order, infinite-component field equations we proposed before for non-relativistic anyons (identified with particles in the plane with noncommuting coordinates) are generalized to accommodate arbitrary background electromagnetic fields. Consistent coupling of the underlying classical system to arbitrary fields is introduced; at a critical value of the magnetic field, the particle follows a Hall-like law of motion. The corresponding quantized system reveals a hidden nonlocality if the magnetic field is inhomogeneous. In the quantum Landau problem spectral as well as state structure (finite vs. infinite) asymmetry is found. The bound and scattering states, separated by the critical magnetic field phase, behave as further, distinct phases.'
author:
- |
[P. A. Horváthy${}^a$]{}[^1] [^2]\
\
[*${}^a$Laboratoire de Mathématiques et de Physique Théorique*]{}\
[*Université de Tours, France*]{}\
[*${}^b$Departamento de Física, Universidad de Santiago de Chile*]{}\
[*Casilla 307, Santiago 2, Chile*]{}
title: ' [**Nonrelativistic anyons in external electromagnetic field** ]{}'
---
.5cm
Introduction
============
In a previous paper [@HP2] we proposed an infinite set of first-order field equations for non-relativistic anyons, namely $$\left\{\begin{array}{ll}
i{\partial}_{t}\phi_{k}+\displaystyle\sqrt{\frac{k+1}{2\theta}}\,
\displaystyle\frac{p_{+}}{m}\,\phi_{k+1}=0,
\\[16pt]
p_{-}\,\phi_{k}
+\displaystyle\sqrt{\frac{2(k+1)}{\theta}}\,
\phi_{k+1}=0,
\end{array}\right.
\label{infLL}$$ k=0,1,…. Here $p_\pm=p_1\pm ip_2$, and we assume for definiteness that the non-commutative parameter $\theta$ (whose physical dimension is $m^{-2}$, see below) is positive. Grouping the upper and lower equations, respectively, (\[infLL\]) can also be presented in the form $$\left\{\begin{array}{c}
D|\phi\rangle=0
\\[10pt]
\lambda_-|\phi\rangle=0
\end{array}\right.,
\qquad
\begin{array}{cc}
D=i{\partial}_t-h,\hfill
&h=\vec{p}\cdot\vec{v}-\frac{1}{2}m\, v_+v_-,
\\[10pt]
\lambda_-=p_--mv_- ,\quad&
\end{array}
\label{DL}$$ where $|\phi\rangle=\sum_{k=0}^\infty\phi_{k}|k\rangle_v$. The $|k\rangle_v$ are the Fock states of the velocity operators $v_{\pm}=v_1\pm iv_2$, $v_-|0\rangle_v=0$. The latters are analogous to the $\alpha$ matrices of Dirac, but are associated with an infinite-component, Majorana - type representation of the planar Galilei (rather then Lorentz) group.
The first of these equations is reminiscent of the usual Dirac equation (more precisely, of its non-relativistic counterpart due to Lévy-Leblond [@LL]) in that it is of the first order in the derivatives. $h$ is the Hamiltonian.
$\lambda_-$ measures the difference between the canonical ($p_i$) and the mechanical ($mv_i$) momenta. The second equation can be viewed as a constraint $\lambda_-\vert\phi\!>_{phys}=0$ which specifies the physical subspace as composed of coherent states of the velocity. This makes the spectrum bounded from below by freezing the internal spin degrees of freedom [@HP2].
Eliminating the velocity operator using the constraint converts the first equation into a quadratic expression, which is the quantum version of the acceleration-dependent system of Lukierski et al. [@LSZ1], and can be obtained as a tricky non-relativistic limit of Polyakov’s “particle with torsion” [@HP1; @Polyakov].
The system (\[DL\]) realizes the “exotic” \[i. e., two-fold centrally extended\] planar Galilean symmetry [@exotic]. The commutator of the velocity operators is in fact $[v_-,v_+]=2\kappa^{-1}$ where the real constant $\kappa=\theta m^2$ is indeed the second central charge that measures the extent Galilean boosts fail to commute [@exotic]. The Hamiltonian and the constraint weakly commute, $$\Big[h,\lambda_-\Big]=\frac{1}{m\theta}\lambda_-.
\label{freeconsrel}$$ The relation (\[freeconsrel\]), which is the archetype of “good” behaviour, guarantees that the physical states do not mix with the unphysical ones during time evolution, i.e., the [*consistency*]{} of the system.
The equations (\[DL\]) only describe free particles, though, and coupling them to electromagnetic field is not entirely trivial. The standard “minimal coupling” rule $\vp\to\vp-e\vA$, simply inserted into both the Hamiltonian and the constraint, yields in fact also some unwanted terms, see (\[inconsrel\]) below.
We would also like to remind the reader to the analogous difficulties encountered in the relativistic case: the first-order, Majorana-Dirac type anyon field equations considered in [@JNany; @Plany; @MP1] as well as those put forward by Dirac [@Dirac], only describe free particles. Their coupling to external electromagnetic field is still an unsolved problem.
In this paper, we find a Hamiltonian and a constraint which involve the electromagnetic field and such that they [*weakly commute*]{}.
A general framework, which includes both minimal and also nonminimal coupling, is presented. Special attention is paid to a critical case. The quantum Landau problem and the associated field equations are studied in detail.
Our paper is organized as follows. In Section 2 the free classical symplectic model which underlies our field-theoretical system (\[DL\]) is generalized so that it accommodates arbitrary background magnetic and electric fields. The system we obtain is described by two second class constraints, which, at the critical value of magnetic field, are transmuted into first class constraints.
Section 3 is devoted to the analysis of classical system in the critical case. It is performed at the level of the equations of motion, proceeding from the generic case and developing a Hamiltonian analysis. For minimal coupling the reduced Hamiltonian is given by the initial scalar potential corrected by a term, which is quadratic in the electric field.
In Section 4 our analysis is extended to the quantum case. First we identify the quantum Hamiltonian and constraints, and then show that, when the magnetic field is inhomogeneous, the theory reveals a hidden nonlocal structure.
Then we analyse in detail the Landau problem in a constant $B$- field, for which theory is local, and the generalization of the free anyon field equations (\[infLL\]) are found.
A special section is devoted to the critical case, and its relation to the generic (noncritical) Landau problem.
Our results are summarized in Section \[Conc\].
Classical framework {#classical}
===================
The free symplectic model
-------------------------
The classical counterpart of the system (\[DL\]) is given by its symplectic structure and a pair of real second class constraints $$\begin{aligned}
\omega=dp_i\wedge dx_i +\frac{1}{2}
\kappa\epsilon_{ij}
dv_i\wedge dv_j,
\label{symp0}
\\[6pt]
\lambda_i=p_i-mv_i\approx 0,\qquad
\{\lambda_i,\lambda_j\}=-\theta^{-1}\epsilon_{ij},
\label{lambda}\end{aligned}$$ augmented with a Hamiltonian, presented in either of the equivalent forms $$\begin{aligned}
h=p_iv_i-\frac{1}{2} mv_i^2=
\frac{1}{2}mv_i^2+v_i\lambda_i=
\Di\frac{1}{2m}(p_i^2-\lambda_i^2).
\label{h3}\end{aligned}$$ The Lagrange multipliers ($v_i$) in the middle expression guarantee the conservation of the constraints, $\dot{\lambda}_i=\{\lambda_i,h\}\approx 0$ [^3]. The system has the conserved angular momentum $$J=\epsilon_{ij}x_ip_j+\frac{1}{2}\theta m^2v_+v_-.
\label{Jfree}$$
The second class constraints (\[lambda\]) reduce the number of physical phase space degrees of freedom from $6$ to $4$. The gauge-invariant extension of the original coordinates $x_i$, $$X_i=x_i-\theta\epsilon_{ij}\lambda_j,
\label{X}$$ and the momenta satisfy the relations $\{X_i,\lambda_j\}=\{p_i,\lambda_j\}=0$, and can be therefore identified with dynamical variables describing the physical degrees of freedom (observables) of the system. By (\[symp0\]), $$\{p_i,p_j\}=0,\quad
\{X_i,p_j\}=\delta_{ij},\quad
\{X_i,X_j\}=\theta\epsilon_{ij}.
\label{Xp0}$$ Let us stress, in particular, that the new coordinates $X_{i}$ are non-commuting. The angular momentum is presented equivalently as $$J\approx \epsilon_{ij}X_ip_j +\frac{1}{2}\theta p_i^2.
\label{JXp}$$
The Poisson bracket relations (\[Xp0\]) imply that, when restricted to the surface of second class constraints, the classical system is equivalent to the free exotic particle of [@DH].
Interactions {#interac}
------------
Let us assume that the magnetic and electric fields are static, given by abelian vector and scalar potentials, $A_i(\vx)$ and $V(\vx)$, $B=\epsilon_{ij}{\partial}_iA_j$, and $eE_i=-{\partial}_iV$, respectively. Let us consider the usual minimal coupling rule $$p_{i}\to P_{i}=p_{i}-eA_{i}(\vx).
\label{pP}$$ Inserting (\[pP\]) into the Hamiltonian and the constraints, $$\begin{aligned}
h\to \widetilde{H}=
\vP\cdot
\vv -\frac{1}{2}m
\, \vv{}\,{}^2+V(\vx)
\qquad\hbox{and}\qquad
\lambda_i\to
\widetilde{\Lambda}_i=P_i-mv_i\approx 0,
\label{Lam}\end{aligned}$$ respectively, would yield additional terms in the Poisson bracket, $$\Big\{\widetilde{H},\widetilde{\Lambda}_i\Big\}
=\frac{1}{m\theta}\widetilde{\Lambda}_i+eBv_i+{\partial}_iV.
\label{inconsrel}$$ violating the consistency relation (\[freeconsrel\]).
Similarly, $
\{P_i,\widetilde{\Lambda}_j\}= eB\epsilon_{ij}\neq0
$ so that the $P_i$ in (\[pP\]) are not observable.
Below we correct these defects. On account of $$\{\widetilde{\Lambda}_i,\widetilde{\Lambda}_j\}=
-\theta^{-1}(1-\beta)\epsilon_{ij}
\qquad\hbox{where}\qquad
\beta=\beta(\vx)=e\theta B(\vx),
\label{tLij}$$ it is necessary to distinguish two cases. Let us define the critical magnetic field by putting $$B_{c}=\displaystyle\frac{1}{e\theta}.
\label{Bc}$$
When $B\neq B_{c}$, the constraints (\[Lam\]) are second class, but for $B=B_c$ they turn into first class. These cases should be analyzed separately.
We first consider the generic case $B\neq B_{c}$. Let us first assume that we only have a magnetic field, and try to generalize the free (kinetic) Hamiltonian in (\[h3\]) as $$H_B=\frac{1}{2}mv_i^2+u_i\widetilde{\Lambda}_i.
\label{H0tL}$$ Requiring that the constraints (\[Lam\]) be preserved, $
\displaystyle\frac{d}{dt}\widetilde{\Lambda}_i\approx 0,
$ fixes the Lagrange multipliers as $u_i=(1-\beta)^{-1}v_i$, and we get $$H_B=\frac{1}{2}mv_i^2+v_i\Lambda_i,
\qquad\hbox{where}\qquad
\Lambda_i=\displaystyle\frac{1}{1-\beta}\,
\widetilde{\Lambda}_i\approx 0.
\label{Li}$$ Then $$\{H_B,\Lambda_i\}=
\left(
\left(\displaystyle\frac{1}{m\theta}\delta_{jl}
+\frac{1}{2}v_j \epsilon_{lk}\partial_{k}
\right)(1-\beta(x))^{-1}\right)\Lambda_l\epsilon_{ji}$$ weakly vanishes, as expected.
As long as $\beta\neq1$, the new constraints $\Lambda_i$ in (\[Li\]) are equivalent to the old ones in (\[Lam\]) and indeed satisfy $$\{\Lambda_i,\Lambda_j\}=
\left(-\displaystyle\frac{1}{\theta(1-\beta)}+
\Delta\right)\epsilon_{ij}
\approx
-\frac{1}{\theta(1-\beta)}\,
\epsilon_{ij},
\qquad
\Delta=\frac{1}{2}
\epsilon_{ij}\Lambda_i\partial_j
(1-\beta)^{-1}\approx0.
\label{LLD}$$
The $\Lambda_i$ can also be presented in a form similar to (\[lambda\]), $$\Lambda_i=\cP_i-mv_i\approx 0
\qquad\hbox{with}\qquad
\cP_i=\displaystyle\frac{1}{1-\beta}\,
(P_i-m\beta v_i).
\label{cPi}$$ The new “momenta” $\cP_i$, unlike the $P_i$, [*are*]{} observable, $
\{\cP_i,\Lambda_j\}=\epsilon_{ij}\Delta\approx 0.
$ The Hamiltonian (\[Li\]) has again equivalent forms, namely $$\begin{aligned}
H_B=\cP_iv_i-\frac{1}{2}mv_i^2
=\displaystyle\frac{1}{2m}(\cP_i^2-\Lambda_i^2).
\label{cHcP02}\end{aligned}$$
The generalization of the free coordinate $X_i$ in (\[X\]), $$\cX_i=x_i-\theta\epsilon_{ij}\Lambda_j,
\label{cXx}$$ is also observable, $
\{\cX_i,\Lambda_j\}=\theta\Delta\delta_{ij}\approx 0.
$ Putting $\Omega= (1-\beta)^{-1}+\theta\Delta$, $$\begin{aligned}
\Big\{\cX_i,\cX_j\Big\}=&\theta\Omega\,\epsilon_{ij}\hfill
&\approx\displaystyle\frac{\theta}{1-\beta}\,
\epsilon_{ij},\label{cXcXcomrel}
\\[8pt]
\Big\{\cX_i,\cP_i\Big\}=&\Omega\,\delta_{ij}\hfill
&\approx\displaystyle\frac{1}{1-\beta}\,\delta_{ij},
\label{cXcPcomrel}
\\[8pt]
\Big\{\cP_i,\cP_j\Big\}=&\displaystyle\frac{\Omega-1}{\theta}\,\epsilon_{ij}\hfill
&\approx\displaystyle\frac{eB}{1-\beta}\epsilon_{ij}.
\label{cPcPcomrel}\end{aligned}$$ The angular momentum (\[JXp\]) is now generalized to $$J=\epsilon_{ij}\cX_i\cP_j
+\frac{1}{2}\theta\cP_i^2+\frac{1}{2}eB\cX_i^2.
\label{JcXP}$$ It generates rotations of the observables $\cX_i$ and $\cP_i$.
Having identified the observable variables which correspond to the physical degrees of freedom, now we extend the Hamiltonian in (\[Li\]) by adding a scalar potential.
$\bullet$ Let us first consider $$H=H_B+V(\cX),
\label{minham}$$ for which the (\[freeconsrel\])-type consistency condition $
\Big\{H,\Lambda_i\Big\}\approx 0
$ holds.
Since $\cX_i\approx x_i$, the derivative $\partial_i V(\cX)=-eE_i(\cX)$ is ($-e$ times) the electric field. (\[minham\]) is viewed therefore as a generalization of the minimally coupled Hamiltonian. It generates the equations of motion $$\begin{aligned}
&m^*\dot{\cX}_i\hfill=\left(\big(
\cP_i+m\theta\epsilon_{ij}\partial_jV(\cX)\big)\,
\Omega
-\theta\Delta\Lambda_i
\right)(1-\beta)\hfill
\approx\cP_i-em\theta \epsilon_{ij}E_j,&
\label{vitesse1}
\\[8pt]
&m^*\dot{\cP}_i\hfill=\theta^{-1}\epsilon_{ij}\big(m^*\dot{
\cX}_j-
(1-\beta)\cP_j\big)\hfill
\approx
eB\epsilon_{ij}\cP_j+emE_i.&
\label{Lorentz1}\end{aligned}$$ where $$m^*=m(1-\beta)=m(1-e\theta B)$$ is the effective mass. The second equation from (\[Lorentz1\]) on account of the first one can be presented in the equivalent form $$\dot{\cP}_i\approx
eB(\cX)\epsilon_{ij}\dot{\cX}_j+eE_i(\cX),
\label{PXEi}$$
On-shell, our extended scheme reduces hence to that of [@DH].
Off the critical case, the variables $\cX_{i}, \cP_{i}$ are observable and provide us with a satisfactory description of the system in terms of the constraints $\Lambda_{i}$ (\[cPi\]) and the Hamiltonian $H$ (\[minham\]). The interaction can, however, also be discussed in terms of the vector $$Y_i=x_i+m\theta\epsilon_{ij}v_j,
\label{Y}$$ whose use will be particularly convenient in the critical case. In terms of $\cX_i$ and $\cP_i$, it can be presented equivalently as $$Y_i=\cX_i+\theta\epsilon_{ij}\cP_j.
\label{Y*}$$
$Y_{i}$ is, like $\cX_i$ and $\cP_i$, observable, but unlike these, it [*strongly*]{} commutes with the constraints, $$\{Y_i,\Lambda_j\}=0.$$ $Y_i$ is decoupled from the coordinates $\cX_i$ and satisfies $$\{Y_i,\cX_j\}=0,\qquad
\{Y_i,\cP_j\}=\delta_{ij},
\label{YPX}$$ $$\{Y_i,Y_j\}=-\theta\epsilon_{ij}.
\label{YY}$$ In terms of $\cP_i$ and $Y_i$, (\[vitesse1\]) takes the form familiar from point mechanics, $$m\dot{Y}_i\approx \cP_i.
\label{PdotX}$$
Using the decoupled, independent observables $\cX_i$ and $Y_i$, the generator of rotations, (\[JcXP\]), can be represented in a quadratic normal form, $$J=\frac{1}{2\theta}\left(Y_i^2-(1-\beta)\cX_i^2\right).
\label{JYX}$$
$\bullet$ Another Hamiltonian can also be considered now: $$\check{H}=H_B+\check{V}(Y).
\label{nonmin}$$ where, to avoid confusion with the previous case, we called the potential $\check{V}$.
It also satisfies the classical counterpart of (\[freeconsrel\]), $\{\check{H},\Lambda_i\}\approx 0$. The expansion $$\check{V}(Y)=\check{V}(\cX)-\theta
e\epsilon_{ij}\check{E}_i(\cX)\cP_j+
\ldots$$ allows us to infer that $\partial_i\check{V}(Y)=-e{\check{E}}_i(Y)$ is the electric field only if $\check{V}(Y)$ is linear. The Hamiltonian (\[nonmin\]) describes therefore a particle with non-commuting coordinates and with non-minimal coupling. The associated equation of motion can be written in the form $$m^*\dot{\cX}_i\approx \cP_i,\qquad
m^*\dot{\cP}_i\approx
eB\epsilon_{ij}\cP_j+em^*\check{E}_i(Y),
\label{EMnm}$$ cf. Eqs. (\[PdotX\]) and (\[Lorentz1\]), respectively[^4].
For a constant magnetic field $B=B_0\neq B_{c}$, the Lorentz force law (\[PXEi\]) of the minimal coupling case can be presented in the equivalent form $$\dot{\cX}^{gc}_i\approx \frac{1}{B_0}
\epsilon_{ij}E_j(\cX),
\label{Xgmin}$$ where $${\cX}^{gc}_i:=\cX_i+\frac{1}{eB_0}
\epsilon_{ij}\cP_j.
\label{Xgc}$$ In the nonminimal case we have instead, using (\[EMnm\]), $$\dot {\cX}^{gc}_i\approx \frac{1}{B_0}
\epsilon_{ij}\check{E}_j(Y).
\label{Xgnm}$$ ${\cX}^{gc}_i$ can therefore be interpreted, in both cases, as the guiding center coordinate [@Ezawa].
Compared to $Y_i$, ${\cX}^{gc}_i$ behaves in the opposite way: it is decoupled from $\cP_i$ (but not from $\cX_i$), $\{\cX^{gc}_i,\cP_j\}\approx 0$ \[that is behind its evolution law (\[Xgmin\]) or (\[Xgnm\])\], and its brackets depend on the value of the constant magnetic field, $$\{\cX^{gc}_i,\cX^{gc}_j\}\approx
-\frac{1}{eB_0}\epsilon_{ij}.
\label{XXgc}$$
Let us stress, however, that the definition (\[Xgc\]) of the guiding center coordinate is restricted to a homogeneous magnetic field. Naively extended to the inhomogeneous case, $\cX^{gc}_i$ will perform circular motion with amplitude proportional to the gradient of $B$, i.e. it will be a guiding center coordinate in zero order of $\partial_i B$. The brackets (\[XXgc\]) also will be corrected by the term proportional to the gradient of magnetic field.
We conclude this section with presenting the second-order form of our equations of motion.
$\bullet$ In the minimal case (\[vitesse1\]) – (\[Lorentz1\]) we have $$\displaystyle\frac{d}{dt}
\big(
m^*\dot{\cX}_i+m\theta e\epsilon_{ij}E_j(\cX)\big)
\approx
eB(\cX)\epsilon_{ij}\dot{\cX}_j+
eE_i(\cX).
\label{dotcX}$$ Expressed in terms of the coordinates $Y_i$, this reads $$m^*\ddot{Y}_i
\approx
eB(\cX)\epsilon_{ij}
\dot{Y}_j+eE_i(\cX),
\label{dotX}$$ where the arguments of the magnetic and electric fields are given by $
\cX_i=Y_i-m\theta\epsilon_{ij}
\dot{Y}_j.
\label{cXX}
$
$\bullet$ In the non-minimal case (\[nonmin\]) we have instead $$\displaystyle\frac{d}{dt}(m^*\dot{\cX}_i)
\approx
eB(\cX)\epsilon_{ij}\dot{\cX}_j+
e\check{E}_i(Y),
\label{dotcX*}$$ where it is assumed that $Y_i=\cX_i+m^*\theta\epsilon_{ij}
\dot{\cX}_j$. Equivalently, in terms of the $Y_i$, $$m^*\displaystyle
\frac{d}{dt}(\dot{Y}_i-e\theta\epsilon_{ij}
\check{E}_j(Y))
\approx
eB(\cX)\epsilon_{ij}\dot{Y}_j+
e\check{E}_j(Y),
\label{nm2Y}$$ where it is assumed that the argument of $B$ is expressed via the relation $\cX_i=Y_i-m\theta\epsilon_{ij}\dot{Y}_j
-m\theta^2\check{E}_i(Y)$.
Note that for constant magnetic and electric fields, $B=B_0=const$, and $E_i=\check{E}_i=E^0_i=const$, respectively, the equations (\[dotcX\]), (\[dotX\]), (\[dotcX\*\]) and (\[nm2Y\]) take all the same form, namely $$m^*\ddot{Z}_i=eB_0\epsilon_{ij}\dot{Z}_j+eE^0_i,
\label{Z}$$ where $Z_i$ is either $\cX_i$ or $Y_i$.
The critical case $B=B_{c}$ {#critical}
===========================
For $B=B_{c}$ the constraints $\Lambda_{i}$ as well as the observables $\cP_i$ and $\cX_i$ are all ill-defined; the variable $Y_i$ in (\[Y\]) behaves in turn regularly.
The guiding center coordinates (\[Xgc\]) are, a priori, only defined off the critical case. The divergences are readily seen to cancel as $B_0\rightarrow B_c$, however, and (\[Xgc\]) becomes precisely $Y_i$, presented in the form (\[Y\*\]). The brackets (\[XXgc\]) take the form (\[YY\]). Thus, in the critical case, $Y_{i}$ becomes the guiding center coordinate.
$\bullet$ For the minimal coupling, (\[minham\]) at $B=B_c$, Eq. (\[vitesse1\]) is reduced to $\cP_i\approx
em\theta\epsilon_{ij}E_j$, and $Y_i$ becomes, using Eq. (\[Y\*\]) and $\cX_{i}\approx x_i$, $$Y_i\approx x_i-\displaystyle\frac{m}{eB_c^2}E_i(\vx).
\label{guidcent}$$ The equations of motion (\[dotX\]) become now first order, $$\dot{Y}_i\approx
\displaystyle\frac{1}{B_c}
\epsilon_{ij}E_j(\vx),
\label{dXcrit}$$ cf. Eqn. (\[Xgmin\]), and we indeed recognize $Y_i$ as the familiar expression of the guiding center in the Hall effect.
$\bullet$ Similarly in the non-minimal case (\[nonmin\]), at $B=B_c$ the first equation from (\[EMnm\]) gives $\cP_i\approx 0$, and with $\cX_{i}\approx x_i$, from Eqn. (\[Y\*\]) we find $$Y_i\approx x_i.
\label{Yxnm}$$ Then, on account of Eq. (\[dotcX\*\]) with $m^*=0$, we find that the [*guiding center*]{} follows the law $$\dot{Y}_i\approx\displaystyle\frac{1}{B_c}
\epsilon_{ij}\check{E}_j(Y),
\label{YHall}$$ cf. Eqn. (\[Xgnm\]).
Both equations (\[dXcrit\]) and (\[YHall\]) are reminiscent of the [*Hall law*]{}, $\dot{Z}_i=\frac{1}{B_c}\epsilon_{ij}E^0_j$, to which they both reduce if the electric field is homogeneous. In the general case, however, they are slightly different : on the one hand, in (\[dXcrit\]) the argument of electric field is $x_i$, which is related to $Y_i$ via Eqn. (\[guidcent\]). On the other hand, as noted above, $\check{E}_i$ in (\[YHall\]) is the electric field only for $\check{E}_i=const$.
After these preliminary observations, we present a Hamiltonian analysis of the critical case.
For $B=B_{c}$ we have $\beta=1$; the constraints (\[Lam\]) become first class, and reduce therefore the dimension of the physical phase subspace by $4$, rather than by $2$. In all cases (critical or not), $
\{Y_i,\tilde{\Lambda}_j\}=0.
$ In the critical case the noncommuting variables $Y_i$ represent the two independent phase space degrees of freedom of the physical subspace. As already said, the relation of the initial coordinates $x_i$ to $Y_i$ depends on the choice of the potential.
For the consistency of the theory, the conservation of the constraints (\[Lam\]) has to be checked.
$\bullet$ Let us first consider the minimally coupled system with $B=B_{c}$. We seek again our Hamiltonian in the form $$H=\frac{1}{2}mv_i^2
+u_i\tilde{\Lambda}_i+V(\vx),
\label{cHum}$$ The first two terms here are as in (\[H0tL\]), but the argument of the potential has been changed from $\cX_{i}$ \[which is ill-defined for $B=B_{c}$\] to $x_{i}(\approx \cX_i)$. The conservation of the constraints $\tilde{\Lambda}_i\approx 0$ results in the gauge-fixing conditions $$\chi_i=v_i+\theta\epsilon_{ij}
\partial_jV(\vx)\approx 0,
\qquad\hbox{i. e.}\qquad
P_{i}\approx m\epsilon_{ij}\frac{E_{j}(\vx)}{B_{c}}
\label{chivV}$$ which played a rôle in the Hamiltonian reduction in [@DH].
The conservation of (\[chivV\]) requires in turn, $$M_{ij}u_j=v_i,
\qquad
M_{ij}=\delta_{ij}+m\theta^2\partial_i\partial_j V.
\label{uvV}$$ When the matrix $M_{ij}$ is non-singular, the constraints (\[Lam\]) and gauge conditions (\[chivV\]) provide us with four second class constraints; then the equations (\[uvV\]) can be solved for the $u_i$.
Let us mention for completeness that, for a repulsive oscillator potential $$V(x)=-\alpha\frac{eB}{2m\theta} x_i^2+\mu_i x_i+\nu,$$ where $\alpha$, $\mu_i$ and $\nu$ are constants, the matrix $M_{ij}$ in (\[uvV\]) vanishes if $\alpha=1$. Then (\[uvV\]) gives new constraints $v_i\approx0$, and we get $6$ second class constraints and reduction yields a zero-dimensional phase subspace (i. e. a point) with fixed values $$x_i=Y_i=m\theta^2\mu_i,
\quad
p_i=eA^c_i(x)_{x_i=m\theta^2\mu_i},
\quad
\epsilon_{ij}\partial_iA^c_j=B_c.$$ This can be understood as follows. The equations of motion (\[dotcX\]) with $V(\cX)=V(x)_{x_i=\cX_i}$ specified above, now read $$(1-\beta)\ddot{\cX}_i+(\alpha-1)\frac{eB}{m}\epsilon_{ij}
\dot{\cX}_j
-\frac{\alpha}{m\theta}\,
\frac{eB}{m}\cX_i +\frac{1}{m}\mu_i=0.
\label{E2}$$ When $B=B_{c}=(e\theta)^{-1}$ and $\alpha\neq 1$, we have the Hall-like law (\[dXcrit\]) \[whereas for $\alpha=1$, eq. (\[E2\]) reduces to $\cX_i=m\theta^2\mu_i$\]. When $B\neq B_{crit}$ and $\alpha=1$, for $\beta(1-\beta)<0$ and $\beta(1-\beta)>0$, the system performs rotational resp. hyperbolic motion around the point $\cX_i=m\theta^2\mu_i$. Hence, $\alpha=1$, $B=B_c$ corresponds to the boundary that separates these two phases.
Returning to the generic case, (\[chivV\]) says that the variables $v_i$ are determined by the Hall law, $$v_{i}\approx\epsilon_{ij}\frac{E_{i}(\vx)}{B_c}.
\label{vE}$$ The interpretation of this relation requires some care, however : in the coupled case we consider here, the variables $v_i$ do [*not*]{} represent anymore the time derivative of the original position. Assuming that $M=\left(M_{ij}\right)$ is non-singular, the “velocity” equation reads in fact $$\dot{x}_{i}=u_{i}=\left(M^{-1}\right)_{ij}v_{j}.
\label{xdot}$$ On the other hand, $\dot{Y}_{i}=\{H,Y_{i}\}=v_i$, which identifies $v_{i}$ as the time derivative of the guiding center coordinate $Y_{i}$; this latter satisfies the Hall-like law, (\[dXcrit\]).
On account of the relation $(M^{-1})_{ij}=(\det\, M)^{-1}\epsilon_{ik}
\epsilon_{jl}M_{kl}$, equations (\[xdot\]) with $v_i$ given by (\[vE\]) can be presented in Hamiltonian form, $$\dot{x}_i=\{x_i,H_c\}
\qquad\hbox{with}\quad
H_c=V(\vx)+\frac{m}{2}
\theta^2(\partial_i V(\vx))^2
\label{cHcx}$$ and $$\{x_i,x_j\}=-\theta (\det\, M)^{-1}\epsilon_{ij},
\qquad
\det\, M =1+m\theta^2
\partial_i^2 V
+\frac{1}{2}(m\theta^2)^2\epsilon_{kl}\epsilon_{rs}(\partial
_k
\partial_r V)(\partial_l\partial_s V).
\label{xxM}$$ The Hamiltonian (\[cHcx\]) is indeed the reduction of (\[cHum\]) to the surface defined by the second class constraints (\[Lam\]) and (\[chivV\]), with (\[xxM\]) the corresponding Dirac brackets. Note that in the Landau problem ($V=0$), Eq. (\[guidcent\]) is reduced to $Y_i\approx
x_i$, and the brackets (\[xxM\]) coincide with those of $Y_i$.
Alternatively, these coordinates $Y_i$ can be used to describe also the system reduced to the surface (\[Lam\]), (\[chivV\]). Their brackets are $\{Y_i,Y_j\}=-\theta\epsilon_{ij}$ cf. (\[YPX\]), and the dynamics (\[dXcrit\]) is generated by the Hamiltonian $$H_c={\cal V}(Y)
\qquad\hbox{with}\qquad
{\cal V}(Y)=\left(V(\vx)+\frac{m}{2}
\theta^2(\partial_i V(\vx))^2\right)_{x_i=x_i(Y)}\,,
\label{cHc}$$ where $x_i(Y)$ is given by (\[guidcent\]). This also explains the advantage of quantizing the system in terms of the $Y_{i}$. The reduced Hamiltonian $H_c$ extends the rule called “ Peierls substitution” [@DJT] to the non-commutative case. The $V(Y)$ alone used in [@DH], obtained dropping the $\theta$-term, is only correct for constant fields.
$\bullet$ The non-minimal Hamiltonian is instead $$\check{H}=\frac{1}{2}mv_i^2
+u_i\tilde{\Lambda}_i+\check{V}(Y).
\label{cHu}$$ The conservation of the first class constraints requires now $$\chi_i=v_i\approx 0.
\label{chiv}$$ The functions $\chi_i$ are such that $\det||\{\varphi_a,\varphi_b\}||\neq 0$, where $\varphi_a$, $a=1,2,3,4$, are $\varphi_a=(\tilde{\Lambda}_i,\chi_j)$. (\[chiv\]) is a gauge-fixing for the constraints (\[Lam\]) [@GT]; the conservation of (\[chiv\]) fixes furthermore the Lagrange multipliers as $$u_i=v_i+\theta\epsilon_{ij}\partial_j \check{V}(Y)\approx
\theta\epsilon_{ij}\partial_j\check{V}(Y).$$ Reduced to the surface given by the set of second class constraints (\[Lam\]) and gauges (\[chiv\]), the system is described by the Hamiltonian $$\check{H}_c=\check{V}(Y).
\label{cHcrit}$$ It follows from $\{Y_i,\tilde{\Lambda}_j\}=0$, that the Dirac bracket of the reduced phase space coordinates $Y_i=x_i$ coincides with their initial Poisson bracket (\[YY\]). The equation of motion of the system (\[cHu\]) is therefore (\[YHall\]). With hindsight to Eq. (\[JYX\]), note that in the critical case the generator of rotations is reduced to $$J=\frac{1}{2\theta} Y_i^2.
\label{JYXc}$$
Quantization and field equations
================================
Now we quantize the coupled system. The different behaviour of the constraints $\widetilde{\Lambda}_i\approx 0$ and $\Lambda_i\approx 0$ for $B\neq B_{c}$ and $B=B_{c}$, respectively, obliges us to distinguish between these two cases also at the quantum level. As we observed in Section \[interac\], the $\widetilde{\Lambda}_i$ are classically equivalent to $\Lambda_i$ for $B\neq B_c$, but, unlike the latters, the $\widetilde{\Lambda}_i$ are well defined also in critical case. We start therefore, with the former constraints.
The generic case $B\neq B_{c}$
------------------------------
Let us start with the noncritical case. As in the free case, we pass over to the conjugate complex linear combinations $$\widetilde{\Lambda}_-
=\widetilde{\Lambda}_1-i\widetilde{\Lambda}_2\approx 0
\qquad\hbox{and}\qquad
\widetilde{\Lambda}_+
=\widetilde{\Lambda}_1+i\widetilde{\Lambda}_2\approx 0.$$
The first combination here can be viewed as a first class constraint and the second one as a gauge condition for it. Then, instead of quantizing the system with two second class constraints which generate complicated, field-dependent Poisson-Dirac brackets on reduced phase space, (\[cXcXcomrel\])–(\[cPcPcomrel\]), we quantize it by the Gupta-Bleuler method. This amounts to using the simple symplectic structure (\[symp0\]) in total phase space, and then selecting the physical quantum states by the quantum constraint $$\tilde{\Lambda}_-|\phi\rangle=0,\qquad\hbox{where}\qquad
\tilde{\Lambda}_-={P}_--m{v}_-.
\label{quL}$$ As a result, we get a correspondence between the classical and quantum descriptions in that, for any two physical states, $
\langle\phi_1|\tilde{\Lambda}_\pm|\phi_2\rangle=0,
$ where $
{\tilde{\Lambda}}_+
={\tilde{\Lambda}}_-^\dagger.
$
Any operator ${\cal O}$ which leaves the physical subspace (\[quL\]) invariant can be viewed as a quantum observable. Therefore, it has to satisfy a relation of the form $$[\tilde\Lambda_-,{\cal O}]=(...)\tilde\Lambda_-$$ with the operator $\Lambda_-$ appearing on the right, cf. (\[freeconsrel\]). This happens, in particular, for the operator $Y_i=x_i+m\theta\epsilon_{ij}v_j$, which strongly commutes with the constraint also quantum-mechanically, and is, therefore, a quantum observable.
We have to identify a quantum Hamiltonian, together with two other independent observables \[see the classical equation (\[Y\])\]. The quantum counterpart of the ‘magnetic Hamiltonian’ $H_B$ is chosen to be the Hermitian analog of (\[H0tL\]), namely $$H_B=\frac{m}{2}v_+v_-+u_-^\dagger\tilde\Lambda_-
+\tilde\Lambda_+u_-.
\label{qH0}$$
The operator-valued coefficient $u_-$ is fixed here by the observability requirement for (\[qH0\]) as $u_-=\frac{1}{2}\cT v_-,$ where the operator $\cT$ \[further discussed below\] is given formally by $$\cT=\left(1+\frac{1}{2}\,
\frac{\theta}{1-\beta}\,
\tilde\Lambda_+\tilde\Lambda_-\right)^{-1}
\frac{1}{1-\beta}=
\frac{1}{1-\beta}
\left(
1+\frac{1}{2}\theta\tilde{\Lambda}_+
\tilde{\Lambda}_-\frac{1}{1-\beta}\right)^{-1}.
\label{qu-}$$ The quantum analogs of the classical position and momentum operators $\cX_\pm$ and $\cP_\pm$ are $$\begin{aligned}
\cX_+&=x_++i\theta\tilde{\Lambda}_+\cT,\qquad
\cX_-=\cX_-^\dagger\label{XQu},
\\[8pt]
\cP_+&=\tilde\Lambda_+\cT+mv_+,
\qquad \cP_-=\cP_+^\dagger,
\label{PQu}\end{aligned}$$ cf. (\[cXx\]), (\[cPi\]). Minimal and non-minimal coupling, respectively, are obtained adding to $H_B$ the scalar potential with the $\cX_{i}$ resp. $Y_i$ in its argument. Decomposition of the second operator factor in (\[qu-\]) into a formal infinite operator series shows, however, that, due to the noncommutativity of $\tilde\Lambda_-$ and $\beta(x)$, the theory is in general nonlocal in $x_i$ — except for a homogeneous magnetic field, discussed below.
Constant magnetic field $B\neq B_c$
-----------------------------------
Let us assume that the magnetic field is homogeneous $B=const$, $B\neq B_c$. Then the operators $\tilde\Lambda_-$ and $(1-\beta)^{-1}$ commute and the action of $\cT$ on physical states reduces to multiplication by the constant $(1-\beta)^{-1}$. Thus $$u_-=\frac{1}{2(1-\beta)}\,v_-,$$ cf. Section \[classical\], and the kinetic Hamiltonian is $$H_B
= \frac{1}{2}\,(\cP_+v_- +
v_+\Lambda_-)=
\frac{1}{2m}(\cP_{+}\cP_{-}-\Lambda_+\Lambda_-)\, .
\label{quantBham}$$ The observables (\[XQu\]) and (\[PQu\]) become now local operators $$\begin{aligned}
\cX_+=x_++i\theta{\Lambda}_+,\qquad
\cX_-=\cX_-^\dagger,
\label{opXQu}
\\[6pt]
\cP_+=\Lambda_++mv_+=\frac{1}{1-\beta}(P_+-m\beta v_+),
\qquad \cP_-=\cP_+^\dagger,
\label{opPQu}\end{aligned}$$ and $\Lambda_\pm=(1-\beta)^{-1}\tilde{\Lambda}_\pm$, cf. the classical relations (\[Li\]), (\[cPi\]), and (\[cXx\]).
Equation (\[quL\]) means that the physical states are coherent states, namely the eigenstates of the velocity operator $v_-$ with eigenvalue $P_-/m$. The physical states, defined as solutions of (\[quL\]), are $$|\phi\rangle_{phys}=\exp \left(\frac{1}{2}\theta mP_-v_+
\right)
\left(|0\rangle_v |\tilde{\phi}\rangle\right),
\label{statephys}$$ where $|0\rangle_v$, $v_-|0\rangle_v=0$, is the vacuum state of the Fock space generated by the velocity operators, and $|\tilde{\phi}\rangle$ is a velocity-independent state associated with other degrees of freedom [^5].
The action of the observable operators on physical states is reduced to $$\begin{aligned}
&\cP_-\rightarrow P_-,\qquad
\cP_+\rightarrow
\displaystyle\frac{1}{1-\beta}P_+,\label{physP}\\
&
\cX_-\rightarrow x_-,\qquad
\cX_+\rightarrow x_++i
\displaystyle\frac{\theta}{1-\beta}P_+,
\qquad
Y_-\rightarrow x_-+i\theta P_-,\qquad
Y_+\rightarrow x_+,
&
\label{physX}\end{aligned}$$ in the sense $$\cP_-|\phi\rangle_{phys}=\exp \left(\frac{1}{2}\theta
mP_-v_+\right)\left(|0\rangle_v\,
P_-|\tilde{\phi}\rangle\right),$$ etc., i.e. the operators on the right hand sides act on $|\tilde{\phi}\rangle$. Similarly, the action on physical states of the magnetic Hamiltonian (\[quantBham\]) and of the quantum analog of the angular momentum (\[JcXP\]) reduce to $$H_B\rightarrow \frac{1}{2m^*}P_+P_-
\label{Hred0}$$ and $$J\rightarrow \frac{i}{2}(x_+P_--x_-P_+)+\frac{1}{2}eBx_+x_-,
\label{Jred}$$ respectively. On the subspace spanned by the velocity-independent states $|\tilde{\phi}\rangle$, let us define the operators $$R_+=P_++ieBx_+,\qquad
R_-=P_--ieBx_-,
\label{RR}$$ which correspond to $\cP_++ieB\cX_+=ieB\cX^{gc}_+$ and $\cP_- -ieB\cX_-=-ieB\cX^{gc}_-$, acting in total space, where $\cX^{gc}_i$ is the guiding center coordinate (\[Xgc\]). On account of the commutation relations $$[P_+,P_-]=2eB,\quad
[P_-,x_+]=[P_+,x_-]=-2i,\quad
[P_+,x_+]=[P_-,x_-]=0,
\label{PPxx}$$ the operators (\[RR\]) commute with $P_+$, $P_-$ and satisfy the relation $$[R_+,R_-]=-2eB.
\label{RRB}$$ They reduce the angular momentum operator (\[Jred\]) to normal Hermitian form, $$J\rightarrow \frac{1}{2eB}\, (R_+R_--P_-P_+).
\label{JRP}$$
The commutation relations (\[PPxx\]) and (\[RRB\]) depend on the sign of $eB$. We have to distinguish therefore two cases. For both signs, we have two independent sets of creation-annihilation oscillator operators $a^\pm$ and $b^\pm$. The cast is sign-dependent, though :
$\bullet$ For $eB<0$, $$a^-=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2|eB|}}\,P_-,\quad
a^+=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2|eB|}}\,P_+,\quad
b^-=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2|eB|}}\,R_+,\quad
b^+=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2|eB|}}\,R_-,
\label{ab-}$$ satisfy $[a^-,a^+]=[b^-,b^+]=1$, $[a^\pm,b^\pm]=0$. In their terms, the angular momentum operator (\[JRP\]) takes the canonical quadratic form $$J\rightarrow \, a^+a^--b^+b^-.
\label{Jab-}$$
$\bullet$ For $eB>0$ we have, instead of (\[ab-\]), $$a^-=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2eB}}\,P_+,\quad
a^+=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2eB}}\,P_-,\quad
b^-=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2eB}}\,R_-,\quad
b^+=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2eB}}\,R_+,
\label{ab+}$$ and the angular momentum operator reads $$J\rightarrow \, b^+b^--a^+a^-.
\label{Jab+}$$
Let us now assume that we have a purely magnetic field. Hence $H=H_{B}$, and angular momentum is conserved. Consider the physical states (\[statephys\]) with $$|\tilde{\phi}\rangle=|n\rangle_a|l\rangle_b,
\qquad\hbox{where}\qquad
a^+a^-|n\rangle_a =n|n\rangle_a,
\quad
b^+b^-|l\rangle_b =l|l\rangle_b,$$ $n,l=0,1,\ldots$, i.e. consider the states of the form $$|n,l):=e^{\frac{1}{2}\theta mP_-v_+}
|0\rangle_v |n\rangle_a|l\rangle_b.
\label{NBisstates}$$
$\bullet$ For $eB<0$, the (\[NBisstates\]) are eigenstates of operators $H=H_B$ and $J$ with eigenvalues $$E_N=\frac{|eB|}{m^*}N,\quad N=n=0,1,\dots
\qquad\hbox{and}\qquad
j=n-l=N,N-1,\ldots,
\label{E1}$$ respectively. The energy spectrum is therefore discrete and nonnegative; each Landau level is infinitely degenerate in the angular momentum, which takes integer values bounded from above.
$\bullet$ For $eB>0$, the roles of the operators $P_+$ and $P_-$ as creation and annihilation operators are interchanged, and instead of (\[E1\]) we have $$E_N=\frac{eB}{m^*}(N+1),\quad N=n=0,1,\dots,
\qquad\hbox{and}\qquad
j=l-n=-N,-N+1,\ldots.
\label{EN2}$$ Here we should distinguish two further “phases”[^6].
$\bullet\bullet$ For $0<eB<\theta^{-1}$, the energy spectrum is discrete and positive. The Landau levels are infinitely degenerate in $j$, which takes an infinite number of integer values and is bounded from below.
$\bullet\bullet$ For $eB>\theta^{-1}$, we have the same degeneration of Landau levels, but the effective mass $m^*$ becomes negative. In order to make the theory well defined and to eliminate the negative-energy, unbounded-from-below spectrum, we change the sign of the evolution parameter, $t\rightarrow -t$. This is equivalent to changing the sign of the Hamiltonian operator. The energy spectrum is given therefore by (\[EN2\]) but with $m^*$ changed into $|m^*|$. Below we shall see, however, that even with such a change of time evolution parameter, the cases $0<eB<\theta^{-1}$ and $eB>\theta^{-1}$ correspond to the two essentially different phases.
One could attempt to restore the spectrum symmetry around $B=0$, by changing the quantum ordering. Replacing indeed the quantum Hamiltonian (\[quantBham\]) by $$H_B^s=\frac{1}{4}(\cP_+v_-+v_-\cP_+)+\frac{1}{2}v_+\Lambda_-
=\,
\frac{1}{4m}(\cP_+\cP_-+\cP_-\cP_+)-\frac{1}{2m}\Lambda_+
\Lambda_-
\label{HBsym}$$ i. e. $
H_B^s\rightarrow\frac{1}{4m^*}(P_+P_-+P_-P_+)
$ on the physical states (\[statephys\]) yields, instead of (\[E1\]) and (\[EN2\]), the spectrum $$E_N=\frac{|eB|}{m^*}\left(N+\frac{1}{2}\right),
\qquad N=0,1,\dots
\label{Esym}$$ which looks to be symmetric w.r.t. $B=0$. The asymmetry between $B<0$ and $B>0$ is still present, however, since it is hidden in the asymmetric behaviour of the effective mass. To second order in $B$, the spectrum is indeed $|B|(1+e\theta B)(N+1/2)$.
Parity invariance is hence violated by planar noncommutativity, and this is revealed by coupling to a magnetic field.
Let us now investigate the question of normalizability of the states (\[NBisstates\]). Let us define the ‘normalized’ velocity creation- annihilation oscillator operators $$c^\pm=\sqrt{\frac{\theta m^2}{2}}\,v_\pm,\qquad
[c^-,c^+]=1,$$ and the corresponding Fock states $|k\rangle_v$, $c^+c^-|k\rangle_v=k|k\rangle_v$, $k=0,1,\ldots$. Decomposing the exponential factor into Taylor series, we find that for $eB>0$ the states (\[NBisstates\]) are given by an infinite superposition $$|n,l)=\sum_{k=0}^{\infty} \beta^{k/2}
\sqrt{C^{n+k}_k}\,
|k\rangle_v |n+k\rangle_a|l\rangle_b,\qquad
C^{n+k}_k=\frac{(n+k)!}{k!\,n!}
\label{Nsuper+}$$ that satisfy the relation $$( n',l'|n,l)=\delta_{n'n}\delta_{l'l}
\sum_{k=0}^{\infty}
\beta^k C^{n+k}_k.
\label{Njscalar}$$
$\bullet$ For $0<eB<\theta^{-1}$, we have $\beta<1$ and the series in (\[Njscalar\]) converges. The orthonormal Landau states are $$|n,l\rangle = {\cal N}^{-1/2}|n,l),\qquad
{\cal N}={\cal N}(\beta,n)=\frac{1}{n!}\,
\frac{d^{n}}{d\beta^{n}}
\left(\frac{1}{1-\beta}\right).
\label{NJnorm+}$$
$\bullet$ For $eB>\theta^{-1}$, $\beta>1$ and the series in (\[Njscalar\]) diverges. In this case the energy eigenstates (\[Nsuper+\]) are scattering-like, unbounded states.
Hence, the two cases $0<eB<\theta^{-1}$ and $eB>\theta^{-1}$ correspond to two, essentially different phases.
$\bullet$ For $eB<0$, operator $P_-$ is in fact the annihilation operator $a^-$ \[see Eq. (\[ab-\])\]. As a result, (\[NBisstates\]) is a superposition of $(n+1)$ states, $$|n,l)=\sum_{k=0}^{n}|\beta|^{k/2}\sqrt{C^{n}_k}\,
|k\rangle_v|n-k\rangle_a|l\rangle_b.
\label{Nsuper-}$$ The corresponding orthormal states are given by $$|n,l\rangle = {\cal N}^{-1/2}|n,l),\qquad
{\cal N}={\cal N}(\beta,n)=(1-\beta)^{-n/2}.
\label{NJnorm-}$$
In conclusion, the structure of the states (\[NBisstates\]) is essentially different for $eB<0$ and $eB>0$: in the first case it is a normalizable superposition of $(n+1)$ velocity Fock states; in the second case it is an infinite superposition of all velocity-Fock states, which is normalizable (bound state) for $0<eB<\theta^{-1}$, and is not normalizable (scattering-like state) for $eB>\theta^{-1}$. In this sense the noncomutative Landau problem for $B\neq B_c$ has three, essentially different phases (plus the critical case phase separating the phases $0<eB<\theta^{-1}$ and $eB>\theta^{-1}$, see below).
The hidden finite resp. infinite dimensional structures of the physical states in the $eB<0$ and $eB>0$ phases described here are reminiscent of the finite resp. infinite-dimensional representations of the $sl(2,R)$ algebra, associated with universal Majorana-Dirac-like equations for usual integer/half-integer resp. anyonic fields in $2+1$ dimensions [@MP1], see below.
Note that such a hidden structure would be absent if we quantized the system on the reduced phase space given by the second class constraints. This would eliminate effectively the velocity degrees of freedom ($v_\pm$), and yield the system in Ref. [@DH], described only by the variables $\cX_i$ and $\cP_i$, and would have symplectic structure (\[cXcXcomrel\]), (\[cXcPcomrel\]), (\[cPcPcomrel\]). Then, a superposition of the states of the form $|\tilde{\phi}\rangle=|n\rangle_a|l\rangle_b$ would describe the quantum states of the system. In such a quantization scheme it would be impossible to reveal the difference between the energy eigenstates for $eB<\theta^{-1}$ and $eB>\theta^{-1}$ in the sense of their normalizability. This is consistent with an observation [@PR] which says that different quantization methods can produce physically inequivalent results.
To conclude this section, we generalize the free field equations (\[infLL\]) $$\left\{\begin{array}{cccc}
\left(i{\partial}_{t}+eB
\displaystyle\frac{k}{m^*}\right)\phi_{k}
&+&\sqrt{ \displaystyle\frac{k+1}{2\theta}}\,
\displaystyle\frac{P_+}{m^*}
\,\phi_{k+1}
&=0,
\\[18pt]
P_{-}\,\phi_{k}
&+&\sqrt{\displaystyle\frac{2(k+1)}{\theta}}\,
{\phi}_{k+1}
&=0.
\end{array}\right.
\label{BinfLL}$$ Each of these equations is just the component form of the Schrödinger equation $i\partial_t|\phi\rangle=H_B|\phi\rangle$ and constraint equation (\[quL\]), respectively, where $H_B$ is taken in the first, linear-in-$\cP$ form in Eq. (\[quantBham\]), and the field components are defined as $\phi_k(x,t)=(-1)^k({}_v\langle k|\langle
x|\phi\rangle)$.
Eliminating the $(k+1)^{th}$ component using the lower equation we find that each component satisfies an independent Schrödinger-Pauli type equation, namely $$i{\partial}_{t}\phi_{k}=H_{k}\phi_{k},
\qquad
H_{k}=H_{0}-\frac{eB}{m^*}k,\qquad
H_0=\displaystyle\frac{1}{2m^*}P_+P_-.
\label{compBSch}$$
$H_{0}$ is, in particular, the restriction of the Landau Hamiltonian $H_B$ to the velocity vacuum sector, cf. Eq. (\[Hred0\]). For the higher components, the Hamiltonian $H_k$ looks formally like that for a charged particle with planar spin $s=\frac{1}{2}k$ and with gyromagnetic ratio $g=2$. Our system is a spinless, however : it is described just by one independent field component $\phi_0$, whose internal angular momentum (spin) is zero [@HP2]. It can not be treated as a scalar particle, however, see the last section below. The tower of higher components is generated by $\phi_0$ according to $$\phi_k=(-1)^k\left(
\displaystyle\frac{\theta}{2k!}\right)^{k/2}
P_-^k\,
\phi_0.
\label{phin}$$ $\phi_0$ corresponds to the wave function of the velocity-independent state $|\tilde{\phi}\rangle$ from the physical state (\[statephys\]), $\phi_0=\langle x|\tilde{\phi}\rangle$. In general, it describes an arbitrary superposition of the Landau states $|n,l\rangle$. In the particular case $|\tilde{\phi}\rangle=|n,l\rangle$, the corresponding fields $\phi^{n,l}_k(x,t)$ are the stationary states of the Schrödinger-Pauli equation (\[compBSch\]). In accordance with Eqs. (\[Nsuper+\]) the tower of components $\phi^{n,l}_k$ is infinite for $eB>0$, while according to Eq. (\[Nsuper-\]), for $eB<0$ it contains a finite number of nonzero components $\phi^{n,l}_k$, $k=0,1,...,n$. In this respect, the structure of our field equations is [*formally*]{} similar to that of the infinite-component, relativistic Majorana-Dirac like equations for (2+1)D anyons, and also to the finite- component equations for usual spin $s=\frac{1}{2}n$ fields [@MP1].
The critical quantum case {#cqc}
=========================
In the critical case the constraints $\widetilde{\Lambda}_i$ in (\[Lam\]) are first class. Since the observables $Y_i$ strongly commute with the $\widetilde{\Lambda}_i$, the Hamiltonian can be taken, consistently with Section 3, to be a function of the $Y_i$, $H_c={\cal H}(Y)$. ${\cal H}(Y)$ is given by Eq. (\[cHc\]) and (\[cHcrit\]) for minimal or nonminimal coupling, respectively. Here we assume that the observables are realized in terms of the total (initial) phase space variables $Y_i=x_i+m\theta\epsilon_{ij}v_j$, see Eq. (\[Y\]), while the constraints (\[Lam\]) should be treated as equations specifying the classical physical subspace. Then, following Dirac, condition (\[quL\]) has to be supplemented at the quantum level with $$\tilde{\Lambda}_+|\phi\rangle=0,\qquad
\tilde{\Lambda}_+=P_+-mv_+.
\label{L+}$$ Using the solution (\[statephys\]) of Eq. (\[quL\]), we find that equation (\[L+\]) is reduced to $$P_+|\tilde{\phi}\rangle=0.
\label{P+phi}$$ The operators $P_+$ and $P_-$ satisfy here the commutation relation $[P_+,P_-]=2\theta^{-1}$, i.e. they act as annihilation and creation operators. Let us choose the gauge $$A_+=A_1+iA_2=\displaystyle\frac{i}{2e\theta}\, x_+,\qquad
A_-=A_1-iA_2=-\displaystyle\frac{i}{2e\theta}\, x_-.
\label{gA1}$$ Hence, $$P_+=-2i\frac{\partial}{\partial x_-}-\frac{i}{2\theta}x_+,
\qquad
P_-=-2i\frac{\partial}{\partial x_+}+\frac{i}{2\theta}x_-.$$ Then the solution of Eq. (\[P+phi\]) is given by $$\tilde{\phi}(x_+,x_-)=\langle x_+,x_-|\tilde{\phi}\rangle=
\exp \left(-\frac{1}{4\theta}x_+x_-\right)\, f(x_+).
\label{Laughlin}$$ where $f(x_+)$ is an arbitrary holomorphic function. Thus, we recover the wave functions proposed by Laughlin to describe the ground states in the Fractional Quantum Hall Effect [@Laugh; @QHE]. The action of the operators $Y_\pm$ on these functions is reduced to $$Y_+
\tilde{\phi}(x_+,x_-)
=e^{-\frac{1}{4\theta}x_+x_-}\, x_+
f(x_+),\qquad
Y_-\tilde{\phi}(x_+,x_-)
=e^{-\frac{1}{4\theta}x_+x_-}\,
2\theta\frac{d}{dx_+}f(x_+),
\label{YLaugh}$$ cf. (\[physX\]).
Due to the noncommutativity of the operators $Y_-$ and $Y_+$, the construction of the quantum Hamiltonian ${\cal H}(Y)$ requires to choose an ordering.
Let us clarify now how such a quantum picture is related to the generic Landau problem with a noncritical magnetic field. First we note that, just like classically, the critical case corresponds to the boundary between two different phases, namely $0<eB<\theta^{-1}$ and $eB>\theta^{-1}$, respectively. In accordance with Eqs. (\[physP\]), (\[physX\]), the $Y_i$ are (unlike $\cP_+$ and $\cX_+$) well defined at $eB=\theta^{-1}$: $$Y_-\rightarrow i\sqrt{2\theta}\, b^-,
\qquad
Y_+\rightarrow -i\sqrt{2\theta}\, (b^+-a^-).$$
Since at $eB=\theta^{-1}$ the second constraint equation is reduced to Eq. (\[P+phi\]), we find that the physical states now belong to the lowest Landau level (LLL), $$|0,l)=e^{\frac{1}{2}\theta mP_-v_+}
|0\rangle_v|0\rangle_a|l\rangle_b.
\label{Nstates0}$$ By Eq. (\[Njscalar\]), such states are not normalizable. We can ‘renormalize’ the theory by first projecting, in the phase $0<eB<\theta^{-1}$, to the lowest Landau level, and then taking the limit $\beta\rightarrow 1$. The projection of an observable ${\cal O}$ to the lowest Landau level is $$({\cal O})_0=\Pi_0 {\cal O}\Pi_0
\qquad\hbox{where}\qquad
\Pi_0=\sum_{l=0}^\infty |0,l\rangle\langle 0, l|$$ \[for $N=n=0$, $j=l$, see Eq. (\[EN2\])\]. Taking into account the definitions (\[RR\]) and (\[ab+\]), we find that $$({\cP}_\pm)_0=0,\quad
({\cX}_-)_0=({Y}_-)_0
=
i\sqrt{\frac{2}{eB}}\,b^-\,
\Pi_0,\quad
({\cX}_+)_0=({Y}_+)_0=-i\sqrt{\frac{2}{eB}}\,b^+\,
\Pi_0.
\label{ProjectionLLL}$$ Therefore, when restricted to the lowest Landau level, the coordinates $\cX_i$ act identically as the $Y_i$ do. Letting $\beta\rightarrow 1$ yields that, in the critical case, the action of these operators is reduced to $$({\cX}_-)_0=({Y}_-)_0
\longrightarrow i\sqrt{2\theta}\,b^-
\qquad
({\cX}_+)_0=({Y}_+)_0\longrightarrow
-i\sqrt{2\theta}\,b^+,
\label{XYcrit}$$ cf. Eq. (\[YLaugh\]), where, on the right hand sides we assume that the operators act on LLL states. These operators are the only independent nontrivial operators of the system put into a critical magnetic field, and, in accordance with Eqns. (\[RR\]) and (\[ab+\]), are the guiding center coordinate (\[Xgc\]) reduced to the LLL states. Note that the relations (\[XYcrit\]) correspond to the classical brackets (\[xxM\]) taken for $V=0$ and with $x_i\approx Y_i$, valid generically for nonminimal coupling with $B=B_c$ (see Section 3).
The normalized states (\[NJnorm+\]) corresponding to the lowest Landau level for $0<eB<\theta^{-1}$ are $$|0,l\rangle=\left((1-\beta)^{1/2}
\sum_{k=0}^\infty \beta^{k/2}
|k\rangle_v |k\rangle_a\right)|l\rangle_b.$$ Taking the limit $\beta\rightarrow 1$ and factorizing the fixed state vector in the bracket yields the reduced quantum space of those LLL states $|l\rangle_b$.
The Laughlin wave functions (\[Laughlin\]) are the states $|l\rangle_b$ written in holomorphic representation, in which the operators (\[XYcrit\]) are reduced to (\[YLaugh\]).
Discussion and concluding remarks {#Conc}
==================================
The main result of this paper is a consistent scheme to couple the first-order, Majorana-Dirac type equations that describe a non-relativistic anyon to an electromagnetic field. (An alternative framework is presented in [@Stich].) Let us stress that the analogous results in the relativistic setting are still missing[^7].
Our framework here is analogous to the usual electromagnetic coupling of a Dirac particle in terms of the initial coordinates $x_i$, subject to Zitterbewegung. That in [@DH] corresponds in turn to the introduction of electromagnetic interaction using the Zitterbewegung-free Foldy-Wouthuysen coordinates.
The Dirac equation for a spin-$1/2$ particle can be treated as a constraint which removes the timelike spin degrees of freedom (which otherwise would produce negative norm states), and generates the mass shell, Klein-Gordon equation. The structure behind both of these properties is the local supersupersymmetry of a Dirac particle [@SUSYDirac]. Modification of a free Dirac equation according to the minimal coupling prescription produces, via local supersymmetry, the correct form of the mass shell equation.
For our system, the constraint makes, in the free case, the spectrum bounded from below by freezing its spin degrees of freedom. So, it plays the role similar to that of the (first-order) Dirac equation, while the Schrödinger equation is analogous to the (quadratic) mass-shell condition. We have, however, no local supersymmetry here. To switch on interaction we use instead weak commutativity as guiding principle. This fixes the form of the Hamiltonian to be consistent with the constraint, modified according to the minimal coupling prescription.
When the magnetic field is non-constant (inhomogeneous), our quantum theory becomes non-local. This property is actually inherited from relativistic anyons from which our theory can be derived [@HP2]. It is indeed reminiscent of the nonlocality of anyon fields within the framework of the Chern-Simons U(1) gauge field construction, with associated half-infinite nonobservable ‘string’, [@W; @Sem; @Ban].
Viewing the critical case also as a “phase”, we can say that, in the non-commutative Landau problem, our system exhibits [*four*]{} different phases. These “phases” may be viewed as analogous to various energy sectors of the Kepler problem,
$\bullet$ $E<0$($eB<\theta^{-1}$),
$\bullet$ $E=0$($eB=\theta^{-1}$),
$\bullet$ $E>0$($eB>\theta^{-1}$)
with its changing $SO(4)$, $E(3)$ and $SO(3,1)$ symmetry.
The phases on each side of $B=0$ exhibit a spectral asymmetry with respect to the sign of magnetic field, and an essentially different structure of the states: for $eB<0$, the angular momentum takes an infinite number of values, $j=N,N-1,\ldots, -\infty$. The field associated with a Landau state of level $N$ has ($N+1$)-components. On the other hand, for $0<eB<\theta^{-1}$, the field is infinite-component, with the angular momentum taking $j=-N,-N+1,\ldots,+\infty$, for a level-$N$ Landau state. In both phases the corresponding quantum mechanical states are normalizable and represent bound states.
In the phase $eB >\theta^{-1}$, for a Landau state of level $N$, the angular momentum can take an infinite half-bounded set of integer values, with, for any fixed value of $j$, an associated infinite- component field. The corresponding quantum states are non-normalizable scattering states.
In the critical case $eB\theta=1$, our framework generalized to the non-commutative context the Peierl’s substitution [@DJT] and Laughlin’s framework for the Fractional Quantum Hall Effect [@QHE].
In the free case ($\cP_i=p_i$), our system describes a spinless particle. It cannot be interpreted, however, as an “ordinary” scalar particle. In the rest frame system ($\vp=0$) it is described effectively by the velocity vacuum state (see Eqn. (\[statephys\])) and by associated one field component only (constant in this frame). In a boosted frame, however, an infinite tower of velocity Fock states contribute, coherently, to the physical state; an infinite tower of field components (\[phin\]) is “brought to life”. Thus, the internal spin degrees of freedom associated with velocity operators (see Eqn. (\[Jfree\])) are here frozen, rather then removed as in the model [@DH]. The corresponding velocity Fock states $|k\rangle_v$ with $k>0$ can be compared with a Dirac sea of the negative energy states.
When we switch on a magnetic field, the ‘frozen sea’ ‘melts’. For $eB<0$, in the state corresponding to the $N^{th}$ Landau level, the first $N$ exited velocity Fock states contribute to the state. In contrast, for $eB>0$, the entire, infinite set of velocity Fock states is “brought to life”, just like in the free case for $\vp\neq 0$. Taking also into account the normalizability properties of the physical states, the phases with $eB<0$, $0<eB<\theta^{-1}$, $eB>\theta^{-1}$ and $eB=\theta=1$ are somewhat reminiscent resp. to a partially ‘melted’, a ‘liquid’, a ‘gaseous’ and ‘boiling’ phases.
The observed spectral asymmetry of the system is reminiscent of the phase transition between exact (for $eB<0$) and spontaneously broken (for $eB>0$) supersymmetry, see [@Wit]. An analogous asymmetry has been observed earlier in noncommutative Chern-Simons theories, namely between self-dual and anti-self-dual solution, see [@Bak].
In the noncritical case, we only analysed in detail the purely magnetic Landau problem. Adding a potential term $V(\cX)$ (or $\check{V}(Y)$), the analog of first equation in (\[BinfLL\]) would involve other field components, due to the presence of velocity operators in operators $\cX_i$ and $Y_i$, see Eqns. (\[opXQu\]), (\[Y\]). The second equation in (\[BinfLL\]), which controls the number of nontrivial field components would not change, however. These latter behave, therefore exactly in the same way as in the pure Landau problem.
0.4cm[**Acknowledgements**]{}. MP is indebted to the [*Laboratoire de Mathématiques et de Physique Théorique*]{} of Tours University for hospitality extended to him. The partial support by the FONDECYT, Chile (Grants 1010073 and 7010073) is acknowledged.
[99]{} P. A. Horváthy and M. S. Plyushchay, [*Anyon wave equations and the noncomutative plane*]{} [*Phys. Lett*]{}. [**B 595**]{} (2004) 547 \[`hep-th/0404137`\].
J.-M. Lévy-Leblond, [*Nonrelativistic Particles and Wave Equations*]{}. [*Comm. Math. Phys.*]{} [**6**]{} (1967) 286.
J. Lukierski, P. C. Stichel, W. J. Zakrzewski, [*Galilean-invariant $(2+1)$-dimensional models with a Chern-Simons-like term and $d=2$ noncommutative geometry*]{}. [*Annals of Physics*]{} (N.Y.) [**260**]{} (1997) 224 \[`hep-th/9612017`\] P. A. Horváthy and M. S. Plyushchay, [*Non-relativistic anyons, exotic Galilean symmetry and noncommutative plane*]{}. [*JHEP*]{} [**0206**]{} (2002) 033 \[`hep-th/0201228`\]; P. A. Horváthy, [*Mathisson’s electron: noncommutative mechanics & exotic Galilean symmetry, 66 years ago*]{}. [*Acta Physica Polonica*]{} [**34**]{} (2003) 2611 \[`hep-th/0303099`\].
A. M. Polyakov, [*Fermi-Bose transmutations induced by gauge fields*]{}. [*Mod. Phys. Lett.*]{} [**A 3**]{} (1988) 325; M. S. Plyushchay, [*Relativistic particle with torsion, Majorana equation and fractional spin*]{}. [*Phys. Lett.*]{} [**B 262**]{} (1991) 71; [*The model of relativistic particle with torsion*]{}. [*Nucl. Phys*]{}. [**B 362**]{} (1991) 54.
J.-M. Lévy-Leblond, [*Galilei group and Galilean invariance*]{}. in [*Group Theory and Applications*]{} (Loebl Ed.), [**II**]{}, Acad. Press, New York, p. 222 (1972); A. Ballesteros, N. Gadella and M. del Olmo, [*Moyal quantization of 2+1 dimensional Galilean systems*]{}. [*Journ. Math. Phys.*]{} [**33**]{} (1992) 3379; Y. Brihaye, C. Gonera, S. Giller and P. Kosiński, [*Galilean invariance in $2+1$ dimensions.*]{} `hep-th/9503046` (unpublished); D. R. Grigore, [*Transitive symplectic manifolds in $1+2$ dimensions*]{}. [*Journ. Math. Phys.*]{} [**37**]{} (1996) 240; [*The projective unitary irreducible representations of the Galilei group in $1+2$ dimensions*]{}. [*Journ. Math. Phys.*]{} [**37**]{} (1996) 460 \[`hep-th/9312048`\].
R. Jackiw and V. P. Nair, [*Relativistic wave equation for anyons*]{}. [*Phys. Rev.*]{} [**D 43**]{} (1991) 1933. M. S. Plyushchay, [*Fractional spin: Majorana-Dirac field*]{}. [*Phys. Lett.*]{} [**B 273**]{} (1991) 250; [*The model of a free relativistic particle with fractional spin*]{}. [*Int. Journ. Mod. Phys*]{}. [**A 7**]{} (1992) 7045. M. S. Plyushchay, [*Deformed Heisenberg algebra and fractional spin field in (2+1)-dimensions*]{}. [*Phys.Lett.*]{} [**B 320**]{} (1994) 91 \[`hep-th/9309148`\]; [*Deformed Heisenberg algebra, fractional spin fields and supersymmetry without fermions*]{}. [*Annals Phys.*]{} (N.Y.) [**245**]{} (1996) 339 \[`hep-th/9601116`\]; J. L. Cortes and M. S. Plyushchay, [*Linear differential equations for a fractional spin field*]{}. [*J. Math. Phys.*]{} [**35**]{} (1994) 6049 \[`hep-th/9405193`\].
P. A. M. Dirac, [*A positive-energy relativistic wave equation*]{}. [*Proc. R. Soc. Lond. Ser*]{}. [**A 322**]{} (1971) 435, and [*ibid*]{}. [**A 328**]{} (1972) 1.
C. Duval and P. A. Horváthy, [*The exotic Galilei group and the “Peierls substitution”*]{}. [*Phys. Lett.*]{} [**B 479**]{} (2000) 284 \[`hep-th/0002233`\]; [*Exotic Galilean symmetry in the non-commutative plane, and the Hall effect*]{}. [*Journ. Phys.*]{} [**A 34**]{} (2001) 10097 \[`hep-th/0106089`\]; P. A. Horváthy, [*The non-commutative Landau problem*]{}. [*Ann. Phys.*]{} (N. Y.) [**299**]{} (2002) 128 \[`hep-th/0201007`\].
C. Duval and P. A. Horváthy, [*Anyons with anomalous gyromagnetic ratio & the Hall effect*]{}. [*Phys. Lett.*]{} [**B 594**]{} (2004) 402 \[`hep-th/0402191`\]; P. A. Horváthy, L. Martina and P. Stichel [*Enlarged Galilean symmetry of anyons and the Hall effect*]{}. \[`hep-th/0412090`\]. F. Ezawa, [*The Quantum Hall Effects. Field theoretical approach and related topics*]{}. World Scientific: Singapore (2000).
G. Dunne R. Jackiw and C. A. Trugenberger, [*Topological” (Chern-Simons) quantum mechanics*]{}. [*Phys. Rev.*]{} [**D 41**]{} (1990) 661; G. Dunne and R. Jackiw, [*“Peierls Substitution” and Chern-Simons Quantum Mechanics*]{}. [*Nucl. Phys.*]{} [**B**]{} (Proc. Suppl.) [**33C**]{} (1993) 114. \[`hep-th/9204057`\].
D. M. Gitman and I. V. Tyutin. [*Quantization of Fields with Constraints*]{}. Springer-Verlag, 1990.
S. Bellucci, A. Nersessian, and C. Sochichiu, [*Two phases of the noncommutative quantum mechanics*]{}. [*Phys. Lett*]{}. [**B 522**]{} (2001) 345 \[`hep-th/0106138`\].
M. S. Plyushchay and A. V. Razumov, [*Dirac versus reduced phase space quantization for systems admitting no gauge conditions*]{}. [*Int. J. Mod. Phys.*]{} [**A 11**]{} (1996) 1427 \[`hep-th/9306017`\]. R. B. Laughlin, [*Anomalous Quantum Hall effect: an incompressible quantum fluid with fractionally charged excitations*]{}. [*Phys. Rev. Lett.*]{} [**50**]{} (1983) 1395; S. Girvin and T. Jach, [*Formalism for the Quantum Hall effect: Hilbert space of analytic functions*]{}. [*Phys. Rev*]{}. [**B 29**]{} (1984) 5617.
. Ed. M. Stone, World Scientific Singapore (1992).
P.C. Stichel, [*Deformed Chen-Simons interaction for nonrelativistic particles*]{}. [*Phys. Lett*]{}. [**B 526**]{} (2002) 399 \[`hep-th/0112025`\]; J. Lukierski, P.C. Stichel, and W. J. Zakrzewski, [*Noncommutative planar particle dynamics with gauge interactions*]{}. [*Ann. Phys*]{}. (N.Y.) [**306**]{} (2003) 78 \[`hep-th/0207149`\]. M. S. Plyushchay, [*Relativistic model of anyon*]{}. [*Phys. Lett.*]{} [**B 248**]{} (1990) 107; J. L. Cortes and M. S. Plyushchay, [*Anyons as spinning particles*]{}. [*Int. J. Mod. Phys.*]{} [**A 11**]{} (1996) 3331 \[`hep-th/9505117`\]. S. Ghosh and S. Mukhopadhyay, [*A novel BRST approach in generalizing the Jackiw-Nair anyon*]{}. [*Phys. Rev.*]{} [**D 54**]{} (1996) 2793 \[`hep-th/9511074`\]; S. Ghosh, [*Anyons in electromagnetic field and the BMT equation*]{}. [*Phys. Rev.*]{} [**D 51**]{} (1995) 5827 \[Erratum-ibid. [**D 52**]{} (1995) 4762\] \[`hep-th/9409169`\].
L. Brink, S. Deser, B. Zumino, P. Di Vecchia and P. S. Howe, [*Local Supersymmetry For Spinning Particles*]{}. [*Phys. Lett.*]{} [**B 64**]{} (1976) 435; F. A. Berezin and M. S. Marinov, [*Particle Spin Dynamics As The Grassmann Variant Of Classical Mechanics*]{}. [*Annals Phys.*]{} (N.Y.) [**104**]{} (1977) 336. F. Wilczek, [*Magnetic Flux, Angular Momentum, And Statistics*]{}. [*Phys. Rev. Lett.*]{} [**48**]{} (1982) 1144. G. W. Semenoff, [*Canonical Quantum Field Theory With Exotic Statistics*]{}. [*Phys. Rev. Lett.*]{} [**61**]{} (1988) 517. R. Banerjee, A. Chatterjee and V. V. Sreedhar, [*Canonical quantization and gauge invariant anyon operators in Chern-Simons scalar electrodynamics*]{}. [*Annals Phys.*]{} (N.Y.) [**222**]{} (1993) 254.
E. Witten, [*Dynamical Breaking Of Supersymmetry*]{}. [*Nucl. Phys.*]{} [**B 188**]{} (1981) 513.
G. S. Lozano, E. F. Moreno and F. Schaposnik, [*Self-dual Chern-Simons solitons in non-commutative space*]{}. [*JHEP*]{} [**0102**]{} (2001) 036 \[`hep-th/0012266`\]; D. Bak, S. K. Kim, K-S Soh, J. H. Yee, [*Noncommutative Chern-Simons solitons*]{}, [*Phys. Rev*]{}. [**D 64**]{} (2001) 025018 \[`hep-th/0102137`\].
[^1]: Parc de Grandmont, F-37200 TOURS (France). e-mail: [email protected]
[^2]: e-mail: [email protected]
[^3]: The notation $\approx$ means “on-shell” i. e. after restriction to the constrained surface.
[^4]: The similarity between (\[EMnm\]) and (\[PdotX\]) suggests a kind of “duality” between the two types of couplings. Another generalization includes anomalous coupling [@anom].
[^5]: Various “kets” – distinguished sometimes by lower indices – “live” in different spaces.
[^6]: Two phases were discussed also in the context of another noncommutative quantum mechanical model in [@BNS], which is related to the model [@DH] by a time rescaling, $t\to (m/m^*)t$, supplemented with (nonunitary) change of variables.
[^7]: For relativistic models of anyons see [@Polyakov; @JNany; @Plany; @MP1; @relany].
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: |
Local differential privacy (LDP) enables private data sharing and analytics without the need for a trusted data collector. Error-optimal primitives (for, , estimating means and item frequencies) under LDP have been well studied. For analytical tasks such as range queries, however, the error is often dependent on the domain size of private data, which is potentially prohibitive. This deficiency is inherent as LDP protects the same level of indistinguishability between any pair of private data values for each data downer.
In this paper, we investigate a [*policy-aware*]{} extension of $\eps$-LDP, where a [*policy*]{} is customizable and defines heterogeneous privacy guarantees for different pairs of private data values. The policy provides another knob besides $\eps$ to tune utility-privacy trade-offs in analytical workloads. We show that, under realistic relaxed LDP policies, for analytical workloads such as linear counting queries, multi-dimensional range queries, and quantile queries, we can achieve significant gains in utility (with the same privacy parameter $\eps$). In particular, for range queries under relaxed LDP, we design mechanisms with errors independent on the domain sizes; instead, their errors depend on the policy, which specifies in what granularity the private data is protected. We believe that the primitives we design for policy-aware LDP will be useful in developing mechanisms for other non-trivial analytical tasks with lower errors, and encourage the adoption of LDP in practice.
author:
- 'Zhuolun Xiang[^1]'
- Bolin Ding
- Xi He
- Jingren Zhou
bibliography:
- 'ref.bib'
title: 'Design of Algorithms under Policy-Aware Local Differential Privacy: Utility-Privacy Trade-offs'
---
[^1]: Work done at Alibaba Group.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'In this paper we show that there is no algorithm to decide whether an arbitrarily given polynomial equation $P(z_1,\ldots,z_{52})=0$ (with integer coefficients) over the Gaussian ring $\mathbb Z[i]$ is solvable.'
address:
- '(Yuri Matiyasevich) St. Petersburg Department of Steklov Mathematical Institute of Russian Academy of Sciences, Fontanka 27, 191023, St. Petersburg, Russia'
- '(Zhi-Wei Sun, corresponding author) Department of Mathematics, Nanjing University, Nanjing 210093, People’s Republic of China'
author:
- 'Yuri Matiyasevich and Zhi-Wei Sun'
title: 'On Diophantine equations over $\mathbb Z[i]$ with $52$ unknowns'
---
Introduction
============
The original HTP (Hilbert’s Tenth Problem) asks for an (effective) algorithm to test whether an arbitrary polynomial Diophantine equation with integer coefficients has solutions over the ring $\Z$ of the integers. This was finally solved by Yu. Matiyasevich [@M70] negatively in 1970 based on the work of M. Davis, H. Putnam and J. Robinson [@DPR]. Z.-W. Sun [@S17] showed further that there is no algorithm to decide for any given $P(x_1,\ldots,x_{11})\in\Z[x_1,\ldots,x_{11}]$ whether the equation $P(x_1,\ldots,x_{11})=0$ has integer solutions.
For any quadratic field $K=\Q(\sqrt d)$, J. Denef [@D75] proved that the ring $\Z$ is Diophantine over the ring $O_K$ of algebraic integers in $K$ and hence the HTP for $O_k$ is undecidable with the aid of Matiyasevich’s theorem.
In this paper we study Diophantine equations with few unknowns over the Gaussian ring $$\Z[i]=O_{\Q(i)}=\{a+bi:\ a,b\in\Z\}.$$ Our main results are as follows.
\[Th1.1\] A number $z\in\Z[i]$ is a rational integer if and only if there are $v,w,x,y\in\Z[i]$ with $v\not=0$ such that $$\label{zzi}
\begin{aligned}&(4(2v(2(2z+1)^2+1)-y)^2-3y^2-1)^2
\\&+2(w^2-1-3y^2(2z+1-xy)^2)^2=0.\end{aligned}$$
\[Th1.2\] For any r.e. (recursively enumerable) set $\mathcal A\se\N=\{0,1,2,\ldots\}$, there is a polynomial $P(z_0,z_1,\ldots,z_{52})$ with integer coefficients such that for any $a\in\N$ we have $$\label{re}a\in \mathcal A\iff P(a,z_1,\ldots,z_{52})=0\ \t{for some}\ z_1,\ldots,z_{52}\in\Z[i].$$
It is well known (cf. [@C80]) that there are nonrecursive r.e. subsets of $\N$. Thus Theorem \[Th1.2\] has the following corollary.
\[Cor1.1\] There is no algorithm to decide for any polynomial $P(z_1,\ldots,z_{52})$ with integer coefficients whether the equation $$P(z_1,\ldots,z_{52})=0$$ has solutions in $\Z[i]$.
We will provide some lemmas in the next section and then show Theorems 1.1-1.2 in Section 3.
Some Lemmas
===========
For $A,B\in\Z$, the Lucas sequence $(u_n(A,B))_{n\gs0}$ is given by $u_0(A,B)=0$, $u_1(A,B)=1$, and $$\ u_{n+1}(A,B)=Au_n(A,B)-Bu_{n-1}(A,B)\ \ (n=1,2,3,\ldots).$$
\[Lem2.1\] Let $A,B\in\Z$.
[(i)]{} For any $k,n,r\in\N$, we have the identity $$u_{kn+r}(A,B)=\sum_{j=0}^n\bi nj(u_{k+1}(A,B)-Au_k(A,B))^{n-j}u_k^ju_{j+r}.$$
[(ii)]{} Let $A,B,M\in\Z$ with $M\not=0$. Then $B$ is relatively prime to $M$ if and only if $u_n(A,B)\eq0\pmod M$ and $u_{n+1}(A,B)\eq1\pmod M$ for some $n\in\Z^+=\{1,2,3,\ldots\}$.
[(iii)]{} If $A>B\gs0$, then $(A-B)^n\ls u_{n+1}(A,B)\ls A^n$ for all $n\in\N$.
Parts (i)-(iii) are Lemmas 2, 6, 8 of Sun [@S92].
\[Lem2.2\] Let $A\in\{2,3,\ldots\}$. Then $$x^2-Axy+y^2=1\ \t{with}\ x,y\in\N\ \t{and}\ x\gs y$$ if and only if $$x=u_{n+1}(A,1)\ \t{and}\ y=u_n(A,1)\ \t{for some}\ n\in\N.$$
This is a known result, see, e.g., Sun [@S92 Lemma 9].
\[Lem2.3\] If $x,y\in\Z[i]$ and $x^2-4xy+y^2=1$, then we must have $x,y\in\Z$.
This follows from a more general result of Denef [@D75]; a proof for this particular case was also presented in Matiyasevich [@M93 Section 7.3].
\[Lem2.4\] For $x,y\in\Z[i]$, we have $$x=0\land y=0\iff x^2+2y^2=0.$$
. Though the result is known, here we provide a simple proof.
Suppose that $x^2+2y^2=0$ but $x\not=0$ or $y\not=0$. Then $xy\not=0$ and $x/y\in\{\sqrt2\,i,-\sqrt2\,i\}$. As $x/y\in\Q(i)=\{r+si:\ r,s\in\Q\}$, and $\sqrt2$ is irrational, we obtain a contradiction. This ends the proof.
\[Lem2.5\] An integer $m$ is nonzero if and only if $m=(2x+1)(2y+1)$ for some $x,y\in\Z$.
This is a useful observation of S.-P. Tung [@T85].
Proofs of Theorems 1.1 and 1.2
==============================
[*Proof of Theorem 1.1*]{}. (i) We first show the “if" direction.
Suppose that there are $v,w,x,y\in\Z[i]$ with $v\not=0$ satisfying . In view of Lemma \[Lem2.4\], we have $$\label{2.1}4(2v(2(2z+1)^2+1)-y)^2-3y^2-1=0$$ and $$\label{2.2}
w^2-1-3y^2(2z+1-xy)^2=0.$$ Let $y_*=4v(2(2z+1)^2+1)$ and $w_*=w+2(2z+1-xy)y$. Then $$y_*^2-4y_*y+y^2=(y_*-2y)^2-3y^2=1$$ and $$\begin{aligned}
&w_*^2-4w_*y(2z+1-xy)+y^2(2z+1-xy)^2
\\=&(w_*-2y(2z+1-xy))^2-3y^2(2z+1-xy)^2
\\=&w^2-3y^2(2z+1-xy)^2=1.\end{aligned}$$ Applying Lemma \[Lem2.3\], we see that $y,y_*,w_*,y(2z+1-xy)\in\Z$. Thus both $2z+1-xy$ and $w$ are rational integers.
Note that $$\f{|y_*|}4\gs2|2z+1|^2-1=|2z+1|(2|2z+1|-1)+(|2z+1|-1)\gs|2z+1|$$ and $$(y-2y_*)^2=3y_*^2+1\ls 3y_*^2+\f{y_*^2}{16}=\l(\f74y_*\r)^2.$$ If $(y-2y_*)^2=(\f 74y_*)^2$, then we must have $|y_*|/4=1=|2z+1|$, hence $z\in\{0,-1\}$ and $|y_*|=|12v|>4$. Therefore $$\begin{aligned}
|y|>2|y_*|-\f 74|y_*|=\f{|y_*|}4\gs|2z+1|.\end{aligned}$$ Recall that $2z+1-xy\in\Z$, and write $x=a+bi$ with $a,b\in\Z$. Then $$|y|^2>|2z+1|^2=|(2z+1-xy)+(a+bi)y|^2=(2z+1-xy+ay)^2+b^2y^2,$$ hence $b=0$ and $x\in\Z$. Thus $2z+1\in\Z$ and hence $z\in\Z$.
\(ii) Below we show the “only if" direction. For $n\in\N$ we simply write $u_n$ to denote $u_n(4,1)$.
Let $z\in\Z$ and $k=|2z+1|$. By Lemma \[Lem2.1\](ii), for some $n\in\N$ we have $u_{n+1}\eq0\pmod{4(2k^2+1)}$. In view of Lemma \[Lem2.1\](iii), $u_{kn}\gs 3^{kn-1}$ and $u_{n+1}\gs 3^{n}$. Write $u_{n+1}=4(2k^2+1)v$ with $v\in\Z^+$ and set $y=u_n$. Then $$4(2v(2k^2+1)-y)^2=(u_{n+1}-2u_n)^2=3u_n^2+1=3y^2+1$$ with the aid of Lemma \[Lem2.2\]. By Lemma \[Lem2.1\](i), $$u_{nk}\eq k(u_{n+1}-4u_n)^{k-1}u_n\pmod{u_n^2}.$$ Let $q=u_{kn}/u_n\in\Z^+$. Then $$q\eq ku_{n+1}^{k-1}\eq k\pmod {u_n}$$ since $k\eq1\pmod2$ and $u_{n+1}^2=1-u_n^2+4u_nu_{n+1}\eq 1\pmod{u_n}$. Define $\ve=1$ if $z\gs0$, and $\ve=-1$ if $z<0$. Then $\ve u_{kn}=u_n(\ve k+xu_n)=y(2z+1-xy)$ for some $x\in\Z$. Let $w_*=\ve u_{kn+1}$ and $w=w_*-2\ve u_{kn}$. Then $$w^2-3y^2(2z+1-xy)^2=(u_{kn+1}-2u_{kn})^2-3u_{kn}^2=1$$ by Lemma \[Lem2.2\]. Now it is clear that holds.
In view of the above, we have completed the proof of Theorem \[Th1.1\].
In view of Lemma \[Lem2.5\] and the proof of Theorem 1.1, a number $z\in\Z[i]$ is an rational integer if and only if there are $s,t,w,x,y\in\Z[i]$ such that holds with $v=(2s+1)(3t+1)$.
[*Proof of Theorem \[Th1.2\]*]{}. By Sun [@S17 Theorem 1.1(ii)], there is a polynomial $f(z_0,\ldots,z_{10})\in\Z[z_0,\ldots,z_{10}]$ such that $a\in\N$ belongs to ${\mathcal A}$ if and only if $f(a,z_1,\ldots,z_{10})=0$ for some $z_1,\ldots,z_{10}\in\Z$ with $z_{10}\not=0$.
Let $F(v,w,x,y,z)$ denote the left-hand side of . For $z_k\in\Z[i]$, by Theorem \[Th1.1\], $z_k\in\Z$ if and only if $F(v_k,w_k,x_k,y_k,z_k)=0$ for some $v_k,w_k,x_k,y_k\in\Z[i]$ with $v_k\not=0$. Thus, $a\in\mathcal A$ if and only if there are $$v_k,w_k,x_k,y_k,z_k\in\Z[i]\ (k=1,\ldots,10)$$ with $F(v_k,w_k,x_k,y_k,z_k)=0\ \t{for all}\ k=1,\ldots,10$ such that $z_{10}\prod_{k=1}^{10}v_k\not=0$. By the proof of Theorem \[Th1.1\], when $a\in\mathcal A$ we can actually choose $z_{10},v_1,\ldots,v_{10}\in\Z\setminus\{0\}$ to meet the requirements. Therefore, in view of Lemma \[Lem2.5\], $a\in\mathcal A$ if and only if there are $$v_k,w_k,x_k,y_k,z_k\in\Z[i]\ (k=1,\ldots,10)$$ such that $F(v_k,w_k,x_k,y_k,z_k)=0\ \t{for all}\ k=1,\ldots,10$ and $z_{10}\prod_{k=1}^{10}v_k=(2s+1)(2t+1)$ for some $s,t\in\Z[i]$. Thus, in light of Lemma \[Lem2.4\], holds for some polynomial $P(z_0,z_1,\ldots,z_{52})\in\Z[z_0,z_1,\ldots,z_{52}]$. This concludes the proof.
[DPR]{}
N. Cutland, Computability, Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 1980.
M. Davis, H. Putnam and J. Robinson, [*The decision problem for exponential diophantine equations*]{}, Ann. of Math. [**74**]{}(1961), 425–436.
J. Denef, [*Hilbert’s Tenth Problem for quadratic rings*]{}, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. [**48**]{} (1975), 214–220.
Yu. Matiyasevich, [*Enumerable sets are diophantine*]{}, Dokl. Akad. Nauk SSSR [**191**]{} (1970), 279–282; English translation with addendum, Soviet Math. Doklady [**11**]{} (1970), 354–357.
Yu. Matiyasevich, Hilbert’s Tenth Problem, MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1993.
Z.-W. Sun, [*Reduction of unknowns in Diophantine representations*]{}, Sci. China Ser. A [**35**]{} (1992), no.3, 257–269.
Z.-W. Sun, [*Further results on Hilbert’s tenth problem*]{}, preprint, arXiv:1704.03504, 2017.
S. P. Tung, [*On weak number theories*]{}, Japan. J. Math. (N.S.) [**11**]{} (1985), 203–232.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'In this paper, an intuitive mathematical formulation is provided to generalize the residual entanglement for tripartite systems of qubits (Phys. Rev. A **61**, 052306 (2000)) to the tripartite systems in higher dimension. The spirit lies in the tensor treatment of tripartite pure states (Phys. Rev. A **72**, 022333 (2005)). A distinct characteristic of the present generalization is that the formulation for higher dimensional systems is invariant under permutation of the subsystems, hence is employed as a criterion to test the existence of genuine tripartite entanglement. Furthermore, the formulation for pure states can be conveniently extended to the case of mixed states by utilizing the kronecker product approximate technique. As applications, we give the analytic approximation of the criterion for weakly mixed tripartite quantum states and consider the existence of genuine tripartite entanglement of some weakly mixed states.'
author:
- 'Chang-shui Yu'
- 'He-shan Song'
title: Existence Criterion of Genuine Tripartite Entanglement
---
Introduction
============
Entanglement is an essential ingredient in the broad field of quantum information theory. It is the basis of a lot of quantum protocols, such as quantum computation \[1\], quantum cryptography \[2\], quantum teleportation \[3\], quantum dense coding \[4\] and so on. It has been an important physical resource. Recently, many efforts have been made on the quantification of the resource \[5,6,7,8\], however, the good understanding is only limited in low-dimensional systems. The quantification of entanglement for higher dimensional systems and multipartite quantum systems remains to be an open question.
Since the remarkable concurrence was presented \[5\], it has been shown to be a useful entanglement measure for the systems of qubit. More interestingly, based on the concurrence, Valerie Coffman et al \[9\] introduced the so called residual entanglement for tripartite systems of qubits. The residual entanglement is independent on the permutation of the qubits, hence can be employed to measure genuine three-party entanglement, i.e. the tripartite entanglement, which opens the path to studying multipartite entanglement. Based on the motivation of generalizing the definition of the residual entanglement to higher dimensional systems and multipartite quantum systems, Alexander Wong et al \[10\] introduced the definition of the $n$-tangle for $n$ qubits with $n$ even, however, the $n$-tangle itself is not a measure of the $n$-partite entanglement. Later, hyperdeterminant in Ref. \[11\] has been shown to be an entanglement monotone and represent the genuine multipartite entanglement. However, it is easy to find that the hyperdeterminant for higher dimensional systems and multipartite system can not be explicitly given conveniently. In particular, so far the hyperdeterminant as an entanglement measure has not been able to be extended to mixed systems. Furthermore, a new method by constructing $N$-qubit entanglement monotones was introduced by Andreas Osterloh et al \[12\] for pure states to measure the $n$-partite entanglement, however, it is only confined to the systems of qubits and seems to be very difficult to extend to the case of mixed states analogously to Ref. \[11\].
In this paper, we introduce a new approach to generalize the residual entanglement for tripartite systems of qubits to the tripartite systems in higher dimension. One knows that the key to obtaining the explicit $\tau _{ABC}$ in Ref. \[9\] is the analytic expression of the concurrence in mixed systems of qubits. However, so far no one has been able to obtain an analytic expression of concurrence (or concurrence vector) for higher dimensional mixed systems, which means that the expectable results for higher dimensional systems seems not to be obtained from the similar method to that in Ref. \[9\]. Hence, we provide an intuitive mathematical formulation to generalize the residual entanglement according to the tensor treatment of tripartite pure states presented in Ref. \[13\]. A distinct characteristic of the present generalization is that the formulation for higher dimensional systems is invariant under permutation of the subsystems (i.e. the qudits), hence can be employed as a criterion to test existence of the genuine tripartite entanglement (also called tripartite entanglement for convenience in the paper). Furthermore, the formulation for pure states can be conveniently extended to the case of mixed states by utilizing the kronecker product approximate technique \[14,15\]. However, it should be noted that the formulation is not an entanglement measure except that for tripartite systems of qubits due to the variance under local unitary operations. As applications, we give the analytic approximation of the criterion for weakly mixed tripartite quantum states (quasi pure states) and consider the existence of tripartite entanglement of some quasi pure states, which shows that our criterion can be conveniently applied in these cases. The paper is organized as follows. Firstly, we give the intuitive generalization of the residual entanglement for pure states; secondly, we extend it to mixed states and discuss the existence of tripartite entanglement of some quasi pure states; the conclusions are drawn in the end.
Existence criterion of tripartite entanglement for pure states
==============================================================
The residual entanglement for tripartite systems of qubits or $\tau _{ABC}$ (i.e. the tripartite entanglement measure) is given by
$$\tau (\left\vert \psi _{ABC}\right\rangle )=\sqrt{\det R}=\left\vert
d_{1}-2d_{2}+4d_{3}\right\vert ,$$
where a constant factor is neglected and the element $R_{ij}$ of the $2\times 2$ matrix $R$ is defined by $$R_{ij}=\sum a_{klj}a_{mni}^{\ast }\epsilon _{mp}\epsilon _{nq}a_{pqr}^{\ast
}a_{str}\epsilon _{sk}\epsilon _{tl},$$with the sum being over all the repeated indices, $\epsilon _{01}=-\epsilon
_{10}=1$ and $\epsilon _{00}=-\epsilon _{11}=1$; $$d_{1}=a_{000}^{2}a_{111}^{2}+a_{001}^{2}a_{110}^{2}+a_{010}^{2}a_{101}^{2}+a_{100}^{2}a_{011}^{2};$$$$\begin{aligned}
d_{2} &=&a_{000}a_{111}a_{011}a_{100}+a_{000}a_{111}a_{101}a_{010} \\
&&+a_{000}a_{111}a_{110}a_{001}+a_{011}a_{100}a_{101}a_{010} \\
&&+a_{011}a_{100}a_{110}a_{001}+a_{101}a_{010}a_{110}a_{001};\end{aligned}$$$$d_{3}=a_{000}a_{110}a_{101}a_{011}+a_{111}a_{001}a_{010}a_{100}.$$What’s more, the $a$ terms in above equations are the coefficients in the standard basis defined by $\left\vert \psi _{ABC}\right\rangle
=\sum_{i,j,k=0}^{1}a_{ijk}\left\vert ijk\right\rangle _{ABC}$. As mentioned in Ref. \[9\], the expression of $\tau (\left\vert \psi _{ABC}\right\rangle )$ can be mentally pictured by imagining the eight coefficients $a_{ijk}$ attached to the corners of a cube. The picture yields that $\tau $ is invariant under permutations of the qubits, because a permutation of qubits corresponds to a reflection or rotation of the cube. It happens that the picture is consistent to the tensor cube introduced in Ref. \[13\]. In other words, a tensor cube of $\left\vert \psi _{ABC}\right\rangle $ corresponds to a tripartite entanglement measure $\tau (\left\vert \psi
_{ABC}\right\rangle )$. For convenience, we employ $f\left( \left\vert \psi
_{ABC}\right\rangle \right) =\left\vert \tau (\left\vert \psi
_{ABC}\right\rangle )\right\vert ^{2}$ to measure tripartite entanglement, which is equivalent to $\tau (\left\vert \psi _{ABC}\right\rangle )$ from the viewpoint of entanglement measure. Obviously, $f\left( \left\vert \psi
_{ABC}\right\rangle \right) $ has the same properties to $\tau (\left\vert
\psi _{ABC}\right\rangle )$.
According to Ref. \[13\], a tripartite pure state in any dimension can be regarded as the tensor grid which includes tensor cubes. E.g. let $%
\left\vert \phi _{ABC}\right\rangle
=\sum_{i,j=0}^{1}\sum_{k=0}^{2}a_{ijk}\left\vert ijk\right\rangle
_{ABC}$, the tensor grid of $\left\vert \phi _{ABC}\right\rangle $ can be pictured as figure 1, which includes three tensor cubes. In this sense, one can draw a conclusion that tensor cube is the unit of tensor grid. Since every tensor cube in a tensor grid can be considered as an non-normalized tripartite pure state of qubits, one can get that every unit corresponds to the tripartite entanglement measure of the non-normalized pure state. Namely, the tensor cube corresponds to the minimal unit of describing the tripartite entanglement. Therefore, whether there exist some genuine tripartite entanglement can be determined by all the minimal units.
![The tensor grid of the coefficients of a tripartite pure state in $%
2\times 2\times 3$ dimension.[]{data-label="1"}](grid.eps){width="9.5cm"}
**Theorem 1:-**For any a tripartite pure state $\left\vert \Psi
\right\rangle $ which includes $M$ minimal units mentioned above, let the the non-normalized tripartite pure state of qubits corresponding to the $i$th unit be denoted by $\left\vert \varphi
_{i}\right\rangle $, then the corresponding tripartite entanglement can be given by $f\left( \left\vert \varphi _{i}\right\rangle
\right) $. Define $$F(\left\vert \Psi \right\rangle )=\sqrt[4]{\sum_{i=1}^{M}f\left( \left\vert
\varphi _{i}\right\rangle \right) },$$for the state $\left\vert \Psi \right\rangle $, then if there does not exist genuine tripartite entanglement in $\left\vert \Psi \right\rangle $, $%
F(\left\vert \Psi \right\rangle )=0$.
**Proof.** It is obvious that $F(\left\vert \Psi \right\rangle )=0$ means that $f\left( \left\vert \varphi _{i}\right\rangle \right) =0$ holds for all $\varphi _{i}$, *vice versa*. Since the tensor cube corresponds to the minimal unit of describing the tripartite entanglement, $%
F(\left\vert \Psi \right\rangle )=0$ shows that there does not exist genuine three-party entanglement in $\left\vert \Psi \right\rangle $. That is to say, $F(\left\vert \Psi \right\rangle )$ can effectively test the existence of tripartite entanglement in $\left\vert \Psi \right\rangle $. Furthermore, a permutation of qudits corresponds to a reflection or rotation of the tensor grid, which is similar to that in Ref. \[9\], hence all the tensor cubes in the tensor grid are invariant except the relative positions in the grid. Namely, $F(\left\vert \Psi \right\rangle )$ is invariant under permutations of the qudits.
Considering the matrix notation of $\left\vert \Psi \right\rangle
=\sum_{i=0}^{n_{1}-1}\sum_{j=0}^{n_{2}-1}\sum_{k=0}^{n_{3}-1}a_{ijk}\left%
\vert ijk\right\rangle $, $F(\left\vert \Psi \right\rangle )$ can be expressed as the function of $\left\vert \Psi \right\rangle $, i.e.$$F(\left\vert \Psi \right\rangle )=\sqrt[4]{\sum_{\alpha
=1}^{N_{1}}\sum_{\beta =1}^{N_{2}}\sum_{\gamma =1}^{N_{3}}f\left( \left(
s_{\alpha }\otimes s_{\beta }\otimes s_{\gamma }\right) \left\vert \Psi
\right\rangle \right) },$$where $N_{p}=\frac{n_{p}(n_{p}-1)}{2}$ with $p=1,2,3$; $s_{q}$, $q=\alpha
,\beta ,\gamma ,$ denotes $2\times n_{p}$ matrix with $p$ corresponding to $%
q $. If the generator of the group $SO(n_{p})$ is denoted by $S_{p}$, $s_{q}$ can be derived from $\left\vert S_{p}\right\vert $ by deleting the row where all the elements are zero, where $\left\vert \text{ }\right\vert $ denotes the absolute value of the matrix elements.
Because eq. (2) can also be written in the standard basis by $$\begin{aligned}
R_{ij}
&=&%
\sum_{r=0}^{1}(a_{00j}a_{11r}+a_{11j}a_{00r}-a_{01j}a_{10r}-a_{10j}a_{01r})
\notag \\
&&\cdot (a_{00i}^{\ast }a_{11r}^{\ast }+a_{11i}^{\ast }a_{00r}^{\ast
}-a_{01i}^{\ast }a_{10r}^{\ast }-a_{10i}^{\ast }a_{01r}^{\ast }),\end{aligned}$$and $f(\left\vert \psi _{ABC}\right\rangle )=\det R$, $F(\left\vert \Psi
\right\rangle )$ can be expanded by $$\begin{aligned}
&&F(\left\vert \Psi \right\rangle )=\{\sum_{\alpha =1}^{N_{1}}\sum_{\beta
=1}^{N_{2}}\sum_{\gamma =1}^{N_{3}} \notag \\
&&[\sum\limits_{k=0}^{1}\left\vert \left\langle \Psi ^{\ast }\right\vert
S_{\alpha \beta \gamma }^{T}\left\vert \left\vert 0\right\rangle
\right\rangle (\sigma _{y}\otimes \sigma _{y})\left\langle \left\langle
k\right\vert \right\vert S_{\alpha \beta \gamma }\left\vert \Psi
\right\rangle \right\vert ^{2} \notag \\
&&\times \sum\limits_{k=0}^{1}\left\vert \left\langle \Psi \right\vert
S_{\alpha \beta \gamma }^{T}\left\vert \left\vert 1\right\rangle
\right\rangle (\sigma _{y}\otimes \sigma _{y})\left\langle \left\langle
k\right\vert \right\vert S_{\alpha \beta \gamma }\left\vert \Psi ^{\ast
}\right\rangle \right\vert ^{2} \notag \\
&&-\sum\limits_{k=0}^{1}(\left\langle \Psi ^{\ast }\right\vert S_{\alpha
\beta \gamma }^{T}\left\vert \left\vert 0\right\rangle \right\rangle (\sigma
_{y}\otimes \sigma _{y})\left\langle \left\langle k\right\vert \right\vert
S_{\alpha \beta \gamma }\left\vert \Psi \right\rangle \notag \\
&&\times \left\langle \Psi \right\vert S_{\alpha \beta \gamma
}^{T}\left\vert \left\vert 1\right\rangle \right\rangle (\sigma _{y}\otimes
\sigma _{y})\left\langle \left\langle k\right\vert \right\vert S_{\alpha
\beta \gamma }\left\vert \Psi ^{\ast }\right\rangle ) \notag \\
&&\times \sum\limits_{k=0}^{1}(\left\langle \Psi ^{\ast }\right\vert
S_{\alpha \beta \gamma }^{T}\left\vert \left\vert 1\right\rangle
\right\rangle (\sigma _{y}\otimes \sigma _{y})\left\langle \left\langle
k\right\vert \right\vert S_{\alpha \beta \gamma }\left\vert \Psi
\right\rangle \notag \\
&&\times \left\langle \Psi \right\vert S_{\alpha \beta \gamma
}^{T}\left\vert \left\vert 0\right\rangle \right\rangle (\sigma _{y}\otimes
\sigma _{y})\left\langle \left\langle k\right\vert \right\vert S_{\alpha
\beta \gamma }\left\vert \Psi ^{\ast }\right\rangle )]\}^{1/4},\end{aligned}$$where $S_{\alpha \beta \gamma }=s_{\alpha }\otimes s_{\beta }\otimes
s_{\gamma }$, $\left\vert \left\vert 0\right\rangle \right\rangle =\left(
\begin{array}{c}
1 \\
0%
\end{array}%
\right) \otimes \left(
\begin{array}{cc}
1 & 0 \\
0 & 1%
\end{array}%
\right) \otimes \left(
\begin{array}{cc}
1 & 0 \\
0 & 1%
\end{array}%
\right) $, $\left\vert \left\vert 1\right\rangle \right\rangle =\left(
\begin{array}{c}
0 \\
1%
\end{array}%
\right) \otimes \left(
\begin{array}{cc}
1 & 0 \\
0 & 1%
\end{array}%
\right) \otimes \left(
\begin{array}{cc}
1 & 0 \\
0 & 1%
\end{array}%
\right) $, and $\left\langle \left\langle \ \right\vert \right\vert =\left(
\left\vert \left\vert \ \right\rangle \right\rangle \right) ^{T}$ and the superscript $T$ denotes transposition operation. Note that $F(\left\vert
\Psi \right\rangle )=\frac{1}{2}(F(\left\vert \Psi \right\rangle
)+F(\left\vert \Psi \right\rangle )^{\ast })$. Although the expanded $%
F(\left\vert \Psi \right\rangle )$ is a bit tedious, it is important for the extension of $F(\left\vert \Psi \right\rangle )$ to mixed states.
Existence criterion of tripartite entanglement for mixed states
===============================================================
Kronecker product approximation technique
-----------------------------------------
We first introduce the kronecker product approximation technique \[14,15\]. For any a matrix $M=[m_{ij}]$, with entries $m_{ij}$, defined in $%
C_{d_{1}}\otimes C_{d_{2}}$, $\tilde{M}$ can be defined \[16\] by$$\tilde{M}=V_{12}^{L}(MV_{12}^{R})^{T_{2}},$$where the superscript $T_{2}$ denotes partial transposition on the second space \[17\], $V_{12}^{L,R}$ are left (right) hand side swap operators defined as $V_{12}=\sum_{ikj^{\prime }k^{\prime }}\delta _{jk^{\prime }}\delta
_{j^{\prime }k}\left\vert j\right\rangle \left\langle j^{\prime }\right\vert
\otimes \left\vert k\right\rangle \left\langle k^{\prime }\right\vert $, $%
j,k^{\prime }=1,\cdot \cdot \cdot ,d_{2}$, $j^{\prime },k=1,\cdot \cdot
\cdot ,d_{1}$. The right hand side swap operator is defined in $%
C_{d_{1}}\otimes C_{d_{2}}$ and the left one is defined in $C_{d_{2}}\otimes
C_{d_{1}}$. Furthermore, $V_{12}^{L}=(V_{12}^{R})^{T}=(V_{12}^{R})^{-1}$. If $d_{1}=d_{2}$, $V_{12}^{L}=V_{12}^{R}$. $\tilde{M}$ has the singular value decompositions:$$\tilde{M}=U\Sigma V^{\dag }=\sum_{i=1}^{r}\sigma _{i}u_{i}v_{i}^{\dag },$$where $u_{i}$, $v_{i}$ are the $i$th columns of the unitary matrices $U$ and $V$, respectively; $\Sigma $ is a diagonal matrix with elements $\sigma _{i}$ decreasing for $i=1,\cdot \cdot \cdot ,r$; $r$ is the rank of $\tilde{M}$. Based on Ref. \[14,15\], $M$ can be written by $$M=\sum_{i=1}^{r}\left( X_{i}\otimes Y_{i}\right) ,$$with $Vec(X_{i})=\sqrt{\sigma _{i}}u_{i}$ and $Vec(Y_{i})=\sqrt{\sigma _{i}}%
v_{i}^{\ast }$, where $$Vec(A)=[a_{11},\cdot \cdot \cdot ,a_{p1},a_{12},\cdot \cdot \cdot
,a_{p2},\cdot \cdot \cdot ,a_{1q},\cdot \cdot \cdot ,a_{pq}]^{T},$$for any a $p\times q$ matrix $A=[a_{ij}]$ with entries $a_{ij}$ \[18\].
Extension of existence criterion to mixed states
------------------------------------------------
Consider $F(\left\vert \Psi \right\rangle )$ of pure states, the corresponding quantity of mixed states $\rho $ is then given as the convex of $$F(\rho )=\inf \sum_{i}p_{i}F(\left\vert \Psi _{i}\right\rangle )$$of all possible decompositions into pure states $\left\vert \Psi
_{i}\right\rangle $ with $$\rho =\sum_{i}p_{i}\left\vert \Psi _{i}\right\rangle \left\langle \Psi
_{i}\right\vert ,p_{i}\geq 0.$$$F(\rho )$ vanishes if and only if $\rho $ does not include any genuine three-party entanglement. According to the matrix notation \[7\] of equation (13), one can obtain $\rho =\Psi W\Psi ^{\dagger }$, where $W$ is a diagonal matrix with $W_{ii}=p_{i}$, the columns of the matrix $\Psi $ correspond to the vectors $\left\vert \Psi _{i}\right\rangle $. Due to the eigenvalue decomposition: $\rho =\Phi M\Phi ^{\dagger }$, where $M$ is a diagonal matrix whose diagonal elements are the eigenvalues of $\rho $, and $\Phi $ is a unitary matrix whose columns are the eigenvectors of $\rho $, one can obtain $\Psi W^{1/2}=\Phi M^{1/2}U$, where $U\in C^{r\times N}$ is a Right-unitary matrix, with $N$ and $r$ being the column number of $\Psi $ and the rank of $\rho $. Therefore, based on the matrix notation and eq. (7), eq. (12) can be rewritten as$$F(\rho )=\inf_{U}\sum_{i}^{N}([\left( U^{T}\otimes U^{\dag }\otimes
U^{T}\otimes U^{\dag }\right)$$$$\times \sum_{\alpha \beta \gamma }A_{\alpha \beta \gamma }\left( U\otimes
U^{\ast }\otimes U\otimes U^{\ast }\right) ]_{ii,ii}^{ii,ii})^{1/4},$$where $$A_{\alpha \beta \gamma }=\frac{1}{2}\left( \mathbf{\rho }^{1/2}\right) ^{T}%
\mathbf{S}_{\alpha \beta \gamma }^{T}\left\vert \left\vert L\right\rangle
\right\rangle \Sigma _{y}\left\langle \left\langle R\right\vert \right\vert
\mathbf{S}_{\alpha \beta \gamma }\left( \mathbf{\rho }^{1/2}\right)$$defined in $C_{d\times d}\otimes C_{d\times d}\otimes C_{d\times d}\otimes
C_{d\times d}$, and $\rho $ is defined in $C_{d\times d}$, with$$\mathbf{\rho }^{1/2}=\left( \Phi M^{1/2}\right) ^{T}\otimes \left( \Phi
M^{1/2}\right) ^{\dag }\otimes \left( \Phi M^{1/2}\right) ^{T}\otimes \left(
\Phi M^{1/2}\right) ^{\dag },$$
$$\left\vert \left\vert L\right\rangle \right\rangle =\left\vert \left\vert
0011\right\rangle \right\rangle +\left\vert \left\vert 1100\right\rangle
\right\rangle -\left\vert \left\vert 0110\right\rangle \right\rangle
-\left\vert \left\vert 1001\right\rangle \right\rangle ,$$
$$\left\vert \left\vert R\right\rangle \right\rangle =(\left\langle
\left\langle 00\right\vert \right\vert +\left\langle \left\langle
11\right\vert \right\vert )\otimes (\left\langle \left\langle 00\right\vert
\right\vert +\left\langle \left\langle 11\right\vert \right\vert ),$$
$$\Sigma _{y}=\otimes _{j=1}^{8}\sigma _{y},$$
$$\mathbf{S}_{\alpha \beta \gamma }=\otimes _{j=1}^{4}S_{\alpha \beta \gamma },$$
and$$\left\vert \left\vert abcd\right\rangle \right\rangle =\left\vert \left\vert
a\right\rangle \right\rangle \otimes \left\vert \left\vert b\right\rangle
\right\rangle \otimes \left\vert \left\vert c\right\rangle \right\rangle
\otimes \left\vert \left\vert d\right\rangle \right\rangle .$$If the former two subspaces and the latter two ones are regarded as a doubled subspace, respectively. $\sum_{\alpha \beta \gamma }A_{\alpha \beta
\gamma }$ can be considered to be defined in $C_{d^{2}\times d^{2}}\otimes
C_{d^{2}\times d^{2}}$. It is easy to find that $\sum_{\alpha \beta \gamma
}A_{\alpha \beta \gamma }$ is invariant under the exchange of two doubled subspaces. Hence, based on the kronecker product approximation technique, $%
\sum_{\alpha \beta \gamma }A_{\alpha \beta \gamma }$ can be written by$$\sum_{\alpha \beta \gamma }A_{\alpha \beta \gamma }=\sum_{i}^{r^{\prime
}}B_{i}\otimes B_{i}=\sum_{i}^{r^{\prime }}\sigma _{i}B_{i}^{\prime }\otimes
B_{i}^{\prime },$$with $B_{i}$, $B_{i}^{\prime }$ defined in $C_{d\times d}\otimes C_{d\times
d}$ and $\sigma _{i}$ the corresponding singular value. $B_{i}=\sqrt{\sigma
_{i}}B_{i}^{\prime }$ which can be obtained following the procedure in above subsection is not given explicitly. Furthermore, $r^{\prime }$ is the rank of the matrix $\sum_{\alpha \beta \gamma }\tilde{A}_{\alpha \beta \gamma }$ defined in above subsection. Due to eq. (15), eq. (14) can be rewritten by$$F(\rho )=\inf_{U}\sum_{i}^{N}\left( \sum_{j}^{r^{\prime }}\left( \left[
\left( U^{T}\otimes U^{\dag }\right) B_{j}\left( U\otimes U^{\ast }\right) %
\right] _{ii}^{ii}\right) ^{2}\right) ^{1/4}.$$
It is also obvious that $A_{\alpha \beta \gamma }$ is converted into $%
A_{\alpha \beta \gamma }^{\ast }$, if the former two subspaces and the latter two ones are exchanged simultaneously. Based on the kronecker product approximation technique again, one can obtain that $$B_{j}=\sum_{i}^{r^{\prime \prime }}\left( C_{j}\right) _{i}\otimes \left(
C_{j}\right) _{i}^{\ast }=\sum_{i}^{r^{\prime \prime }}\left( \sigma
_{j}^{\prime }\right) _{i}\left( C_{j}^{\prime }\right) _{i}\otimes \left(
C_{j}^{\prime }\right) _{i}^{\ast }$$holds for any $j$, with $\left( C_{j}\right) _{i}$, $\left( C_{j}^{\prime
}\right) _{i}$ defined in $C_{d\times d}$, $\sigma _{j}^{\prime }$ the corresponding singular value and $\left( C_{j}\right) _{i}=\sqrt{\left(
\sigma _{j}^{\prime }\right) _{i}}\left( C_{j}^{\prime }\right) _{i}$. Analogously, $r^{\prime \prime }$ is the rank of $\tilde{B}_{j}$. Hence, eq. (16) can be rewritten by$$F(\rho )=\inf_{U}\sum_{i}^{N}\left( \sum_{j}^{r^{\prime }}\left(
\sum_{m}^{r^{\prime \prime }}\left\vert \left( U^{T}\left( C_{j}\right)
_{m}U\right) _{ii}\right\vert ^{2}\right) ^{2}\right) ^{1/4}.$$The infimum can be employed to test the existence of tripartite entanglement of $\rho $.
In terms of the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality $\left(
\sum\limits_{i}x_{i}^{2}\right) ^{1/2}\left( \sum\limits_{i}y_{i}^{2}\right)
^{1/2}\geqslant \sum\limits_{i}x_{i}y_{i}$ and $\sum_{i}\left\vert
x_{i}\right\vert \geq \left\vert \sum_{i}x_{i}\right\vert $, $F(\rho )$ can also be expressed by $$F(\rho )\geq \inf_{U}\sum_{i}^{N}\left\vert U^{T}\left( \sum_{j}^{r^{\prime
}}\sum_{m}^{r^{\prime \prime }}z_{j}\cdot Z_{jm}\left( C_{j}\right)
_{m}\right) U\right\vert _{ii},$$where $z_{j}=x_{j}\exp (i\phi _{j})$, with $x_{j}\geq 0$, $%
\sum_{j}x_{j}^{4}=1,$ and $Z_{jm}=y_{jm}\exp (i\varphi _{jm})$, with $%
y_{jm}\geq 0$, $\sum_{jm}y_{jm}^{2}=1$. Eq. (18) has the similar form to that in Ref. \[7\], even though it is a little more complex. Therefore the infimum of eq. (18) can be given by $\underset{\mathbf{z},\mathbf{Z}}{\text{%
max}}$ $\lambda _{1}(\mathbf{z},\mathbf{Z})-\sum_{i>1}\lambda _{i}(\mathbf{z}%
,\mathbf{Z})$, where $\lambda _{j}(\mathbf{z},\mathbf{Z})$ are the singular values of $\left( \sum_{j}^{r^{\prime }}\sum_{m}^{r^{\prime \prime
}}z_{j}\cdot Z_{jm}\left( C_{j}\right) _{m}\right) $ in decreasing order \[7\], with $\mathbf{z}=[z_{1},z_{2},\cdot \cdot \cdot ,z_{r^{\prime }}]$ and $%
\mathbf{Z=}[Z_{11},Z_{12},\cdot \cdot \cdot ,Z_{1r^{\prime \prime
}},Z_{21},\cdot \cdot \cdot ,Z_{r^{\prime }r^{\prime \prime }}]$.
In terms of the inequality $\sum_{i=1}^{n}\left\vert x_{i}\right\vert
^{2}\geq \frac{1}{n}\left( \sum_{i=1}^{n}\left\vert x_{i}\right\vert \right)
^{2}$, a more analogous form about eq. (17) to that in Ref. \[7\] can be given by $$F(\rho )\geq \inf_{U}\left( \frac{1}{r^{\prime }}\right)
^{1/4}\sum_{i}^{N}\left\vert U^{T}\left( \sum_{j}^{r^{\prime
}}\sum_{m}^{r^{\prime \prime }}Z_{jm}\left( C_{j}\right) _{m}\right)
U\right\vert _{ii},$$The infimum can be obtained by $\left( \frac{1}{r^{\prime }}\right)
^{1/4}\times \left( \underset{\mathbf{Z}}{\text{max}}\lambda _{1}(\mathbf{Z}%
)-\sum_{i>1}\lambda _{i}(\mathbf{Z})\right) $, where $\lambda _{j}(\mathbf{Z}%
)$ are the singular values of $\left( \sum_{j}^{r^{\prime
}}\sum_{m}^{r^{\prime \prime }}Z_{jm}\left( C_{j}\right) _{m}\right) $ in decreasing order. Both the two cases can provide the necessary condition for the existence of tripartite entanglement of a mixed state, but the sufficiency of them may be different.
What’s more, compared with the procedure in Ref. \[8\], it is very possible that $\left[ \left( C_{j}\right) _{m}\right] _{\max }$ corresponding to the maximal $\sqrt{(\sigma _{j}^{\prime })_{m}}$ can give the main contribution to the infimum of eq. (18). That is to say the lower bound of $F(\rho )$ can be given by $\lambda _{1}-\sum_{i>1}\lambda _{i}$ with $\lambda _{j}$ the singular values of $\left[ \left( C_{j}\right) _{m}\right] _{\max }$.
Examples
--------
In above subsection, we have provided three different lower bounds for any mixed state, which can be employed as necessary conditions to test the existence of tripartite entanglement in principal. However, by analysis, one can find that the numerical realization to calculate the bounds for a mixed state $\rho $ requires the eigenvalue decomposition of a matrix defined in the same dimension to that of $\otimes _{i=1}^{4}\rho $ , which reduces the efficiency of calculation. In order to avoid the similar problem, an analytic approximation method was introduced for quasi pure states in Ref. \[19\]. By utilizing the analogous method, one will find that eq. (17) can be simplified significantly, hence our criterion can work well for quasi pure states. Before the examples, we firstly give the analytic approximation of eq. (17).
Let $\sum_{\alpha \beta \gamma }A_{\alpha \beta \gamma }$ in eq. (14) be denoted by $A$. Analogous to Ref. \[19\], the tensor $A$ can be obtained by
$$\begin{aligned}
&&A_{l^{\prime }m^{\prime },j^{\prime }k^{\prime }}^{lm,jk} \notag \\
&=&\sum_{\alpha =1}^{N_{1}}\sum_{\beta =1}^{N_{2}}\sum_{\gamma =1}^{N_{3}}[%
\sqrt{u_{l}u_{m}u_{j}u_{k}u_{l^{\prime }}u_{m^{\prime }}u_{j^{\prime
}}u_{k^{\prime }}} \notag \\
&&\times \sum_{i=0}^{1}(\left\langle \Psi _{l}^{\ast }\right\vert S_{\alpha
\beta \gamma }^{T}\left\vert \left\vert 0\right\rangle \right\rangle (\sigma
_{y}\otimes \sigma _{y})\left\langle \left\langle i\right\vert \right\vert
S_{\alpha \beta \gamma }\left\vert \Psi _{l^{\prime }}\right\rangle \notag
\\
&&\times \left\langle \Psi _{m}\right\vert S_{\alpha \beta \gamma
}^{T}\left\vert \left\vert 0\right\rangle \right\rangle (\sigma _{y}\otimes
\sigma _{y})\left\langle \left\langle i\right\vert \right\vert S_{\alpha
\beta \gamma }\left\vert \Psi _{m^{\prime }}^{\ast }\right\rangle ) \notag
\\
&&\times \sum_{i=0}^{1}(\left\langle \Psi _{j}^{\ast }\right\vert S_{\alpha
\beta \gamma }^{T}\left\vert \left\vert 1\right\rangle \right\rangle (\sigma
_{y}\otimes \sigma _{y})\left\langle \left\langle i\right\vert \right\vert
S_{\alpha \beta \gamma }\left\vert \Psi _{j^{\prime }}\right\rangle \notag
\\
&&\times \left\langle \Psi _{k}\right\vert S_{\alpha \beta \gamma
}^{T}\left\vert \left\vert 1\right\rangle \right\rangle (\sigma _{y}\otimes
\sigma _{y})\left\langle \left\langle i\right\vert \right\vert S_{\alpha
\beta \gamma }\left\vert \Psi _{k^{\prime }}^{\ast }\right\rangle ) \notag
\\
&&-\sum_{i=0}^{1}(\left\langle \Psi _{l}^{\ast }\right\vert S_{\alpha \beta
\gamma }^{T}\left\vert \left\vert 1\right\rangle \right\rangle (\sigma
_{y}\otimes \sigma _{y})\left\langle \left\langle i\right\vert \right\vert
S_{\alpha \beta \gamma }\left\vert \Psi _{l^{\prime }}\right\rangle \notag
\\
&&\times \left\langle \Psi _{m}\right\vert S_{\alpha \beta \gamma
}^{T}\left\vert \left\vert 0\right\rangle \right\rangle (\sigma _{y}\otimes
\sigma _{y})\left\langle \left\langle i\right\vert \right\vert S_{\alpha
\beta \gamma }\left\vert \Psi _{m^{\prime }}^{\ast }\right\rangle ) \notag
\\
&&\times \sum_{i=0}^{1}(\left\langle \Psi _{j}^{\ast }\right\vert S_{\alpha
\beta \gamma }^{T}\left\vert \left\vert 0\right\rangle \right\rangle (\sigma
_{y}\otimes \sigma _{y})\left\langle \left\langle i\right\vert \right\vert
S_{\alpha \beta \gamma }\left\vert \Psi _{j^{\prime }}\right\rangle \notag
\\
&&\times \left\langle \Psi _{k}\right\vert S_{\alpha \beta \gamma
}^{T}\left\vert \left\vert 1\right\rangle \right\rangle (\sigma
_{y}\otimes \sigma _{y})\left\langle \left\langle i\right\vert
\right\vert S_{\alpha \beta \gamma }\left\vert \Psi _{k^{\prime
}}^{\ast }\right\rangle )],\end{aligned}$$
where $\Psi _{\alpha }$ denotes the $\alpha $th eigenvector and all the other quantities are defined similar to those in eq. (7). According to the symmetry of $A$ and the kronecker product approximation technique in above section, $A$ can be formally written as $$A_{l^{\prime }m^{\prime },j^{\prime }k^{\prime }}^{lm,jk}=\sum_{\alpha
}T_{lm}^{\alpha }\left( T_{l^{\prime }m^{\prime }}^{\alpha }\right) ^{\ast
}T_{jk}^{\alpha }\left( T_{j^{\prime }k^{\prime }}^{\alpha }\right) ^{\ast }.$$The density matrix of quasi pure states has one single eigenvalue $\mu _{1}$ that is much larger than all the others, which induces a natural order in terms of the small eigenvalues $\mu _{i}$, $i>1$. Due to the same reasons to those in Ref. \[19\], here we consider the second order elements of type $%
A_{11,11}^{lm,11}$. Therefore, one can have the approximation $$A_{l^{\prime }m^{\prime },j^{\prime }k^{\prime }}^{lm,jk}\simeq \tau
_{lm}\tau _{l^{\prime }m^{\prime }}^{\ast }\tau _{jk}\tau _{j^{\prime
}k^{\prime }}^{\ast }\text{ with }\tau _{lm}=\frac{A_{11,11}^{lm,11}}{\sqrt[4%
]{\left( A_{11,11}^{11,11}\right) ^{3}}}.$$In this sense, eq. (17) and eq. (18) can be simplified significantly:$$F(\rho )\simeq F_{a}(\rho )=\inf_{U}\sum_{i}\left\vert U^{T}\tau
U\right\vert _{ii}.$$$F_{a}(\rho )$ can be given by $$F_{a}(\rho )=\max \{\lambda _{1}-\sum_{i>1}\lambda _{i},0\},$$where $\lambda _{i}$ is the singular value of $\tau $ in decreasing order.
The tripartite mixed states introduced in Ref .\[20\] $$\rho (x)=x\left\vert GHZ\right\rangle \left\langle GHZ\right\vert
+(1-x)/2(\left\vert W\right\rangle \left\langle W\right\vert +\left\vert
\tilde{W}\right\rangle \left\langle \tilde{W}\right\vert ),$$where $$\left\vert GHZ\right\rangle =\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(\left\vert 000\right\rangle
+\left\vert 111\right\rangle ),$$$$\left\vert W\right\rangle =\frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}\left( \left\vert
001\right\rangle +\left\vert 010\right\rangle +\left\vert 100\right\rangle
\right) ,$$$$\left\vert \tilde{W}\right\rangle =\frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}\left( \left\vert
110\right\rangle +\left\vert 011\right\rangle +\left\vert 101\right\rangle
\right) ,$$can be considered as a quasi pure state for $x>1/3$. $F_{a}(\rho
(x))$ is shown in Fig. 2, which indicates the consistent conclusion to that in Ref. \[20\]. What’s more, for the quasi pure states generated by the mixture of maximally mixed state(identity matrix) and tripartite GHZ state (The cases in $3\times3\times3$ dimension is included.), the corresponding $F_{a}(\rho )$s can all be shown to be *nonzero*. Since $F_{a}(\rho )$ is not monotone in higher dimension, the corresponding figures are not given here.
![$F_{a}(\protect\rho )$ of the mixed state $\protect\rho %
(x)=x\left\vert GHZ\right\rangle \left\langle GHZ\right\vert
+(1-x)/2(\left\vert W\right\rangle \left\langle W\right\vert +\left\vert
\tilde{W}\right\rangle \left\langle \tilde{W}\right\vert )$ vs $x$, $x\in
(1/3,1].$](result1.eps){width="8.5cm"}
Conclusion and Discussion
=========================
In summary, we have introduced an intuitive mathematical formulation to generalize the original tripartite entanglement to higher dimensional tripartite systems according to the tensor treatment of a tripartite pure state. A distinct characteristic of the present generalization is that the formulation for higher dimensional systems is invariant under permutation of the qudits. When the formulation is reduced to tripartite systems of qubits, there exists an exponent $\frac{1}{2}$ different from the original one, but the change of exponent provides convenience for the generalization to mixed states. The formulation for pure states can be conveniently extended to the case of mixed states by utilizing the kronecker product approximate technique. We have presented three different lower bounds for $F(\rho )$ of mixed states. The forms of the three results for mixed states are similar to those of bipartite entanglement \[7,8\]. All of them can provide necessary conditions to test the existence of tripartite entanglement, but the sufficiency of them may be different. However, because the dimension of $%
A_{\alpha \beta \gamma }$ is much higher than that corresponding to bipartite entanglement, it seems to be a bit difficult to directly apply to test the existence of tripartite entanglement of a general quantum mixed state. Fortunately, for the weakly mixed states, i.e. quasi pure states, one can find that our criterion can be conveniently applied and is even a sufficient condition for the existence of tripartite entanglement. In particular, our criterion can provide an analytic approximation. Since the 3-tangle is an entanglement measure, $F_{a}(\rho )$ is not only an existence criterion, but also an effective tripartite entanglement indicator. Even though there exist some questions left open, the intuitive mathematical formulation of tripartite entanglement and the convenient extension to mixed states will play an important role in the further understanding of multipartite entanglement measure.
Acknowledgement
===============
This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China, under Grant No. 60472017.
[99]{} M. A. Nielsen and I. L. Chuang, *Quantum Computation and Quantum Information* (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2000).
M. Zukowski, A. Zeilinger, M. A. Horne, and A. K. Ekert, Phys. Rev. Lett. **71**, 4287 (1993).
C. H. Bennett, et al., Phys. Rev. Lett.**70**,1895 (1993).
C. H. Bennett and S. Wiesner, Phys. Rev. Lett. **69**, 2881 (1992).
W. K. Wootters, Phys. Rev. Lett. **80**, 2245 (1998).
A.Uhlmann, Phys. Rev. A **62**, 032307 (2000).
K. Audenaert, F.Verstraete and De Moor, Phys. Rev. A **64**, 052304 (2001).
Florian Mintert, Marek Kuś, and Andreas Buchleitner, Phys. Rev. Lett. **92**, 167902 (2004).
Valerie Coffman, Joydip Kundu, and William K. Wootters, Phys. Rev. A **61**, 052306 (2000).
Alexander Wong and Nelson Christensen, Phys. Rev. A **63**, 044301 (2001).
A. Miyake, Phys. Rev. A **67**, 012108 (2003).
Andreas Osterloh, Jens Siewert, Phys. Rev. A **72**, 012337 (2005).
Chang-shui Yu, He-shan Song, Phys. Rev. A **72**, 022333 (2005).
N. P. Pitsianis, Ph.D. thesis, Cornell University, New York, 1997.
C. F. Van Loan and N. P. Pitsianis, in *Linear Algebra for Large Scale and Real Time Applications*, edited by M. S. Moonen and G. H. Golub (Kluwer, Dordrecht, 1993), pp. 293-314.
Heng Fan, e-print quant-ph/0210168.
A. Peres, Phys. Rev. Lett. **76**, 1413 (1996).
R. A. Horn and C. R. Johnson, *Matrix Analysis* (Cambridge University Press, New York, 1985).
Florian Mintert, André R. R. Carvalho, Marek Kuś, and Andreas Buchleitner, Physics Report **415**, 207 (2005).
Tzu-Chieh Wei and Paul M. goldbart, Phys. Rev. A **68**, 042307 (2003).
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
author:
- 'A. La Rosa,'
title: 'The ATLAS Insertable B-Layer: from construction to operation'
---
[99]{}
ATLAS Collaboration, The ATLAS Experiment at the CERN Large Hadron Collider, JINST 3 (2008) S08003. G. Aad et al., ATLAS pixel detector electronics and sensors, JINST 3 (2008) P07007. ATLAS IBL Collaboration, ATLAS Insertable B-Layer Technical Design Report. CERN-LHCC-2010-0013, https://cds.cern.ch/record/1291633. M. Garcia-Sciveres et al., The FE-I4 Pixel Readout Integrated Circuit, Nucl. Instr. and Meth A636 (2010) S155. C. Goessling, et al., Planar n$^{+}$-in-n silicon pixel sensors for the ATLAS IBL upgrade. Nucl. Instr. and Meth A650 (2011) 198. C. Da Via, et al., 3D silicon sensors: Design, large area production and quality assurance for the ATLAS IBL pixel detector upgrade. Nucl. Instr. and Meth A694 (2012) 321. A. La Rosa, ATLAS Pixel Detector: Operational experience and Run-1 to Run-2 transition. Proceeding of Science PoS(Vertex2014)001 (2014). ATLAS Collaboration, Study of the mechanical stability of the ATLAS Insertable B-Layer, ATL-INDET-PUB-2015-001, http://cds.cern.ch/record/2022587. S. Tsuno, Physics Performance of the ATLAS Pixel Detector, to be published in the same conference proceeding issue. F. Faccio, G. Cervelli, Radiation-Induced Edge Effects in Deep Submicron CMOS Transistors, IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci. 52 (2005) 2413. K. Dette, The total ionizaion effects in the FE-I4 front-end chip of the ATLAS Pixel IBL detector , to be published in the same conference proceeding issue. B. Mandelli et al., Studies of IBL wire bonds operation in a ATLAS-like magnetic field, PH-EP-Tech-Note-2015-002, http://cds.cern.ch/record/2010249.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: |
We present an approximate analytic solution of the Klein-Gordon equation in the presence of equal scalar and vector generalized deformed hyperbolic potential functions by means of parameteric generalization of the Nikiforov-Uvarov method. We obtain the approximate bound state rotational-vibrational (ro-vibrational) energy levels and the corresponding normalized wave functions expressed in terms of the Jacobi polynomial $%
P_{n}^{\left( \mu ,\nu \right) }(x),$ where $\mu >-1,$ $\nu >-1$ and $x\in %
\left[ -1,+1\right] $ for a spin-zero particle in a closed form. Special cases are studied including the non-relativistic solutions obtained by appropriate choice of parameters and also the $s$-wave solutions.
Keywords: Bound states, Klein-Gordon equation, hyperbolic potential functions, deformation theory, Nikiforov-Uvarov method.
author:
- 'Sameer M. Ikhdair'
title: 'Rotational and vibrational diatomic molecule in the Klein-Gordon equation with hyperbolic scalar and vector potentials** **'
---
Introduction
============
In nuclear, molecular and high energy physics \[1,2\], one of the interesting problems is to obtain exact solutions of the relativistic wave equations like Klein-Gordon (KG), Dirac and Salpeter wave equations for mixed vector and scalar potential. The KG equation has also been used to understand the motion of a spin-zero particle in large class of potentials using different methods. This allows us to introduce two types of potential coupling, which are the four-vector potential ($V$) and the space-time scalar potential ($S$).
For the case $S=\pm V,$ the solution of these wave equations with physical potentials has been studied recently. Furthermore, their exact solutions are possible only for certain central potentials such as Morse potential \[3\], Hulthén potential \[4\], Woods-Saxon potential \[5\], Pöschl-Teller potential \[6\], reflectionless-type potential \[7\], pseudoharmonic oscillator \[8\], ring-shaped harmonic oscillator \[9\], $V_{0}\tanh ^{2}(r/r_{0})$ potential \[10\], five-parameter exponential potential \[11\], Rosen-Morse potential \[12\], and generalized symmetrical double-well potential \[13\], etc by using different methods. It is remarkable that in most of these works, the scalar and vector potentials are almost taken to be equal (i.e., $S=V$) \[2,14\]. Recently, interest in the solutions of the KG equation for the case where $S(r)=\pm V(r)$ has surged. It presents bounded solutions in the relativistic view, although the KG equation reduces to the Schrödinger-like problem in the nonrelativistic limit. However, the reduced equation can show the relativistic properties of the system. For the most recent contributions, one may consult the papers in \[2,6,9,10\] and references therein. Therefore, the choice $S(r)=V(r)$ (positive energy states) produces a nontrivial nonrelativistic limit with a potential function $\Sigma (r)=2V(r),$ and not $V(r).$ It represents the concept of the exact spin symmetry that occurs in nuclei (*i.e.*, when the difference potential $\Delta (r)=V(r)-S(r)=0).$ In the negative energy states (corresponding to $S(r)=-V(r)$) the nonrelativistic limit is the trivial interaction free-mode. It represents the concept of the pseudospin symmetry (*i.e.*, occurs when the sum potential $\Sigma
(r)=V(r)+S(r)=0)$ \[15\]. The spin symmetry is relevant for mesons \[16\]. The pseudospin symmetry concept has been applied to many systems in nuclear physics and related areas \[15-17\] and used to explain features of deformed nuclei \[18\], the super-deformation \[19\] and to establish an effective nuclear shell-model scheme \[17,20\]. This, of course, does not diminish the importance of such problems. It only limits it’s contribution (with the proper physical interpretation) to the relativistic regime \[14\]. However, in some few other cases, it is considered the case where the scalar potential is greater than the vector potential (in order to guarantee the existence of KG bound states) (i.e., $S>V$) \[21-24\]. Many authors have considered a more general transformation between the unequal vector and scalar potentials given by $V(r)=V_{0}+\beta S(r)$ (or $S(r)\neq \pm V(r)$)$,$where $V_{0}$ and $\beta $ being arbitrary constants of certain proportions have to be chosen after solving the problem under consideration (cf. Ref. \[25\] and references therein). Nonetheless, such physical potentials are very few. The bound state solutions for the last case is being obtained for the exponential potential with the $s$-wave ($l=0$) KG equation when the scalar potential is greater than the vector potential \[21\].
The problems connected with the molecular structure provide interesting and instructive applications of quantum mechanics, since molecules are considerably more complex in structure than atoms. Two distinct problems arise in connection with molecular structure. The first is to obtain the electronic wave functions and potential energy functions of the nuclear coordinates. This problem can be solved analytically only in the simplest cases. The second is to obtain the solution of the nuclear motion equation. In this regard, the construction of a suitable potential function of a diatomic molecule is very important. It has been found that the potential-energy function for the lowest electronic states of actual diatomic molecules can be expressed by means of the Morse potential \[26\]:$$V_{M}(r)=D\left[ 1-\exp \left[ -\alpha (r-r_{e})\right] \right] ^{2},$$which has three adjustable positive parameters $\alpha ,$ $D$ and $r_{e}.$ At $r=r_{e},$ it has a minimum value at zero and approaches $D$ exponentially for large $r.$ If $\frac{1}{\alpha }$ is somewhat smaller than $r_{e},$ it becomes large (but not infinie) as $r\rightarrow 0.$ This potential is important in the field of molecular physics describing the interaction between two atoms \[26,27\]. Overmore, progress has been made in the field of diatomic molecules and extensive use of the potential functions have been introduced \[28,29\]. At present the Morse potential is still one of the potential functions used most in molecular physics and quantum chemistry \[30\]. However, it has few asymptotic inaccuracies in the regions of small and large $r.$ To avoid these inaccuracies, many works have been carried out in that direction to improve Morse potential \[31\]. In 1986, Schiöberg \[32\] suggested hyperbolical (empirical) potential functions of the form: $$V_{\pm }(r)=D\left\{ 1-\sigma \left[ \coth (\alpha r)\right] ^{\pm
1}\right\} ^{2},$$where $D,$ $\alpha $ and $\sigma $ are three adjustable positive parameters with $D=D_{e}/(1-\sigma )^{2}$ ($D_{e}$ is the spectroscopic dissociation energy) and $\sigma \rightarrow \sigma /\delta ,$ $\delta \neq 0$ is a parameter. In contrast to the everywhere-regular Morse potential, $V_{+}(r)$ is highly singular at the origin with $1/r^{2}$ and $1/r$ singularities. The two potentials behave similarly near the extremum point $r=r_{e}.$ It has the minimum value $0$ at the point$$r=r_{e}=\frac{1}{\alpha }\arctan h\left( \sigma \right) ^{\pm 1},$$and approaches $D$ exponentially for large $r.$ Unlike the Morse potential (1), the empirical potential (EP) function $V_{+}(r)$ approaches infinity at the point $r=0.$ In the region of large $r,$ it is closer to the experimental Rydberg-Klein-Rees (RKR) curve than the Morse potential for some diatomic molecules. For a diatomic molecular model instead of the nuclear model, we consider the reduced mass definition. If the nuclei have masses $m_{1}$ and $m_{2},$ the reduced mass is defined as $\mu
=m_{1}m_{2}/(m_{1}+m_{2})$ and at this point the diatomic molecular model can be included to the the pseudospin symmetry concept. In this context, it is worth noting that the energy of the nuclear motion (in $MeV$) is widely separated from the energy in atomic vibration and rotation (in $KeV$). That is why, one is able to separate the two motions and study the atomic vibration and rotation separately from the nuclear motion.
Lu *et al* \[33\] obtained an approximate solution for the Schrödinger equation of diatomic molecule oscillator with the positive sign EP functions given in Eq. (2) ($\delta =1$ case) by means of the hypergeometric series method. Further, rigorous energy eigenvalues and eigenfunctions for the $1D$ Schrödinger eqauation are also obtained using a similar method$%
. $ Since there are no exact analytical solutions for the EP functions $%
(l\neq 0)$ without an approximation to the centrifugal term $\sim 1/r^{2},$ some approximation \[34\] was used to obtain these solutions. One of these approximations have been employed in solving the rotating Morse potential for any $l$-state \[34,35\]. The ro-vibrating energy eigenvalues of the EP functions were determined with a semiclassical (SC) procedure (the Bohr-Sommerfeld quantization condition) and a quantum-mechanical (QM) method (the Schrödinger equation) \[33\]. Furthermore, several approximation schemes have been developed to find better analytical formulas for Eq. (2) with $\delta =1$ \[33,36\]. Overmore, Jia *et al* \[37\] have used the basic concepts of the supersymmetric quantum mechanics formalism and the functional analysis method to investigate approximately the pseudospin symmetric solutions of the Dirac equation for the arbitrary pseudo-orbital angular momentum number $\widetilde{l}$ and to obtain the bound state solutions for the nuclei in the relativistic EP as a diatomic molecular model. Very recently, the NU method \[38-40\] was applied to solve the radial Schrödinger wave equation with the EP functions for $l\neq 0$ case \[41\]. The analytic solution is used to obtain the ro-vibrating energy states for selected $H_{2}$ and $Ar_{2}$ diatomic molecules using the relevant potential parameters and spectroscpic constants given in Ref. \[32\].
Over the past years, the quantum deformation \[42\] has been the subject of interest because of its relevance with applications in nuclei \[43-45\], statistical quantum theory, string beam theory and conformal field theory \[46-49\]. Recently, some authors have introduced few potentials in terms of hyperbolic functions \[50,51\] in the view of $q$-deformation \[52\].
Encouraged with the high performance of the above inter-molecular potential, we write the EP functions as
$$\left[ \coth \alpha (r-r_{e})\right] ^{\pm 1}=\frac{e^{\alpha (r-r_{e})}\pm
e^{-\alpha (r-r_{e})}}{e^{\alpha (r-r_{e})}\mp e^{-\alpha (r-r_{e})}}=\frac{%
1\pm e^{-2\alpha (r-r_{e})}}{1\mp e^{-2\alpha (r-r_{e})}}=\frac{1\pm
qe^{-2\alpha r}}{1\mp qe^{-2\alpha r}}=\left[ \coth _{q}(\alpha r)\right]
^{\pm 1},$$
$$V_{\pm }(r,q)=D\left\{ 1-\sigma \left[ \coth \alpha (r-r_{e})\right] ^{\pm
1}\right\} ^{2}=D\left\{ 1-\sigma \left[ \frac{1\pm qe^{-2\alpha r}}{1\mp
qe^{-2\alpha r}}\right] \right\} ^{2},$$
where $q=e^{2\alpha r_{e}},$ giving a magnitude for $q$ that is larger than one. For an inverse transformation $q=e^{-2\alpha r_{e}},$ the magnitude for $q$ varies between zero and one. In the context of the quantum deformation \[52\], the above form is similar to a $q$-deformed (perturbed) generalized deformed empirical potential ($q$-DEP/GDEP) functions. It is worth noting that the range of parameter $q$ was taken as $q>0$ in \[50\] and has been extended to $-1\leq q<0$ or $q>0$ or even complex by Ref. \[51\]. Such $q$-deformed potential functions have been introduced for the first time by Arai \[42\] for real $q$ values. When $q$ is complex, these functions are called the generalized deformed potential functions. In this paper, we intend to find the analytic solution of the KG equation for the equal scalar and vector $q$-DEP/GDEP with any orbital angular quantum number ($l\neq 0).$ The specific choice of $V(r)=S(r)$ allows one to make KG equation approximately soluble for it’s relativistic energy eigenvalues and wave functions. Further, it opens up a new approach of generating the non-relativistic solution which is found to coincide with the previous Schrödinger solution of Eq. (4). In the present calculations, we apply a parameteric generalization procedures of the NU method which are making our calculations straightforward and simple.
The present paper is organized as follows. In sect. 2, we present a parameteric generalization of the NU method which holds for the exponential-type potentials. In sect. 3, we obtain an approximate analytic NU bound state solution of the ($3+1$)-dimensional KG equation for equal scalar and vector $q$-DEP/GDEP functions with arbitrary $l$-states. In sect. 4, we discuss two special cases, the vibrational ($l=0$) and the non-relativistic limit (Schrödinger solution). In Sect. 5, we calculate the ro-vibrating energy states for selected $H_{2}$ and $Ar_{2}$ diatomic molecules in the non-relativistic approach. Section 6 contains the relevant conclusions.
NU Method
=========
The NU method is briefly outlined here and the details can be found in \[38\]. This method was proposed to solve the second-order differential equation of the hypergeometric-type:
$$\sigma ^{2}(z)g^{\prime \prime }(z)+\sigma (z)\widetilde{\tau }(z)g^{\prime
}(z)+\widetilde{\sigma }(z)g(z)=0,$$
where $\sigma (z)$ and $\widetilde{\sigma }(z)$ are at most second-degree polynomials and $\widetilde{\tau }(s)$ is a first-degree polynomial. The primes denote derivatives with respect to $z.$ To find a particular solution of Eq. (5), one can decompose the wave functions, $g_{nl}(z)$ as follows:$$g(z)=\phi (z)y_{n}(z),$$leading to recast (5) in the hypergeometric-type equation $$\sigma (z)y_{n}^{\prime \prime }(z)+\tau (z)y_{n}^{\prime }(z)+\lambda
y_{n}(z)=0,$$where$$\lambda =k+\pi ^{\prime }(z),$$and $y_{nl}(z)$ satisfies the Rodrigues relation$$y_{n}(z)=\frac{A_{n}}{\rho (z)}\frac{d^{n}}{dz^{n}}\left[ \sigma ^{n}(z)\rho
(z)\right] .$$In the above equation, $A_{n}$ is a constant related to the normalization and $\rho (z)$ is the weight function satisfying the condition$$\left[ \sigma (z)\rho (z)\right] ^{\prime }=\tau (z)\rho (z),$$with $$\tau (z)=\widetilde{\tau }(z)+2\pi (z),\tau ^{\prime }(z)<0.$$The weight function should be carefully chosen because it has an influence on the performance of orthogonal wave functions, orthogonal in the interval $%
[0,1],$ of the type Laguerre $L_{n}^{(\gamma )}(z)$ and Jacobi $%
P_{n}^{\left( \alpha ,\beta \right) }(z)$ polynomials etc. It is defined with a compact support often called domain of influence which can be spheres in three-dimensions. Generally speaking, the weight function commonly used is exponential function. Furthermore, the weighted integral and weighted average are defined by $h(z)=\dint\limits_{\Omega }f(z)\rho (z)dz$ and $%
g(z)=\dint\limits_{\Omega }f(z)\rho (z)dz/\dint\limits_{\Omega }\rho (z)dz,$ if $\ f(z):\Omega \in
%TCIMACRO{\U{211d} }%
%BeginExpansion
\mathbb{R}
%EndExpansion
,$ real-valued orthogonal polynomial functions, respectively, with $%
f(z)=\sigma (z)$ and $g(z)=P_{n}^{\left( \alpha ,\beta \right) }(z),$ $%
L_{n}^{(\gamma )}(z),\cdots ,$ etc. Since $\rho (z)>0$ and $\sigma (z)>0,$ the derivative of $\tau (z)$ needs to be negative \[38\] which is the essential condition in making the choice of particular solution relevant to the real bound state solution. The other part of the wave functions in Eq. (6) is mainly the solution of the logarithmic derivative:$$\frac{\phi ^{\prime }(z)}{\phi (z)}=\frac{\pi (z)}{\sigma (z)},$$where$$\pi (z)=\frac{1}{2}\left[ \sigma ^{\prime }(z)-\widetilde{\tau }(z)\right]
\pm \sqrt{\frac{1}{4}\left[ \sigma ^{\prime }(z)-\widetilde{\tau }(z)\right]
^{2}-\widetilde{\sigma }(z)+k\sigma (z)}.$$is a polynomial of order one. The determination of $k$ is the essential point in the calculation of $\pi (z),$ for which the discriminant of the square root in the last equation is set to zero. This gives the polynomial $%
\pi (z)$ which is dependent on the transformation function $z(r).$ Also, the parameter $\lambda $ defined in Eq. (8) takes the form$$\lambda =\lambda _{n}=-n\tau ^{\prime }(z)-\frac{1}{2}n\left( n-1\right)
\sigma ^{\prime \prime }(z),\ \ \ n=0,1,2,\cdots .$$In this regard, we can construct a parameteric generalization of the NU method valid for any central and non-central exponential-type potentials. We begin by comparing the following general hypergeometric equation $$\left[ z\left( 1-c_{3}z\right) \right] ^{2}g^{\prime \prime }(z)+\left[
z\left( 1-c_{3}z\right) \left( c_{1}-c_{2}z\right) \right] g^{\prime
}(z)+\left( -B_{1}z^{2}+B_{2}z-B_{3}\right) g(z)=0,$$with it’s counterpart equation (5) to obtain$$\widetilde{\tau }(z)=c_{1}-c_{2}z,$$$$\sigma (z)=z\left( 1-c_{3}z\right) ,$$$$\widetilde{\sigma }(z)=-B_{1}z^{2}+B_{2}z-B_{3}.$$where the parameters $c_{i}$ and $B_{i}$ ($i=1,2,3$) are constants to be determined during the solution process. Thus, following the method, we may obtain all the analytic polynomials and their relevant constants necessary for the solution of a radial wave equation. These analytic expressions are given in Appendix A.
The KG Solution of Equal Scalar-Vector GDEP Functions
=====================================================
In relativistic quantum mechanics, we usually use the KG equation for describing a scalar particle, i.e., the spin-$0$ particle dynamics. The discussion of the relativistic behavior of spin-zero particles requires understanding the single particle spectrum and the exact solutions to the KG equation which are constructed by using the four-vector potential $\mathbf{A}%
_{\lambda }$ $(\lambda =0,1,2,3)$ and the scalar potential $(S)$. In order to simplify the analytic solution of the KG equation, the four-vector potential can be written as $\mathbf{A}_{\lambda }=(A_{0},0,0,0).$ The first component of the four-vector potential is represented by a vector potential $%
(V),$ i.e., $A_{0}=V.$ In this case, the motion of a relativistic spin-$0$ particle in a potential is described by the KG equation with the potentials $%
V$ and $S$ \[1\]$.$ For $S=V$ case \[39\]$,$ the ($3+1$)-dimensional KG equation is recasted to a Schrödinger-like equation and thereby the bound state solutions are easily obtained by using the well-known methods developed in nonrelativistic quantum mechanics \[2\].
Let us now consider the ($3+1$)-dimensional time-independent KG equation describing a scalar particle (spin-$0$ particle) with Lorentz scalar $S(r)$ and Lorentz vector $V(r)$ potentials which takes the form \[2,14,53\]
$$\left[ \mathbf{P}_{op}^{2}-\left( V(r)-E_{R}\right) ^{2}+\left(
S(r)+mc^{2}\right) ^{2}\right] \psi _{KG}(\overrightarrow{r})=0,$$
where $m$ $\ $and $E_{R}$ denote the reduced mass and relativistic binding energy of two interacting particles, respectively, with $\mathbf{P}%
_{op}=-i\hbar \overrightarrow{\nabla }$ is the momentum operator. It would be natural to scale the potential terms in Eq. (17) so that in the nonrelativistic limit the interaction potential becomes $V(r),$ not $2V(r).$ We follow Alhaidari *et al* \[14\] to reduce the above equation to the form \[54\] $$\left\{ \mathbf{\nabla }^{2}+\frac{1}{\hbar ^{2}c^{2}}\left[ \left( \frac{1}{%
2}V(r)-E_{R}\right) ^{2}-\left( \frac{1}{2}S(r)+mc^{2}\right) ^{2}\right]
\right\} \psi _{KG}(\overrightarrow{r})=0.$$Thus, after making use of the equal scalar and vector GDEP functions ($%
S_{\pm }(r;q)=V_{\pm }(r;q)),$ Eq. (18) recasts to $$\left\{ \mathbf{\nabla }^{2}-\frac{1}{\hbar ^{2}c^{2}}\left[ \alpha
_{2}^{2}\left( \alpha _{1}^{2}+V_{\pm }(r,q)\right) \right] \right\} \psi
_{KG}(\overrightarrow{r})=0,$$$$\mathbf{\nabla }^{2}=\frac{\partial ^{2}}{\partial r^{2}}+\frac{2}{r}\frac{%
\partial }{\partial r}+\frac{1}{r^{2}}\left[ \frac{1}{\sin \theta }\frac{%
\partial }{\partial \theta }\left( \sin \theta \frac{\partial }{\partial
\theta }\right) +\frac{1}{\sin ^{2}\theta }\frac{\partial ^{2}}{\partial
\varphi ^{2}}\right] ,\text{ }r^{2}=\text{ }\sum\limits_{j=1}^{3}x_{j}^{2},$$where $\alpha _{1}^{2}=mc^{2}-E_{R},$ $\alpha _{2}^{2}=mc^{2}+E_{R}.$ It is woth noting that the solution of the ($3+1$)-dimensional KG equation can be reduced to the solution of the Schrödinger equation with the following appropriate choice of parameters: $\alpha _{1}^{2}\rightarrow -E_{NR\text{ }%
} $ and $\alpha _{2}^{2}/\hbar ^{2}c^{2}\rightarrow 2\mu /\hbar ^{2},$ where $\mu =m_{1}m_{2}/(m_{1}+m_{2})$ is the reduced atomic mass for the diatomic molecular system \[14,54\]$.$ In addition, we take the interaction potential as in (4) and decompose the total wave function $\psi _{KG}(\overrightarrow{r%
}),$ with a given angular momentum $l,$ as a product of a radial wave function $R_{l}(r)=\frac{g(r)}{r}$ and the angular dependent spherical harmonic functions $Y_{lm}(\widehat{r})$: \[53-56\] $$\psi _{KG}(\overrightarrow{r})=\frac{g(r)}{r}Y_{lm}(\widehat{r}),$$with angular momentum quantum numbers being $l$ and $m.$ This reduces Eq. (19) into the form$$\frac{d^{2}g(r)}{dr^{2}}-\frac{1}{\hbar ^{2}c^{2}}\left[ \alpha
_{1}^{2}\alpha _{2}^{2}+\alpha _{2}^{2}D\left[ 1-\sigma \left( \frac{1\pm
q\exp (-2\alpha r)}{1\mp q\exp (-2\alpha r)}\right) \right] ^{2}+\frac{%
l(l+1)\hbar ^{2}c^{2}}{r^{2}}\right] g(r)=0,\text{ }q\neq 0,$$where $\frac{l(l+1)}{r^{2}}$ is the centrifugal potential and the boundary conditions $g(0)=g(\infty )=0$ as we are dealing with bound-state solutions$%
. $ Moreover, if $l$ is not too large, the case of the vibrations of small amplitude about the minimum, we can then use the approximate expansion of the centrifugal potential near the minimum point $r=r_{e}$ as \[33\]$$\frac{l(l+1)}{r^{2}}\approx \frac{l(l+1)}{r_{e}^{2}}\left\{ A_{0}+A_{1}\frac{%
\pm \exp (-2\alpha r)}{1\mp q\exp (-2\alpha r)}+A_{2}\left[ \frac{\pm \exp
(-2\alpha r)}{1\mp q\exp (-2\alpha r)}\right] ^{2}\right\} ,$$where
$$A_{0}=1-\left[ \frac{1\mp \exp (-2\alpha r_{e})}{2\alpha r_{e}}\right] ^{2}%
\left[ \frac{8\alpha r_{e}}{1\mp \exp (-2\alpha r_{e})}-3-2\alpha r_{e}%
\right] ,$$
$$A_{1}=\pm 2\left[ \exp (2\alpha r_{e})\mp 1\right] \left\{ 3\left[ \frac{%
1\mp \exp (-2\alpha r_{e})}{2\alpha r_{e}}\right] -\left( 3+2\alpha
r_{e}\right) \left[ \frac{1\mp \exp (-2\alpha r_{e})}{2\alpha r_{e}}\right]
\right\} ,$$
$$A_{2}=\left[ \exp (2\alpha r_{e})\mp 1\right] ^{2}\left[ \frac{1\mp \exp
(-2\alpha r_{e})}{2\alpha r_{e}}\right] ^{2}\left[ 3+2\alpha r_{e}-\frac{%
4\alpha r_{e}}{1\mp \exp (-2\alpha r_{e})}\right] ,$$
and higher-order terms are neglected. In fact, Eq. (22) is the approximate expansion of the centrifugal potential $\frac{l(l+1)}{r^{2}}$ and is valid for all $r\approx r_{e}$, the minimum point of $V_{\pm }(r)$ since $r$ is not singular there$.$ However, the expansion is not valid near the singularity point $r=0.$ Overmore, it is a good approximation for small vibrations around the equilibrium separation $r-r_{e}.$ When $l\neq 0,$ we have to use an approximation for the centrifugal term similar to the non-relativistic cases which is valid only for $q=1$ value \[33,53\]. However, for $s$-waves, we remark that the problem can be solved exactly and the solution is valid for any deformation parameter $q.$ At this point, it is important to mention that very similar expressions to the above expression for the energy states have also been found over the past years for the hyperbolical (exponential-type) potentials with $\delta \rightarrow 1$ in Eq. (2) for $V_{+}(r)$ (cf. Ikhdair and Sever in Ref. \[36\]). Very recently, a new improved approximation scheme \[36,39\] for the centrifugal potential term $l(l+1)/r^{2}$ was proposed which appears to be very different from the ones used by Refs. \[33,53,54\].
Putting $z=\pm \exp (-2\alpha r)\in $ $\left( \pm 1,0\right) $ for $V_{\pm
}(r),$ and defining the parameters
$$B_{1}=q^{2}\widetilde{K}_{nl}^{2}+\widetilde{S}_{l}^{2}-q\widetilde{Q}_{l}-%
\frac{q^{2}}{4},\text{ }B_{2}=2q\widetilde{K}_{nl}^{2}-\widetilde{Q}_{l},%
\text{ }B_{3}=\widetilde{K}_{nl}^{2},$$
with
$$\widetilde{K}_{nl}=\frac{1}{2\alpha \hbar c}\sqrt{\alpha _{2}^{2}D\left(
1-\sigma \right) ^{2}+\frac{l(l+1)\hbar ^{2}c^{2}}{r_{e}^{2}}A_{0}+\alpha
_{1}^{2}\alpha _{2}^{2}}>0,$$
$$\widetilde{Q}_{l}=-\frac{q\alpha _{2}^{2}D}{\alpha ^{2}\hbar ^{2}c^{2}}%
\sigma \left( 1-\sigma \right) +\frac{l(l+1)}{4\alpha ^{2}r_{e}^{2}}A_{1},$$
$$\widetilde{S}_{l}=\frac{1}{2\alpha \hbar c}\sqrt{4q^{2}\alpha
_{2}^{2}D\sigma ^{2}+\frac{l(l+1)\hbar ^{2}c^{2}}{r_{e}^{2}}%
A_{2}+q^{2}\alpha ^{2}\hbar ^{2}c^{2}}>0.$$
we obtain the hypergeometric wave equation
$$g^{\prime \prime }(z)+\frac{\left( 1-qz\right) }{z\left( 1-qz\right) }%
g^{\prime }(z)+\frac{1}{z^{2}\left( 1-qz\right) ^{2}}\left\{
-B_{1}z^{2}+B_{2}z-B_{3}\right\} g(z)=0,$$
where $g(z)=g(r).$ If we apply the previous transformations, the above expressions reduce into their non-relativistic limits:
$$\widetilde{K}_{nl}\rightarrow K_{nl}=\frac{1}{2\alpha \hbar }\sqrt{2\mu
D\left( 1-\sigma \right) ^{2}+\frac{l(l+1)\hbar ^{2}}{r_{e}^{2}}A_{0}-2\mu
E_{NR}}>0,$$
$$\widetilde{Q}_{l}\rightarrow Q_{l}=-\frac{2\mu qD}{\alpha ^{2}\hbar ^{2}}%
\sigma \left( 1-\sigma \right) +\frac{l(l+1)}{4\alpha ^{2}r_{e}^{2}}A_{1},$$
$$\widetilde{S}_{l}\rightarrow S_{l}=\frac{q}{2\alpha \hbar }\sqrt{8\mu
D\sigma ^{2}+\frac{l(l+1)\hbar ^{2}}{r_{e}^{2}}\frac{A_{2}}{q^{2}}+\alpha
^{2}\hbar ^{2}}>0,$$
and also when the deformation parameter $q=1,$ the above equations reduce to their counterparts as in Refs. \[33,41\].
Now comparing Eq. (26) with Eq. (5), we obtain particular values for the set of constant parameters given in Section 2:
$$c_{1}=1,\text{ }c_{2}=c_{3}=q,\text{ c}_{4}=0,\text{ }c_{5}=-\frac{q}{2},%
\text{ }c_{6}=q^{2}\widetilde{K}_{nl}^{2}+\widetilde{S}_{l}^{2}-q\widetilde{Q%
}_{l},$$
$$c_{7}=-2q\widetilde{K}_{nl}^{2}+\widetilde{Q}_{l},\text{ }c_{8}=\widetilde{K}%
_{nl}^{2},\text{ }c_{9}=\widetilde{S}_{l}^{2},$$
$$c_{10}=2\widetilde{K}_{nl}=2c_{12}>-1,\text{ }c_{11}=\frac{2}{q}\widetilde{S}%
_{l}=2c_{13}-1>-1,$$
$$c_{12}=\widetilde{K}_{nl}>0,\text{ }c_{13}=\frac{1}{q}\left( \widetilde{S}%
_{l}+\frac{q}{2}\right) >0.$$
Using Eqs. (28) together with Appendix A, we find the following particular physical solutions for the parameters:$$\pi (z)=\widetilde{K}_{nl}-\left( \frac{q}{2}+q\widetilde{K}_{nl}+\widetilde{%
S}_{l}\right) z,$$$$k=-\widetilde{Q}_{l}-2\widetilde{K}_{nl}\widetilde{S}_{l},$$and$$\tau (z)=1+2\widetilde{K}_{nl}-2\left( q+q\widetilde{K}_{nl}+\widetilde{S}%
_{l}\right) z,$$where $\tau ^{\prime }(z)=\frac{d\tau (z)}{dz}=-2\left( q+q\widetilde{K}%
_{nl}+\widetilde{S}_{l}\right) <0$ which gives possible real solutions. In what follows, from Appendix A, we find the ro-vibrational energy equation with the aid of (28) as
$$2\widetilde{K}_{nl}=\frac{\left( \frac{\widetilde{S}_{l}}{q}\right) ^{2}-%
\frac{\widetilde{Q}_{l}}{q}-\frac{1}{4}-\left( \frac{\widetilde{S}_{l}}{q}+n+%
\frac{1}{2}\right) ^{2}}{\frac{\widetilde{S}_{l}}{q}+n+\frac{1}{2}},\text{ }%
q\neq 0,$$
which can be written more explicitly as$$2\sqrt{\left( mc^{2}+E_{R}\right) D\left( 1-\sigma \right) ^{2}+\frac{%
l(l+1)\hbar ^{2}c^{2}}{r_{e}^{2}}A_{0}+m^{2}c^{4}-E_{R}^{2}}=$$
$$\frac{4\left( mc^{2}+E_{R}\right) D\sigma +\frac{l(l+1)\hbar ^{2}c^{2}}{%
r_{e}^{2}}\left( \frac{A_{2}}{q^{2}}-\frac{A_{1}}{q}\right) -\left(
\widetilde{E}+\alpha \hbar c\left( 2n+1\right) \right) ^{2}}{\widetilde{E}%
+\alpha \hbar c\left( 2n+1\right) },$$
$$\widetilde{E}=\sqrt{4\left( mc^{2}+E_{R}\right) D\sigma ^{2}+\frac{%
l(l+1)\hbar ^{2}c^{2}}{r_{e}^{2}}\frac{A_{2}}{q^{2}}+\alpha ^{2}\hbar
^{2}c^{2}},$$
where $n=0,1,2,\cdots $ and $l=0,1,2,\cdots $ signify the usual vibrational and rotational angular momentum quantum numbers, respectively.
Let us now turn to the calculations of the corresponding wave functions for the potential under consideration. Thus, referring to the general model in Appendix A, the explicit form of the weight function reads
$$\rho (z)=z^{2\widetilde{K}_{nl}}(1-qz)^{\frac{2}{q}\widetilde{S}_{l}},$$
which gives the first part of the wave functions (6) as$$y_{n}(z)\rightarrow P_{n}^{(2\widetilde{K}_{nl},\frac{2}{q}\widetilde{S}%
_{l})}(1\mp 2qz),\text{ }\widetilde{K}_{nl}>0,\text{ }\widetilde{S}_{l}>0,$$with the essential requirement that $2\widetilde{K}_{nl}>-1$ and $\frac{2}{q}%
\widetilde{S}_{l}>-1.$ For example, if $q>0$ then $\widetilde{S}_{l}>-\frac{q%
}{2}$ and if $q<0$ then $0<\widetilde{S}_{l}<-\frac{q}{2}.$ Also, the second part can be found as$$\phi ^{\pm }(z)\rightarrow z^{\widetilde{K}_{nl}}(1\mp qz)^{\frac{1}{q}%
\left( \widetilde{S}_{l}+\frac{q}{2}\right) },\text{ }\widetilde{K}_{nl}>0,%
\text{ }\frac{1}{q}\left( \widetilde{S}_{l}+\frac{q}{2}\right) >0,$$and, hence, the unnormalized wave functions are being expressed in terms of the Jacobi polynomials as$$g^{\pm }(z)=\mathcal{N}_{nl}z^{\widetilde{K}_{nl}}(1\mp qz)^{\frac{1}{q}%
\widetilde{S}_{l}+\frac{1}{2}}P_{n}^{(2\widetilde{K}_{nl},\frac{2}{q}%
\widetilde{S}_{l})}(1-2qz),\text{ }z\in \lbrack 0,1/q]$$where $\mathcal{N}_{nl}$ being the normalization constants and $P_{n}^{(2%
\widetilde{K}_{nl},\frac{2}{q}\widetilde{S_{l}})}(1-2qz)=\frac{\left( 2%
\widetilde{K}_{nl}+1\right) _{n}}{n!}_{2}F_{1}(-n,2\widetilde{K}_{nl}+\frac{2%
}{q}\widetilde{S_{l}}+n+1,2\widetilde{K}_{nl}+1;qz)$ with $(m)_{n}=\frac{%
\left( m+n-1\right) !}{\left( m-1\right) !}$ is Pochhammer’s symbol$.$ For example, if $q\geq 1$ then $z\in \lbrack 0,1/q]$ and if $q\leq -1$ then $%
z\in \lbrack 1/q,0]$ lie within or on the boundary of the interval $\left[
-1,+1\right] .$
Hence, the total wave function of the $q$-DEP/GDEP functions is $$\psi _{\pm }(\overrightarrow{r})=\mathcal{N}_{nl}\frac{1}{r}\left[ \pm \exp
(-2\alpha r)\right] ^{\widetilde{K}_{nl}}\left[ 1-\pm q\exp (-2\alpha r)%
\right] ^{\frac{1}{q}\widetilde{S}_{l}+\frac{1}{2}}$$$$\times P_{n}^{(2\widetilde{K}_{nl},\frac{2}{q}\widetilde{S}_{l})}(1-\pm
2q\exp (-2\alpha r))Y_{lm}(\widehat{r}).$$where the normalization constants $\mathcal{N}_{nl}$ are calculated explicitly in Appendix B.
Discussions
===========
In this section, we are going to study two special cases of the energy eigenvalues given by Eq. (34). First, we consider the $s$-wave ($l=0$) vibrational energy equation: $$2\sqrt{\left( mc^{2}+E_{R}\right) D\left( 1-\sigma \right)
^{2}+m^{2}c^{4}-E_{R}^{2}}=$$$$\frac{4\left( mc^{2}+E_{R}\right) D\sigma -\left( \sqrt{4\left(
mc^{2}+E_{R}\right) D\sigma ^{2}+\alpha ^{2}\hbar ^{2}c^{2}}+\alpha \hbar
c\left( 2n+1\right) \right) ^{2}}{\sqrt{4\left( mc^{2}+E_{R}\right) D\sigma
^{2}+\alpha ^{2}\hbar ^{2}c^{2}}+\alpha \hbar c\left( 2n+1\right) },$$where $n=0,1,2,\cdots ,n_{\max },$ where $n_{\max }$ is the number of bound states for the whole bound spectrum near the continuous zone. $n_{\max }$ is the largest integer which is less than or equal to the value of $n$ that makes the right side of Eq. (39) vanish, that is,
$$n\rightarrow n_{\max }=\frac{1}{2}\left[ -1-\sqrt{\frac{4D}{\alpha ^{2}\hbar
^{2}c^{2}}\left( mc^{2}+E_{R}\right) \sigma ^{2}+1}+\sqrt{\frac{4D}{\alpha
^{2}\hbar ^{2}c^{2}}\left( mc^{2}+E_{R}\right) \sigma }\right] ,$$
$$E_{n_{\max }}^{(R)}\rightarrow mc^{2}+D_{e},$$
If $\sigma =1,$ then $E_{n_{\max }}^{(R)}\rightarrow mc^{2}.$ The corresponding normalized wave functions can easily be found directly from Eq. (38) as
$$R_{nl}^{(\pm )}(r)=\mathcal{N}_{n}\frac{1}{r}\left[ \pm \exp (-2\alpha r)%
\right] ^{\widetilde{k}_{n}}\left[ 1-\pm q\exp (-2\alpha r)\right] ^{\frac{1%
}{q}\widetilde{s}+\frac{1}{2}}$$
$$\times P_{n}^{(2\widetilde{k}_{n},\frac{2}{q}\widetilde{s})}(1-\pm 2q\exp
(-2\alpha r)),$$
where $\mathcal{N}_{n}$ are the normalization constants and calculated in Appendix B.
Second, we discuss the non-relativistic limit of the energy eigenvalues and wave functions in the non-relativistic limit. Obviously, the currently calculated KG solutions, under the previously mentioned transformations, can be reduced to their associated Schrödinger ones for the GDEP functions as $$E_{nl}^{(R)}\rightarrow E_{nl}^{(NR)}=D_{e}+\frac{l(l+1)\hbar ^{2}}{2\mu
r_{e}^{2}}A_{0}$$$$-\frac{\alpha ^{2}\hbar ^{2}}{2\mu }\left[ \frac{\left( \frac{S_{l}}{q}%
\right) ^{2}-\frac{Q_{l}}{q}-\frac{1}{4}-\left( \frac{S_{l}}{q}+n+\frac{1}{2}%
\right) ^{2}}{\frac{S_{l}}{q}+n+\frac{1}{2}}\right] ^{2},\text{ }%
n,l=0,1,2,\cdots ,$$or more explicitly as$$E_{nl}^{(NR)}=D_{e}+\frac{l(l+1)\hbar ^{2}}{2\mu r_{e}^{2}}A_{0}$$$$-\frac{\alpha ^{2}\hbar ^{2}}{2\mu }\left[ \frac{\frac{2\mu D}{\hbar
^{2}\alpha ^{2}}\sigma +\frac{l(l+1)}{4\alpha ^{2}r_{e}^{2}}\left( \frac{%
A_{2}}{q^{2}}-\frac{A_{1}}{q}\right) -\left( n+\frac{1}{2}+\sqrt{\frac{2\mu D%
}{\hbar ^{2}\alpha ^{2}}\sigma ^{2}+\frac{l(l+1)}{4\alpha ^{2}r_{e}^{2}}%
\frac{A_{2}}{q^{2}}+\frac{1}{4}}\right) ^{2}}{n+\frac{1}{2}+\sqrt{\frac{2\mu
D}{\hbar ^{2}\alpha ^{2}}\sigma ^{2}+\frac{l(l+1)}{4\alpha ^{2}r_{e}^{2}}%
\frac{A_{2}}{q}+\frac{1}{4}}}\right] ^{2},$$which is identical to Eq. (28) of Ref. \[33\] if one sets $\delta =1$ and $%
q=1. $ This represents the approximate Schrödinger solution of Eq. (2) for the ro-vibratinal molecules. The non-relativistic limits for the vibrational energy states ($l=0$) read
$$E_{n}^{(NR)}=D_{e}-\frac{\alpha ^{2}\hbar ^{2}}{2\mu }\left[ \frac{\frac{%
2\mu D}{\hbar ^{2}\alpha ^{2}}\sigma -\left( n+\frac{1}{2}+\sqrt{\frac{2\mu D%
}{\hbar ^{2}\alpha ^{2}}\sigma ^{2}+\frac{1}{4}}\right) ^{2}}{n+\frac{1}{2}+%
\sqrt{\frac{2\mu D}{\hbar ^{2}\alpha ^{2}}\sigma ^{2}+\frac{1}{4}}}\right]
^{2},\text{ }n=0,1,2,\cdots ,n_{\max },$$
and the corresponding unnormalized wave functions from Eq. (38) are $$\psi _{\pm }(\overrightarrow{r})=\mathcal{N}_{nl}\frac{1}{r}\left[ \pm \exp
(-2\alpha r)\right] ^{K_{nl}}\left[ 1-\pm q\exp (-2\alpha r)\right] ^{\frac{1%
}{q}S_{l}+\frac{1}{2}}$$$$\times P_{n}^{(2K_{nl},\frac{2}{q}S_{l})}(1-\pm 2q\exp (-2\alpha r))Y_{lm}(%
\widehat{r}).$$where $K_{nl}$ and $S_{l}$ are defined in Eq. (27) and the condition for $%
n_{\max }$ turns to become$$n\rightarrow n_{\max }=\frac{1}{2}\left[ -1-\sqrt{\frac{8\mu D}{\hbar
^{2}\alpha ^{2}}\sigma ^{2}+1}+\sqrt{\frac{8\mu D}{\hbar ^{2}\alpha ^{2}}%
\sigma }\right] ,\text{ }E_{n_{\max }}^{(NR)}\rightarrow D_{e}.$$Thus, the finiteness of $n_{\max }$ is reflected in the above condition. If $%
\sigma =1,$ then $n_{\max }\rightarrow 0.$
Applications to Diatomic Molecules
==================================
We have calculated the non-relativistic energy states for the two selected $%
H_{2}$ and $Ar_{2}$ diatomic molecules using energy equation (35) with $%
q\rightarrow 1$ and (23). The spectroscopic constants of these two molecules are given in Table 1. The vibrating ground state energy eigenvalues $%
E_{+}^{0}$ (in $cm^{-1}$) for the $H_{2}$ molecule in the non-deformed EP functions $V_{+}(r)$ are found using the NU method for the potential parameters given in Table 2. Our numerical results obtained in the present NU model are listed together with the numerical results obtained by using SC (as Semi-Classical) procedure and a QM (as Quantum-Mechanical) method mentioned in Ref. \[32\] for various potential parameters. Obviously, as shown in Table 2, the results obtained in the present model are in high agreement with those obtained by QM. However, the SC procedure is proportionally different. Therefore, the differences between our results and SC procedure are less than $0.01$ $cm^{-1},$ i.e., they are negligible because of these approximations: $1$ $a.m.u=931.502$ $MeV/c^{2},$ $1$ $cm^{-1}=1.23985\times
10^{-4}$ $eV$ and $\hbar c=1973.29$ $eV.A^{\circ }$ \[57\]. The second application is applied to $Ar_{2}$ molecule. We confine our study to calculate the ro-vibrating energy states for the $V_{+}(r)$ potential using the following potential parameters: $\sigma =25.23,$ $\delta =41.75$ and $%
\alpha =0.6604$ $(A^{\circ })^{-1}$ \[32\] together with the parameters given in Table 1. For the previously given set of physical parameters, we plot the non-relativistic energy spectrum curve as a function of vibrational quantum number $n$ as seen in Figure 1$.$ Obviously, in a reference to Figure 1, the energy spectrum of the diatomic molecule $Ar_{2}$ approaches the value of $%
D_{e}$ as $n$ approaches $n_{\max }=6.689$ or $n_{\max }=6.$ This is also verified analytically from Eqs. (44) and (46). Moreover, a plot of the non-relativistic energy spectrum curve as a function of the potential strength $D_{e}$ for the above given set of physical parameters and $n=0$ for $Ar_{2}$ molecule is shown in Figure 2. The relationship is noticed to be nearly linear for any arbitrary value of vibrational quantum number $n$. The attractive energy value increases with the increasing potential strength. The splittings of the energy states of $s$-waves $%
E_{+}=E_{+}(n\neq 0)-E_{+}(n=0)$ obtained by the NU method and SC procedures are presented in Table 3. The present results $\Delta E_{+}(NU)$ from NU method and $\Delta E_{+}(SC)$ obtained from the SC procedures are also compared with four-different experimental results labeled $\Delta
E(a),\Delta E(b),$ $\Delta E(c)$ and $\Delta E(d)$ taken from Ref. \[32\]$.$ It is obvious from Table 3 that our results are very close with the experimentally determined values as well as the SC procedure results. Finally, the approximated rotating and vibrating energy states of the $%
V_{+}(r)$ given in Eq. (2) for the $Ar_{2}$ and $H_{2}$ molecules are also calculated for the $l\neq 0$ case. Table 4 shows the energy levels for vibrational $(n=0,1,2,3,4,5)$ and rotational $(l=0,1,2)$ quantum numbers.
Conclusions
===========
To summarize, we have presented the approximate bound state energyeigenvalues and their corresponding normalized wave functions of the relativistic spin-$0$ particle in the radial ($3+1$)-dimensional KG equation with equal scalar and vector $q$-DEP/GDEP functions by means of the parametric generalization of the NU method. We point out that the KG wave functions are found in terms of the Jacobi polynomials. The analytic expressions for the relativistic energy expression and the corresponding wave functions of this molecular system can be reduced to the well-known non-relativistic solutions and to the $s$-waves solutions as well. The relativistic energy $E_{R}$ defined implicitly by Eq. (33) is rather a transcendental equation and it has many solutions for any arbitrarily chosen values of usual quantum numbers $n$ and $l.$ The method presented in this paper is general and worth extending to the solution of other molecular interaction problems. The method is simple and useful in solving other complicated systems analytically without giving any restriction on the solution of some quantum systems as is the case in the other models. We have also seen that for the nonrelativistic model, the approximate energy spectrum can be obtained either by directly solving the Schrödinger equation \[41\] or rather by even applying appropriate transformations to the relativistic solution as currently shown. We should emphasize that the approximate bound state energy spectrum obtained in the present work might have some interesting applications in different branches like atomic and molecular physics and quantum chemistry. The present solution is describing the inter-molecular structures and interactions in diatomic molecules \[32-36,41,58,59\]. The present study is also useful in calculating the vibrating energy for different radial $n$ quantum numbers as well as the rotating energy for different orbital $l$ quantum numbers. To conclude, the proposed $q$-deformation potential with a flexible and fixed value $q$ (real or complex) can generate various potential models with various energy solutions$.$
The author thanks the three anonymous kind referees for the very constructive comments and suggestions. He is also grateful for the partial support provided by the Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey (TÜBİTAK).
Parameterized Version of the NU Method
======================================
We complement the theoretical formulation of the NU method in presenting the essential polynomials, energy equation and wave functions together with their relevant constants as follows.
\(i) The key polynomials:$$\pi (z)=c_{4}+c_{5}z-\left[ \left( \sqrt{c_{9}}+c_{3}\sqrt{c_{8}}\right) z-%
\sqrt{c_{8}}\right] ,$$$$k=-\left( c_{7}+2c_{3}c_{8}\right) -2\sqrt{c_{8}c_{9}}.$$$$\tau (z)=1-\left( c_{2}-2c_{5}\right) z-2\left[ \left( \sqrt{c_{9}}+c_{3}%
\sqrt{c_{8}}\right) z-\sqrt{c_{8}}\right] ,$$$$\tau ^{\prime }(z)=-2c_{3}-2\left( \sqrt{c_{9}}+c_{3}\sqrt{c_{8}}\right) <0,$$(ii) The energy equation:$$\left( c_{2}-c_{3}\right) n+c_{3}n^{2}-\left( 2n+1\right) c_{5}+\left(
2n+1\right) \left( \sqrt{c_{9}}+c_{3}\sqrt{c_{8}}\right) +c_{7}+2c_{3}c_{8}+2%
\sqrt{c_{8}c_{9}}=0.$$(iii) The wave functions:$$\rho (z)=z^{c_{10}}(1-c_{3}z)^{c_{11}},$$$$\phi (z)=z^{c_{12}}(1-c_{3}z)^{c_{13}},\text{ }c_{12}>0,\text{ }c_{13}>0,$$$$y_{n}(z)=P_{n}^{\left( c_{10},c_{11}\right) }(1-2c_{3}z),\text{ }c_{10}>-1,%
\text{ }c_{11}>-1,\text{ }z\in \left[ 0,1/c_{3}\right] ,$$$$u(z)=\mathcal{N}_{n}z^{c_{12}}(1-c_{3}z)^{c_{13}}P_{n}^{\left(
c_{10},c_{11}\right) }(1-2c_{3}z),$$where the Jacobi polynomial $P_{n}^{\left( \mu ,\nu \right) }(x)$ is defined only for $\mu >-1,$ $\nu >-1,$ and for the argument $x\in \left[ -1,+1\right]
$ and $\mathcal{N}_{n}$ is a normalizing factor.$.$ It can be expressed in terms of the hypergeometric function as$$P_{n}^{\left( \mu ,\nu \right) }(1-2s)=\frac{\left( \mu +1\right) _{n}}{n!}%
\begin{array}{c}
_{2}F_{1}%
\end{array}%
\left( -n,1+\mu +\nu +n;\mu +1;s\right) ,$$where $s\in \left[ 0,1\right] $ which lie within or on the boundary of the interval $\left[ -1,1\right] .$ Also, the above wavefunctions can be expressed in terms of the hypergeometric function as$$u(z)=\mathcal{N}_{n}z^{c_{12}}(1-c_{3}z)^{c_{13}}%
\begin{array}{c}
_{2}F_{1}%
\end{array}%
\left( -n,1+c_{10}+c_{11}+n;c_{10}+1;c_{3}z\right) ,$$where $c_{12}>0,$ $c_{13}>0$ and $z\in \left[ 0,1/c_{3}\right] .$
\(iv) The relevant constants:$$c_{4}=\frac{1}{2}\left( 1-c_{1}\right) ,\text{ }c_{5}=\frac{1}{2}\left(
c_{2}-2c_{3}\right) ,\text{ }c_{6}=c_{5}^{2}+B_{1},$$$$\text{ }c_{7}=2c_{4}c_{5}-B_{2},\text{ }c_{8}=c_{4}^{2}+B_{3},\text{ }%
c_{9}=c_{3}\left( c_{7}+c_{3}c_{8}\right) +c_{6},$$$$c_{10}=c_{1}+2c_{4}+2\sqrt{c_{8}}-1>-1,\text{ }c_{11}=1-c_{1}-2c_{4}+\frac{2%
}{c_{3}}\sqrt{c_{9}}>-1,$$$$c_{12}=c_{4}+\sqrt{c_{8}}>0,\text{ }c_{13}=-c_{4}+\frac{1}{c_{3}}\left(
\sqrt{c_{9}}-c_{5}\right) >0.$$
$\label{appendix}$
Normalization of the radial wave function
=========================================
In order to find the normalization factor $\mathcal{N}_{nl}$, we start by writting the normalization condition:$$\frac{\mathcal{N}_{nl}^{2}}{2\alpha }\int_{0}^{1}z^{2\widetilde{K}%
_{nl}-1}(1-z)^{2\widetilde{S}_{l}+1}\left[ P_{n}^{(2\widetilde{K}_{nl},2%
\widetilde{S}_{l})}(1-2z)\right] ^{2}dz=1,$$where $q=1.$ Unfortunately, there is no formula available to calculate this key integration. Neveretheless, we can find the explicit normalization constant $\mathcal{N}_{nl}.$ For this purpose, it is not difficult to obtain the results of the above integral by using the following formulas \[59\]$$\dint\limits_{0}^{1}\left( 1-s\right) ^{\mu -1}s^{\nu -1}%
\begin{array}{c}
_{2}F_{1}%
\end{array}%
\left( \alpha ,\beta ;\gamma ;as\right) dz=\frac{\Gamma (\mu )\Gamma (\nu )}{%
\Gamma (\mu +\nu )}%
\begin{array}{c}
_{3}F_{2}%
\end{array}%
\left( \nu ,\alpha ,\beta ;\mu +\nu ;\gamma ;a\right) ,$$and $%
\begin{array}{c}
_{2}F_{1}%
\end{array}%
\left( a,b;c;z\right) =\frac{\Gamma (c)}{\Gamma (a)\Gamma (b)}%
\dsum\limits_{p=0}^{\infty }\frac{\Gamma (a+p)\Gamma (b+p)}{\Gamma (c+p)}%
\frac{z^{p}}{p!}.$ Following Ref. \[59\], we calculate the normalization constants:$$\mathcal{N}_{nl}=\left[ \frac{\Gamma (2\widetilde{K}_{nl}+1)\Gamma (2%
\widetilde{S}_{l}+2)}{2\alpha \Gamma (n)}\dsum\limits_{m=0}^{\infty }\frac{%
(-1)^{m}\left( 1+n+2(\widetilde{K}_{nl}+\widetilde{S}_{l})\right) _{m}\Gamma
(n+m)}{m!\left( m+2\widetilde{K}_{nl}\right) !\Gamma \left( m+2(\widetilde{K}%
_{nl}+\widetilde{S}_{l}+1)\right) }f_{nl}\right] ^{-1/2}\text{ ,}$$where $$f_{nl}=%
\begin{array}{c}
_{3}F_{2}%
\end{array}%
\left( 2\widetilde{K}_{nl}+m,-n,n+1+2(\widetilde{K}_{nl}+\widetilde{S}%
_{l});m+2(\widetilde{K}_{nl}+\widetilde{S}_{l}+1);1+2\widetilde{K}%
_{nl};1\right) .$$Furthermore, the normalization constants for the $s$-wave can be also found as$$\mathcal{N}_{n}=\left[ \frac{\Gamma (2\widetilde{k}_{n}+1)\Gamma (2%
\widetilde{s}+2)}{2\alpha \Gamma (n)}\dsum\limits_{m=0}^{\infty }\frac{%
(-1)^{m}\left( 1+n+2(\widetilde{k}_{n}+\widetilde{s})\right) _{m}\Gamma (n+m)%
}{m!\left( m+2\widetilde{k}_{n}\right) !\Gamma \left( m+2(\widetilde{k}_{n}+%
\widetilde{s}+1)\right) }g_{n}\right] ^{-1/2}\text{ ,}$$where $$g_{n}=%
\begin{array}{c}
_{3}F_{2}%
\end{array}%
\left( 2\widetilde{k}_{n}+m,-n,n+1+2(\widetilde{k}_{n}+\widetilde{s});m+2(%
\widetilde{k}_{n}+\widetilde{s}+1);1+2\widetilde{k}_{n};1\right) ,$$and $$\widetilde{k}_{n}=\frac{1}{2\alpha \hbar }\sqrt{\left( mc^{2}+E_{R}\right)
D\left( 1-\sigma \right) ^{2}+m^{2}c^{4}-E_{R}^{2}},$$$$\widetilde{s}=\frac{q}{2\alpha \hbar }\sqrt{4\left( mc^{2}+E_{R}\right)
D\sigma ^{2}+\alpha ^{2}\hbar ^{2}},\text{ }n=0,1,2,\cdots ,$$where $E_{R}$ is the solution of the transcendental equation (33).
[99]{} T. Y. Wu and W. Y. Pauchy Hwang, Relativistic Quantum Mechanics and Quantum Fields (World Scientific, Singapore, 1991).
W. Greiner, Relativistic Quantum Mechanics: Wave Equations, 3rd edn (springer, Berlin, 2000).
A. D. Alhaidari, Phys. Rev. Lett. 87 (2001) 210405; 88 (2002) 189901.
W.-C. Qiang, R.-S. Zhou and Y. Gao, Phys. Lett. A 371 (2007) 201; C.-Y. Chen, D.-S. Sun and F.-L. Lu, Phys. Lett. A 370 (2007) 219; G. Chen, Mod. Phys. Lett. A 19 (2004) 2009; J. -Y. Guo, J. Meng and F. -X. Xu, Chin. Phys. Lett. 20 (2003) 602; A. D. Alhaidari, J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. 34 (2001) 9827; 35 (2002) 6207.
J. -Y. Guo, X. -Z. Fang and F. -X. Xu, Phys. Rev. A 66 (2002) 062105; C. Berkdemir, A. Berkdemir and R. Sever, J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. 39 (2006) 13455.
G. Chen, Acta Phys. Sinica 50 (2001) 1651; Ö. Yeşiltaş, Phys. Scr. 75 (2007) 41.
G. Chen and Z.M. Lou, Acta Phys. Sinica 52 (2003) 1071.
G. Chen, Z. D. Chen and Z. M. Lou, Chin. Phys. 13 (2004) 279.
W. C. Qiang, Chin. Phys. 12 (2003) 136; Chin. Phys. 12 (2003) 1054; Chin. Phys. 11 (2002) 757.
W. C. Qiang, Chin. Phys. 13 (2004) 571; Chin. Phys. 13 (2004) 575; Chin. Phys. 13 (2004) 283.
G. Chen, Phys. Lett. A 328 (2004) 116; Y. F. Diao, L. Z. Yi and C. S. Jia, Phys. Lett. A 332 (2004) 157.
L. Z. Yi *et al*, Phys. Lett. A 333 (2004) 212.
X. Q. Zhao, C. S. Jia and Q. B. Yang, Phys. Lett. A 337 (2005) 189.
A. D. Alhaidari, H. Bahlouli and A. Al-Hasan, Phys. Lett. A 349 (2006) 87.
J.N. Ginocchio, Phys. Rep. 414 (2005) 165; J.N. Ginocchio, Phys. Rev. C 69 (2004) 034318; J.N. Ginocchio, Phys. Rev. Lett. 78 (1997) 436.
P.R. Page, T. Goldman, J.N. Ginocchio, Phys. Rev. Lett. 86 (2001) 204.
A. Arima, M. Harvey, K. Shimizu, Phys. Lett. B 30 (1969) 517; K.T. Hecht, A. Adler, Nucl. Phys. A 137 (1969) 129; J.N. Ginocchio, D.G. Madland, Phys. Rev. C 57 (1998) 1167.
A. Bohr, I. Hamarnoto, B.R. Motelson, Phys. Scr. 26 (1982) 267.
J. Dudek, W. Nazarewicz, Z. Szymanski, G.A. Leander, Phys. Rev. Lett. 59, 1405 (1987).
D. Troltenier, C. bahri, J. P. Draayer, Nucl. Phys. A 586 (1995) 53.
G. Chen, Phys. Lett. A 339 (2005) 300.
A. de Souza Dutra and G. Chen, Phys. Lett. A 349 (2006) 297.
F. Dominguez-Adame, Phys. Lett. A 136 (1989) 175.
A. S. de Castro, Phys. Lett. A 338 (2005) 81; G. Chen, Acta Phys. Sinica 53 (2004) 680; G. Chen and D. F. Zhao, Acta Phys. Sinica 52 (2003) 2954.
S.M. Ikhdair, Eur. Phys. J. A 40(1) (2009) \[DOI:10.1140/epja/i2009-10758-9\] (at press).
P.M. Morse, Phys. Rev. 34 (1929) 57; A. Lopez Piñeiro and B. Moreno, J. Chem. Phys. 87 (1987) 520; D. Popov, Phys. Scr. 63 (2001) 257; S.H. Dong, R. Lemus and A. Frank, Int. J. Quantum Phys. 86 (2002) 433.
M.S. Child and L. Halonen, Adv. Chem. Phys. 62 (1984) 1; L. Pauling and E.B. Wilson Jr., Introduction to Quantum Mechanics with Applications to Cemistry, Dover, New York, 1985.
G. Herzberg, Molecular Spectra and Molecular Structure, Van Nostrand, Princeton, N. J., 1950; J. Goodismam, Diatomic Interaction Potential Theory, Vols. 1 and 2, Academic Press, New York, 1953; J.N. Murrell, S. Carter and S.C. Faranlos, Molecular potential Energy Functions, John Wiley and Sons, Chichester, 1984.
D.T. Haar, Phys. rev. 70 (1946) 222; E.M. Greenawalt and A.S. Dickinson, J. Mol. Spectra 30 (1969) 427; B.W. Shore, J. Chem. Phys. 59 (1973) 6450; H. Taşeli, J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. 31 (1998) 779; M. Znojil, Phys. Lett. A 264 (1999) 108; S. Yang and M.E. Kellman, Phys. Rev. A 65 (2002) 034103.
S. Flügge, P. Walgner and A. Weiguny, J. Mol. Spectra 23 (1967) 243; R.N. Kesarwani and Y.P. Varshni, Can. J. Phys. 58 (1980) 363; H. Konwent et al., J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. 31 (1998) 7541; E.D. Davis, Phys. Rev. A 70 (2004) 032101.
R. Zhang and C. Deng, Phys. Rev. A 47 (1993) 71; M. Molski, Phys. Rev. A 60 (1999) 3300; O.I. Tolstikhin and M. Matsuzawa, Phys. Rev. A 63 (2001) 062705; S. Andersson and N. Elander, Phys. Rev. A 69 (2004) 052507.
D. Schiöberg, Mol. Phys. 59 (1986) 1123.
J. Lu, Phys. Scr. 72 (2005) 349; J. Lu, H.-X. Qian, L.-M. Li and F.-L. Liu, Chin. Phys. 14 (2005) 2402.
C. Berkdemir and J. Han, Chem. Phys. Lett. 409 (2005) 203; C. Berkdemir, Nucl. Phys. A 770 (2006) 32.
W.C. Qiang and S.H. Dong, Phys. Lett. A 363 (2007) 169.
S.M. Ikhdair and R. Sever, Ann. Phys. (Berlin) 18(4) (2009) 189; S. Dong, J. Garcia-Ravelo and S.-H. Dong, Phys. Scr. 76 (2007) 393.
C.-S. Jia, J.-Y. Liu, L. He and L.-T. Sun, Phys. Scr. 75 (2007) 388.
A.F. Nikiforov and V.B. Uvarov, Special Functions of Mathematical Physics (Birkhauser, Bassel, 1988).
S.M. Ikhdair and R. Sever, Phys. Scr. 79 (2009) 035002; S.M. Ikhdair and R. Sever, Int. J. Mod. Phys. C 20(3) (2009) 361.
S.M. Ikhdair, Analytical approximation to the $l$-wave solutions of the Klein-Gordon equation with the scalar and vector Eckart-type potentials, submitted to App. Math. and Comp. (AMC-D-08-04644).
S.M. Ikhdair and R. Sever, submitted to Ann. Phys. (Berlin) (2009).
M. Jimbo, Lett. Math. Phys. 10 (1985) 63; 11 (1986) 247.
K.D. Sviratcheva, C. Bahri, A.I. Georgieva and J.P. Draayer, Phys. Rev. Lett. 93 (2004) 152501.
A. Ballesteros, O. Civitarese, F. J. Herranz and M. Reboiro, Phys. Rev. C. 66 (2002) 064317; A. Ballesteros, O. Civitarese and M. Reboiro, Phys. Rev. C. 68 (2003) 044307.
D. Bonatsos, B.A. Kotsos, P.P. Raychev and P.A. Terziev, Phys. Rev. C. 66 (2002) 054306.
A. Ballesteros, N.R. Bruno and F.J. Herranz, Phys. Lett. B 574 (2003) 276.
F.A. Bais, B.J. Schroers and J.K. Slingerland, Phys. Rev. Lett. 89 (2002) 181601.
A. Algin, M. Arik and A.S. Arikan, Phys. Rev. E 65 (2002) 026140.
J. Zhang, Phys. Lett. B 477 (2000) 361.
H. Eğrifes, D. Demirhan, F. Büyükkiliç, Phys. Scr. 60 (1999) 195.
C.S. Jia, X.L. Zeng and L.T. Sun, Phys. Lett. A 294 (2002) 185; C.S. Jia, Y. Li, Y. Sun, J.Y. Liu and L.T. Sun, Phys. Lett. A 311 (2003) 115.
A. Arai, J. Math. Anal. Appl. 158 (1991) 63.
S.M. Ikhdair, Eur. Phys. J. A 39(3) (2009) 307; S.M. Ikhdair, Int. J. Mod. Phys. C 20(1) (2009) 25.
S.M. Ikhdair and R. Sever, Int. J. Mod. Phys. C 19 (2008) 221, 1425.
S.M. Ikhdair and R. Sever, Ann. Phys. (Leibzig) 16 (2007) 218; Int. J. Theor. Phys. 46 (2007) 1643; J. Math. Chem. 42 (2007) 461.
S.M. Ikhdair, Chin. J. Phys. 46 (2008) 291; S.M. Ikhdair and R. Sever, Ann. Phys. (Berlin) 17 (2008) 897; Cent. Eur. J. Phys. 6 (2008) 141, 685.
B.H. Bransden and C.J. Joachain, Quantum Mechanics, 2nd edn.(Pearson Education Ltd., England).
S.M. Ikhdair and R. Sever, J. Math. Chem 45(4) (2009) 1137.
S.M. Ikhdair, Chem. Phys. (2009), doi:10.1016/j.chemphys.2009.04.023, \[arXiv:0904.4366\] (at press).
= 2
------------------------ --------- ----------
Parameters $H_{2}$ $Ar_{2}$
$D_{e}$ $(cm^{-1})$ 38281 99.55
$r_{e}$ $(A^{\circ })$ 0.7414 3.759
$\mu $ (a.m.u) 0.50407 19.9812
------------------------ --------- ----------
: The spectroscopic constants of the EP for $H_{2}$ and $Ar_{2}$ molecules \[26\].
----------- ----------- ------------------------------- ------------- ------------- ---------
$\sigma $ $\delta $ $\alpha $ $(A^{\circ })^{-1}$ $E_{+}(SC)$ $E_{+}(QM)$ Present
$426.826$ $463.102$ $0.9327$ $2167.68$ $2168.93$ 2168.68
$47.294$ $102.341$ $0.6146$ $2153.69$ $2164.83$ 2164.45
$28.685$ $117.121$ $0.3826$ $2139.57$ $2157.69$ 2157.53
$21.250$ $213.212$ $0.1762$ $2124.29$ $2148.40$ 2147.53
----------- ----------- ------------------------------- ------------- ------------- ---------
: The EP parameters of the $V_{+}(r)$ and the ground state energy, $%
E_{+}^{00}$ (in $cm^{-1}$) of the $H_{2}$ molecule.
----- --------- --------------- --------------- --------------- -------------- --------------------
$n$ Present $\Delta E(a)$ $\Delta E(b)$ $\Delta E(c)$ $% $\Delta E_{+}(SC)$
\Delta E(d)$
1 25.808 25.74 25.49 25.21 25.56 25.75
2 46.079 46.15 45.63 45.02 46.00 46.01
3 61.472 61.75 60.70 60.04 61.32 61.42
4 72.536 72.66 71.33 70.92 71.52 72.52
5 79.733 79.44 - - - 79.79
6 83.453 - - - - 83.59
7 84.026 - - - - -
----- --------- --------------- --------------- --------------- -------------- --------------------
: Comparisons of experimentally calculated $s$-states energy transition values $\Delta E_{n,0}(cm^{-1})$ for $n\neq 0\rightarrow n=0$ together with the results of the SC procedure and the present NU method for the $Ar_{2}$ molecule.
----- ----- ----------------- ----------------
$n$ $l$ $E_{+}(Ar_{2})$ $E_{+}(H_{2})$
0 0 15.3828 2168.68
1 0 41.1910 6306.66
1 25.7584 6331.10
2 0 61.4619 10183.8
1 49.7874 10207.6
2 - 10255.2
3 0 76.8546 13802.1
1 68.3028 13825.2
2 19.9133 13871.5
4 0 87.9188 17163.2
1 82.0041 17185.7
2 46.4777 17230.7
5 0 95.1159 20269.1
1 91.4672 20291.0
2 66.5474 20334.8
----- ----- ----------------- ----------------
: Energy levels $E_{n,l}(cm^{-1})$ for $Ar_{2}$ and $H_{2}$ molecules in $V_{+}(r)$ u$\sin $g the NU method.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
author:
- |
Yin Sun$^\dag$, Elif Uysal-Biyikoglu$^\ddag$, Roy D. Yates$^\star$, C. Emre Koksal$^\dag$, and Ness B. Shroff$^\dag{}^\S$\
$^\dag$Dept. of ECE, $^\S$Dept. of CSE, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH\
$^\ddag$Dept. of EEE, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey\
$^\star$Dept. of ECE, Rutgers University, North Brunswick, NJ\
\
[April 20, 2017]{} [^1] [^2]
bibliography:
- './v4/sueh.bib'
title: 'Update or Wait: How to Keep Your Data Fresh'
---
[^1]: This paper was presented in part at IEEE INFOCOM 2016.
[^2]: This work was supported in part by DTRA grant HDTRA1-14-1-0058, NSF grants CNS-1446582, CNS-1409336, CNS-1518829, CNS-1514260, CNS-1422988, and CNS-1054738, ARO grant W911NF-14-1-0368, and ONR grant N00014-15-1-2166. E. Uysal-Biyikoglu was supported in part by TUBITAK and in part by a Science Academy BAGEP award.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'We investigate the morphology dependence of the Tully-Fisher (TF) relation, and the expansion of the relation into a three-dimensional manifold defined by luminosity, total circular velocity and a third dynamical parameter, to fully characterise spiral galaxies across all morphological types. We use a full semi-analytic hierarchical model (based on Croton et al. 2006), built on cosmological simulations of structure formation, to model galaxy evolution and build the theoretical Tully-Fisher relation. With this tool, we analyse a unique dataset of galaxies for which we cross-match luminosity with total circular velocity and central velocity dispersion. We provide a theoretical framework to calculate such measurable quantities from hierarchical semi-analytic models. We establish the morphology dependence of the TF relation in both model and data. We analyse the dynamical properties of the model galaxies and determine that the parameter $\sigma/V_{\rm C}$, i.e. the ratio between random and total motions defined by velocity dispersion and circular velocity, accurately characterises the varying slope of the TF relation for different model galaxy types. We apply these dynamical cuts to the observed galaxies and find indeed that such selection produces a differential slope of the TF relation. The TF slope in different ranges of $\sigma/V_{\rm C}$ is consistent with that for the traditional photometric classification in Sa, Sb, Sc. We conclude that $\sigma/V_{\rm C}$ is a good parameter to classify galaxy type, and we argue that such classification based on dynamics more closely mirrors the physical properties of the observed galaxies, compared to visual (photometric) classification. We also argue that dynamical classification is useful for samples where eye inspection is not reliable or impractical. We conclude that $\sigma/V_{\rm C}$ is a suitable parameter to characterise the hierarchical assembly history that determines the disk-to-bulge ratio, and to expand the TF relation into a three-dimensional manifold, defined by luminosity, circular velocity and $\sigma/V_{\rm C}$.'
title: 'The Fundamental Manifold of spiral galaxies: ordered versus random motions and the morphology dependence of the Tully-Fisher relation.'
---
galaxies: formation galaxies: evolution galaxies: kinematics and dynamics galaxies: structure galaxies: fundamental parameters galaxies: spiral
Introduction
============
Galaxy scaling relations highlight the regularities that characterise galaxy formation. Of particular interest is the physical connection between the dynamical state of a galaxy, determined by its assembly history, and the galaxy photometric properties, tracing its stellar populations and its star formation history. The main dynamical quantity in such an analysis is the galaxy total gravitational potential, which determines the galaxy rotation curve. In the case of spiral galaxies, this is usually parameterised with the circular velocity at a given radius, and in the case of ellipticals, with the central velocity dispersion. Both these quantities have a monothonic dependence on luminosity, thus giving rise to the Tully-Fisher relation (TF; Tully $\&$ Fisher, 1977) for spirals, and the Faber-Jackson relation (FJ; Faber $\&$ Jackson 1976) for ellipticals.
However galaxy structure cannot be completely captured by such simple scalings, and the underlying complexity emerges with additional parameters. In the case of ellipticals, the triaxial mass distribution causes an expansion of the FJ relation into a third dimension, recasting it as a scaling between velocity dispersion $\sigma$, surface brightness $I_e$ and effective radius $r_e$, known as the Fundamental Plane (FP; Djorgovski $\&$ Davis 1987, Dressler et al. 1987), a manifestation of the virial theorem in observational quantities (see for instance Cappellari et al. 2006). The slope of the FP indicates that the structure of elliptical galaxies is not a self-similar scaled version of a single object as a function of mass.
In the case of spirals, the apparent simplicity of these systems is broken by the observational evidence of a morphology dependence of the TF slope (Springob et al. 2007, Masters et al. 2008). Such feature is also predicted by hierarchical galaxy formation models (Tonini et al. 2011), which naturally produce a varying TF slope that depends on the galaxy internal dynamics, a signature of its assembly history. Indeed, there is an extensive body of work in the literature supporting the observational evidence of a dependence of the TF on galaxy type; the TF for late-type spirals (Masters et al. 2006, Courteau 1997, Giovanelli et al. 1997) is not followed by early-type spirals and S0 types (Williams et al. 2010, Bedregal et al. 2006, Neistein et al. 1999), dwarf galaxies (McGaugh et al. 2000, Begum et al. 2008), barred spirals (Courteau et al. 2003), and polar ring galaxies (Iodice et al. 2003).
The evidence suggests that a third parameter beside circular velocity and luminosity enters the TF relation. This parameter depends on galaxy type, and expands the TF into a three-dimensional manifold that describes the structure of spirals or alternatively, of all galaxies. A general three-dimensional manifold for galaxies regardless of type has been investigated (see Zaritsky et al. 2008), with the set of observables ($V_c, I_e, r_e$) in analogy with the ellipticals FP. The approach of this work is the use of analytic toy models, which cannot capture the intrinsic complexity of galaxies due to their hierarchical mass assembly, but resort to absorb it into a single parameter, $\Gamma_e$, the mass-to-light ratio inside the half-light radius $r_e$, and to fit this parameter assuming that galaxies lie on the manifold. Catinella et al. (2012) make use instead of dynamical indicators such as rotational velocity and dispersion to obtain a generalised baryonic FJ relation that holds for all galaxy types. Courteau et al. (2007) investigate galaxy size, and analyse the spiral size-luminosity and luminosity-velocity relations and their dependence on morphology and stellar population content.
In this work we consider two questions: 1) is there a third dynamical parameter that characterises the morphology-dependence of the Tully-Fisher relation, and can be used to expand such relation into a three-dimensional manifold, describing the structure of spiral galaxies?; and 2) can we use this parameter to classify galaxy morphology, when visualisation is not available (for instance at high redshift) or impractical (for instance for large surveys)?
The novelty of our analysis is that we take advantage of a full semi-analytic hierarchical model (based from Croton et al. 2006) to define a dynamical parameter that characterises galaxy morphology, predicts the TF relation for different galaxy types and defines the spiral galaxy manifold. The model is built on cosmological simulations of structure formation, to model galaxy formation and evolution and build the theoretical TF relation. This tool is ideal for accounting for the merger history of galaxies and their complex star formation history, which is recorded in their rotation curve and stellar populations. We take particular care in producing dynamical and photometric quantities that can be directly compared with observations. With this tool, we analyse a unique dataset of galaxies: we build a sample of observed galaxies carrying the information on luminosity, circular velocity and central velocity dispersion, derived from the GALEX Arecibo SDSS Survey (Catinella et al. 2013). To this sample we apply our theoretical predictions.
In Section 2 we describe the model. In Section 3 we introduce our observational sample and present our main results. In Section 4 we discuss our findings and present our conclusions.
The model
=========
Semi-analytic models are a powerful tool for investigating the TF relation in a cosmological framework. They naturally interlink the dynamics of structure formation with the galaxy emission; the galaxy assembly and star formation histories derive directly from the hierarchical growth of structures. In addition, such models allow for a thorough statistical analysis. The model galaxies are obtained with the semi-analytic model by Croton et al. (2006), with the spectro-photometric model (including dust absorption and emission) described in Tonini et al. (2012). We implement the prescription for the galaxy rotation curves by Tonini et al. (2011), where the velocity profile is determined by the mass distribution of all galaxy components (dark matter, stellar disk and bulge, and gas), and the total circular velocity is $$V_{\rm C}^2(r)=V^2_{\rm DM}(r)+V^2_{\rm disk}(r)+V^2_{\rm bulge}(r)
\label{Vc}$$ Each of the velocity terms in the equation is of the type $V^2 \propto G \ M(r)/r$ where $r$ is the galactocentric radius and $M(r)$ is the mass profile: a truncated isothermal sphere for the dark matter halo, a flat exponential disk, and a Hernquist (1990) profile for the bulge (see Tonini et al. 2011 for a complete description; see also Tonini et al. 2006a, Salucci et al. 2007). The slope of the TF relation in models, and in particular its tilting with galaxy type observed in the data, is the manifestation of the connection between galaxy dynamics and star formation and assembly history. For spiral galaxies in general, morphology can be understood in terms of bulge-to-disk ratios. Dynamically, the growth of a bulge in the center of a disk is the result of secular (angular momentum redistribution and stellar migration, bars) and violent (mergers) processes, all of which leave a trace in the galaxy rotation curve. At the same time, the star formation history of the galaxy, which is affected by the dynamical evolution, imprints the bulge-to-disk luminosity. A theoretical determination of the TF relation needs to incorporate each of these effects to be successful, a job that hierarchical semi-analytic models are best suited to accomplish.
Which radius? An angular momentum problem
-----------------------------------------
When studying the morphology dependence of the TF relation, it becomes especially important to measure the TF at a meaningful, physically motivated radius. Because of the different radial profiles of the galaxy dynamical components (disk, bulge, dark matter halo, gas), *1)* the slope of the TF relation varies with the radius at which the rotation velocity is calculated (Yegorova et al. 2007) and *2)* the same radius in galaxies of different morphology probes different dynamical regions, thus introducing an artificial scatter in the TF. Traditionally, the velocity at a galactocentric radius $r=2.2R_{\rm D}$, where $R_{\rm D}$ is the exponential stellar disk scale-length, has often been used to build the TF relation from observations. This velocity roughly corresponds to the peak velocity of a bulgeless disk; in the case of a galaxy with a substantial bulge however, the region around $r=2.2R_{\rm D}$ contains a different mix of dark matter, gas and stars, and the peak of the rotation curve is actually at a different radius.
Following Tonini et al. (2011), we adopt a *dynamical* definition of the disk scale-length, that corresponds to a *fixed angular momentum* rather than a fixed galactocentric distance. With this definition the value of $R_{\rm D}$ self-regulates in the presence of a bulge. The formation of the bulge, both from secular evolution and mergers, implies that stars migrate radially or with inspiralling orbits to the centre of the galaxy, losing all their angular momentum and settling into a pressure-supported configuration. This lost angular momentum is transferred to the disk (Dutton et al. 2007; see also Tonini et al. 2006), with the net effect of increasing the disk size. For a bulge of mass $M_{\rm bulge}$ forming in a disk of mass $M_{\rm disk}$ with initial scale-length $R_{\rm D_{\rm old}}$, the disk scale-length after angular momentum transfer is $$R_{\rm D}=R_{\rm D_{\rm old}} \left( 1+(1-f_{\rm x}) \frac{M_{\rm bulge}}{M_{\rm disk}} \right)~,
\label{rdafter}$$ with the fiducial value $f_{\rm x}=0.25$ indicated by Dutton et al. (2007). The new $R_{\rm D}$ represents a ’corrected’ disk scale-length, that takes into account the additional gravitational potential of the bulge. After the correction, all galaxies move onto the disk mass-disk scale length relation that holds for Sc galaxies (see Tonini et al. 2011). After definining a $R_{\rm D}$ that evolves with morphology, it then makes physical sense to adopt $r=2.2R_{\rm D}$ as our radius of choice to build the TF relation.
Integrated galaxy velocity dispersion
-------------------------------------
From the mass distribution we can build velocity profiles for all galaxy components. The theoretical velocity dispersion is the sum of the contribution to the rotation curve by all components that are pressure-supported, namely the dark matter halo and the bulge: $$\sigma(r)=\sqrt{V^2_{\rm DM}(r)+V^2_{\rm bulge}(r)}~,
\label{sigma}$$ where each velocity term in the equation is determined by the mass profile of the dynamical component: $V_i^2(r) \propto GM_i(r)/r$ (see Tonini et al. 2011 for a detailed description). However this particular kind of output is not readily comparable with observations. In fact, in the literature the observed samples usually provide a single-value galaxy velocity dispersion for each object, which is obtained from the broadening of distinct spectral features due to the internal motions of the stars. This measure is an integrated quantity over a galactocentric radius generally determined by telescope aperture or detection limit. The model on the other hand outputs intrinsic, physical galaxy properties, thus the comparison with the observed spectral line dispersion requires *1)* the definition of a ’model aperture radius’ inside which to compute the velocity dispersion, and *2)* the definition of an integrated velocity dispersion inside this radius.
In defining such a radius, there are two factors to consider: *1)* the galaxy dynamics becomes increasingly dark matter-dominated at larger galactocentric distances, but *2)* the only visible tracers of the galaxy velocity dispersion are the stars in the bulge, since the disk is modeled as completely rotation-supported. Therefore, if we were to ’observe’ a model galaxy, the entirety of the velocity dispersion signal in the spectral features would come from the stars in the bulge. For this reason, we assume that the ’model aperture radius’ corresponds to the bulge outer limit. The latter is calculated as $R_{out}=3.5 R_S$, where $R_S$ is the characteristic scale-length of the Hernquist density profile (following Tonini et al. 2011; this is consistent with other semi-analytic models, for instance GalICS, Hatton et al. 2003). $R_S$ is not well constrained from observations and its relation to other physical parameters is quite uncertain, depending on the formation mechanisms of bulges (for instance, are bulges formed in merger events, or are they formed through secular evolution from the disk?). For this reason, we introduce a random scatter in the value $R_S$, only costrained to be at most half of the disk scale-length $R_D$, which is reasonable for spiral galaxies.
The width of a spectral line is in principle obtained by averaging the velocity dispersion over all the stars; in models, that calculate theoretical velocity dispersion profiles, the equivalent quantity is the mass-averaged velocity dispersion, calculated over radial bins out to the bulge outer limit: $$\sigma = \frac{\sum_n M_n \ \sigma_n}{\sum_n M_n}~,
\label{massweight}$$ where $M_n$ is the bulge mass in the $nth$ shell (out to the bulge outer limit), and $\sigma_n$ is the total velocity dispersion in the centre of the bin, calculated from Eq. (\[sigma\]).
Selection of the model galaxies
-------------------------------
In the model, morphology can be defined in terms of the galaxy physical parameters, like the mass of the bulge and the disk (see Tonini et al. 2011). This method has the advantage of grouping together objects that share a similar formation history, thus favouring a more detailed study of the physics involved in their evolution. On the other hand, this type of selection is hard to apply to observations, and it involves some model-dependencies in the conversion between colors and luminosities to masses and ages, thus confusing the comparison between models and data.
![The distribution of the mass ratio $M_{\rm bulge}/M_{\rm disk}$ for the model Sc, Sb and Sa galaxies (*blue, orange and red respectively*).[]{data-label="histo"}](f1.eps)
In most observations the determination of the Hubble type employs the use of some photometric criterion, based on colors or on the relative luminosities of bulge and disk when available. To facilitate the comparison, we classify our model galaxies with one of such methods, based on the bulge-to-total luminosity ratio in the B band, following Simien $\&$ De Vaucouleurs (1986): after defining $\mu_B=M_B(bulge)-M_B(total)$, Sc galaxies are characterised by $2.3 < \mu_B < 4.15$, Sb galaxies by $1.23 < \mu_B < 2.01$ and Sa galaxies by $0.8 < \mu_B < 1.23$. In Fig. (\[histo\]) we compare this classification with the actual mass ratio of bulge and disk, $M_{bulge}/M_{disk}$. With this classification, we find that the Sc types are well represented by galaxies with small bulges (less than $\sim 20 \% $ of the disk mass). On the other hand, Sb types show a wide variety of bulge-to-disk ratios (peaking between 0.2 and 0.7), and Sa galaxies are rare below 1, where they show a very flat distribution. Both Sb and Sa types leak into the S0 and elliptical regimes, defined in the model for values $M_{bulge}/M_{disk}>1$. It is not difficult to imagine that such a scenario is present in observed galaxies too, especially if a band-pass is used where the luminosity evolves rapidly with the age of the stellar populations, and is moreover subject to dust extinction, like the B band. The photometric definition of Sb and Sa model galaxies select objects that do not belong to a uniform population in terms of physical parameters and formation history.
In general photometric classifications may rely on more than one band, and the accuracy of the classification increases with the number of bands available. However, the photometric classification relies on the fact that the stellar populations of bulge and disk are *visibly* different, and that might not be the case, especially for more massive and evolved systems. Even the most sophisticated photometric schemes in fact cannot easily disentangle the effects of age, metallicity, and reddening (see Pforr et al. 2012, 2013). The degeneracies in luminosity and colours of different stellar populations confuse the mass-to-light ratio and the decomposition of bulge and disk, and we believe this is one factor at the origin of the increased observed scatter in the TF relation for these galaxy types. In fact, the mass-to-light ratio, by mirroring the balance between different dynamical components, is the main factor that shapes the rotation curve, which in turn determines the slope of the TF relation.
Comparison with observations
----------------------------
To compare the model with observed data, we employ the sample of massive galaxies of GASS (GALEX Arecibo SDSS) survey, Data Release 3 (Catinella et al. (2013; see also Catinella et al. 2010 for a complete description of the survey), which provides circular velocities obtained from HI linewidths. To this sample we add measurements of the central velocity dispersions measurements from the Sloan Digital Sky Survey, Data Release 9 (Ahn et al. 2012), and K-band magnitudes from the Two Micron All Sky Survey (2MASS; Skrutskie et al. 2006). Distances are estimated from the 21 cm redshifts (see Mould et al 2000). To minimise the scatter we consider only galaxies with inclinations $> 45^{\circ}$. The final sample after cutting away non-detections and poor-quality detections (see Catinella et al. 2013) consists of $\sim 340$ galaxies.
The comparison between model velocities and observed quantities is complicated by some unavoidable caveats, that we address below.
$\bullet$ In the GASS sample the circular velocity is obtained from HI linewidths. The HI linewidth is an integrated quantity, that we compare with the amplitude of the theoretical rotation curve at one radius. However $r=2.2 R_D$ is large enough for the rotation curve to have already peaked; following Catinella et al. (2006) and Verheijen (2001), we know that in massive galaxies (such as those in the GASS sample) the rotation curve rises rapidly and it remains flat for most of the radial range. Therefore, a measurement of the HI linewidth will be largely dominated by the signal coming from gas that would contribute to the flat region of the rotation curve. Being this the case, the HI linewidth will yield a value of the circular velocity consistent with that which would be measured from the rotation curve itself.
$\bullet$ A source of scatter in the Tully-Fisher, whether theoretical or observational, comes from the choice of a radius at which to measure it, or the choice of an aperture within which to collect the signal and determine a linewidth. As described in Yegorova et al. (2007) and Salucci et al. (2007), rotation curves are actually rarely really flat, and measurements encompassing different radii will give rise to different slopes of the TF relation. This is due to the different density profiles of the galaxy components (disk, bulge, dark matter halo), each of which dominate the curve at different radii. As different radii map different dynamical regimes in the galaxy, so the signal in the HI linewidth, or the amplitude of the rotation curve, will be dominated by different components depending on aperture or radius. In the model we choose a radius large enough to be well away from the bulge, and moreover apply our correction of $R_D$ in Eq. (\[rdafter\]) that ’resets’ the curve in the presence of the bulge. However the farther out we go, the more the curve is dominated by the dark matter halo. As already pointed out, for massive spiral galaxies such as those in the GASS sample the shape of the rotation curve is well behaved outside the bulge (Catinella et al. 2006, Verheijen 2001). However in general, as described by Verheijen (2001), the shape of the curve depends on the galaxy mass and type, and in particular the radius at which the dark matter halo starts to dominate the curve is smaller and smaller for less massive galaxies, with dwarfs having a constantly rising curve out to the last measured point. Therefore, an important source of scatter in the TF relation is driven by the shape of the curve, $dV/dr$, which in turn is determined by the baryonic/dark matter mass ratio or the total $M/L$ ratio (as has been highlighted for the B band in Fig. \[histo\]).
$\bullet$ In the model the velocity dispersion is traced by the bulge stars, since the disk is fully rotationally supported, and therefore we set our "aperture” as encompassing the radial extension of the bulge. Note that this implies a different radius for each galaxy, and corresponds to the assumption that the aperture is always larger than the target. The velocity dispersion for the observed sample on the contrary is determined by the SDSS fiber line-width, which has a fixed aperture centered on the centre of each galaxy. We argue that this difference is however smaller than the scatter we obtain in the theoretical values of the velocity dispersion $\sigma$, dominated by the intrinsic scatter in the galaxy assembly histories.
$\bullet$ Regarding the theoretical velocity dispersion, a quantity more directly comparable with data would be a luminosity-averaged (rather than mass-averaged) dispersion, but this would require an additional layer of modeling, in particular of the radial dependence of the mass-to-light ratio, that is not very well constrained observationally and represents an important source of scatter. In effect our implementation corresponds to assuming a constand mass-to-light ratio for the bulge stars; although this is not strictly true in general, it is nonetheless a fairly reasonable assumtpion for the K band, given that the bulge stars are mostly old (a few Gyrs) and that the spatial extension of the bulge is rather small compared to the disk. In addition, any differences between the mass profile and the K-band luminosity profile are smoothed out by the averaging operation (checked for convergence over different binning grids), and only very large differences, which are unlikely in the K band, would produce significantly different values of $\sigma$.
$\bullet$ We do not include the disk contribution to $\sigma$. The disk is modeled as fully rotationally supported, so the disk stars are dispersion-free. In addition, we find that the disk contribution to the total gravitational potential inside the bulge radius is negligible and its effect on the calculated $\sigma$ is marginal. Observationally the inner disk would add to the signal coming from the bulge, depending on inclination. The model galaxies do not suffer from inclination effects, and rather than attempting to model them, we choose to use data that have been corrected for inclination. In addition we argue that, since we are restricting ourselves to the K band, the disk contribution to the estimate of $\sigma$ in observed galaxies is not likely to be significant.
Results
=======
The observational sample we use is not a Tully-Fisher dedicated sample, and galaxies were not selected based on the quality of their rotation curves or their morphological type. The goal in this work is to characterise the physical properties of the galaxies in this sample so that they would naturally produce a morphology-dependent TF relation. In other words, we want to find the physical parameters that uniquely characterise the Tully-Fisher manifold of spiral galaxies, by which a galaxy type is defined based on dynamics and physical parameters linked to its assembly history, rather than visual inspection.
![The Tully-Fisher relation for the semi-analytic model galaxies, divided according to morphology (*light blue, orange and red points* for Sc, Sb and Sa galaxies respectively), compared with the observed sample (*black squares*).[]{data-label="tfmodel"}](f2.eps)
We start by building the TF relation for the observed sample, plotted in Fig. (\[tfmodel\]) in terms of $W=2 V_{\rm C}$ and represented by the *black squares*. Note that the majority of the galaxies in the sample follow a reasonably-defined relation, but with a rather large scatter. In addition, there are numerous objects that significantly deviate from such behaviour. Fig. (\[tfmodel\]) also shows the Tully-Fisher relation for the model galaxies, divided according to morphology: *light blue, orange and red points* represent Sc, Sb and Sa galaxies respectively. As the bulge-to-disk mass ratio increases, the slope of the TF relation flattens, due to the combination of two effects: 1) the stellar populations in the bulge are on average older and therefore their $M/L$ is higher (for instance in the K band, the very luminous post-main sequence phases have faded away; Maraston 2005), while at the same time the velocity is higher due to the boost the bulge inflicts on the rotation curve, and 2) the scatter in the bulge-to-disk mass ratio increases with mass, because larger galaxies have a wider variety of merger histories. Therefore an Sa galaxy that by chance has a smaller than average bulge will scatter back towards the main TF relation, while an Sa galaxy with a larger than average bulge will scatter further away from the TF, and more so with increasind galaxy mass. The overall effect is that of flattening the TF slope. In addition, at the very high-mass end of the mass distribution AGN feedback causes a further increase of the $M/L$ ratio.
Model and data roughly occupy the same locus in the plot (ignoring the data outliers for the moment), so we use the model to provide insight into the observed galaxies.
In the model, the galaxy type and its evolutionary history (short $vs$ prolongued star formation history, merger-rich $vs$ merger-poor assembly) is at first order characterised by the mass ratio between the spherical and disky components $M_{\rm bukge}/M_{\rm disk}$. A more observationally-friendly quantity to express this is the ratio between random and total motions. In the model this corresponds to $\sigma/V_{\rm C}$, where $\sigma$ is defined by Eq. (\[sigma\]), and $V_{\rm C}^2=\sigma^2+V_{\rm disk}^2$ (Eq. (\[Vc\])). The bulge and dark matter halo mostly contribute with velocity dispersion, and the disk mostly with rotation.
After splitting the model galaxies in photometric classes Sa, Sb and Sc, we consider the ratio $\sigma/V_{\rm C}$ for each type, and plot it in Fig. (\[sigmamodel\]), as a function of the total circular velocity $V_{\rm C}$, calculated at $2.2 \ R_{\rm D}$ (where $R_{\rm D}$ is defined by Eq. (\[rdafter\])); these are the *circles, colour-coded as in Fig. (\[tfmodel\])*. The model galaxies show a differentiation in $\sigma/V_{\rm C}$ depending on the B-band selected morphology, with later-type spirals showing a smaller total velocity dispersion than the earlier types, for a given total circular velocity, and a smaller scatter. This shows how dynamics and star formation history are interlinked in the model: the hierarchical build-up of galaxies grows bulges through mergers and evolves the star formation rates to produce redder early-type objects. Moreover, following the nature of hierarchical mass assembly, earlier-type galaxies live in halos with a richer and more varied merger history, that affects both the bulge and the halo mass; this increases the scatter in $\sigma/V_{\rm C}$. Notice, however, how $\sigma/V_{\rm C}$ does not depend on the total circular velocity $W$, for a given morphological type.
We then compare the observed sample in the same space (*squares*). The morphology of the galaxies in the sample is not known, and we use the relation between photometric type and $\sigma/V_{\rm C}$ of the model to classify them: we colour-code the data based on where they lay with respect to the model, in bands of $\sigma/V_{\rm C}$. We assign *blue* colour to the galaxies with very low velocity dispersion, with values of $\sigma/V_{\rm C}$ typical of model Sc galaxies, *red* to the more dispersion-dominated, with values of $\sigma/V_{\rm C}$ typical of model Sa, and *orange* to the intermediate class, typical of model Sb objects. There is a certain degree of overlap in the model, i.e. there are ranges of $\sigma/V_{\rm C}$ that are occupied by both model Sb and Sa galaxies and, to a lesser degree, by both model Sc and Sb (in analogy with Fig. (\[histo\])). We consider the $\sigma/V_{\rm C}$ intervals with a clear predominance of one type above the others, and colour-code the data accordingly, keeping in mind that the overlap between classes is going to be a source of scatter (particularly between *orange* and *red* data points).
In addition, we colour in *green* the outliers, i.e. galaxies that do not fall in the locus of the model (those with $\sigma/V_{\rm C} > 0.8$ and $\sigma/V_{\rm C} < 0.35$). We also consider as outliers all objects with $V_{\rm C}<100 \ km/s$, which fall way off both the bulk of the data and the model in the TF plot (Fig. (\[tfmodel\]); moreover, the model starts to suffer from resolution effects at those masses, given the mass resolution of the Millennium simulation).
The outliers are mostly dispersion-dominated (in accord with the analysis by Catinella et al. 2012), a feature that in the model is a signature of an early-type/elliptical galaxy. A few outliers show instead a very low velocity dispersion. However, in the range of circular velocities considered here, ratios $\sigma/V_{\rm C}<0.35$ yield velocity dispersions $\sigma < 70 \ km/s$, which is the resolution limit of the Sloan spectrograph. For this reason, such values of the velocity dispersion cannot be considered reliable (Bernardi et al. 2003).
Is $\sigma/V_{\rm C}$ a good parameter to characterise observed galaxies? In other words, have we selected a spiral sample, based entirely on theoretical expectations of the ratio between random and total motions? And is this classification a good proxy for galaxy morphology, i.e. will the sub-classes produce different TF relations, in accord with observations?
Fig. (\[tfmodel2\]) shows again the TF relation for the observed sample, after we have divided the galaxies in bands of $\sigma/V_{\rm C}$, following the prediction of the semi-analytic model described in Fig. (\[sigmamodel\]). In the same plot we show the model galaxies (*circles*). In addition in Fig. (\[tfmodel3\]) we show the same plot, split into 3 panels for clarity.
Indeed, the three subsamples follow three distinct TF relations. As bulges grow larger in galaxies, the TF slope flattens as expected, mostly due to the increased mass-to-light ratio due to the spherical component. At the same time, the scatter increases; as this happens both in the data and in the model, this must be intrinsic rather than due to increased uncertainties in the measurements of $W$ and $M_K$. In models, the increased scatter is due to the hierarchical nature of galaxy assembly, more prominent in bulge-heavy galaxies because the bulge is a signature of a significant merger history (Tonini et al. 2011; see also Tonini, 2013).
A linear regression[^1] of the TF relation for the three subsamples yields the values $[-5.35 \pm 0.40, -6.50 \pm 0.42, -7.34 \pm 0.72]$ for the TF slope of Sa, Sb and Sc-types respectively (also consistent with the theoretical values obtained in Tonini et al. 2011, and the observations of Masters et al. 2008). The best fit lines are shown in Figs. (\[tfmodel2\], \[tfmodel3\]) in *red, orange and light blue* colours respectively. The model galaxies are shown in the background, colour-coded as usual.
The slopes and zero-points for the more rotationally-supported objects (*light blue and orange lines*) are well matched with the model Sc and Sb TF relations. The TF slope for the observed more dispersion-dominated objects is consistent with that of model Sa galaxies, although the zero-point is offset by about $~0.5 \ mag$ or by $~50 \%$ in the velocity. This might be due to selection effects. In fact, the GASS sample was selected based on the HI signature; while in the model Sc and Sb galaxies are pretty uniformly gas-rich, the earlier types present a larger scatter in gas content, depending on the assembly history, and therefore this class of model objects cannot be matched in its entirety by the GASS sample.
As a sanity check, we also visually inspect the observed galaxy sample, to verify to what degree the morphology selection based on $\sigma/V_{\rm C}$ mirrors the traditional Sa, Sb and Sc classification. We find that for about $70 \%$ of the sample the two selections match exactly, with an expecially good match for later types, while for the remaining galaxies there is an offset of one type, predominantly involving Sb-type objects. Notice how this is in agreement with the predicted uncertainty regarding Sb galaxies pointed out in Fig. (\[histo\]).
Fig. (\[tfmodel2\]) shows that $\sigma/V_{\rm C}$ is a good dynamical parameter to characterise spiral galaxies, and it is a good proxy for morphology. The data selected based on $\sigma/V_{\rm C}$ produces morpholgy-dependent TF relations, consistent with the theoretical expectations and previous observational results. The spiral galaxy scaling relation between luminosity and dynamics seems fully characterised in the three-dimensional space $[M_{\rm K}, V_{\rm C}, \sigma/V_{\rm C}]$ across all spiral types.
Discussion and conclusions
==========================
The Tully-Fisher relation is the product of virial equilibrium combined with the star formation history. It links a measure of the total gravitational potential, $V_{\rm C}$, with the luminosity in various bands, which maps the stellar mass as a function of age. The fact that the TF relation holds for all spirals shows that there is one principal parameter that largely governs galaxy evolution, i.e. the total mass. On the other hand, the perturbations in the TF, such as the observed morphology dependence, indicate that at least a second parameter plays a detectable role. Such parameter is linked to the mass *distribution* inside the galaxy, a product of both secular evolution and hierarchical mass assembly (an ideal scenario to study with a semi-analytic model).
The mass distribution might be parameterised with some definition of effective radius, as in the case or ellipticals, but this method relies on a photometric classification that in both models and observations is affected by systematics. Another route is to consider that mass distribution is interlinked with the distribution of the internal motions. In these terms, a dynamical parameter such as $\sigma/V_{\rm C}$ represents as well the mass concentration as the fraction of random over total motions inside the galaxy. In the formalism of virial equilibrium phase-space analysis, it represents an angular momentum parameter. This makes it a very clear-cut, physically well defined quantity to determine in models, but it also has observational advantages. In fact, while a morphology analysis or the determination of effective radii is very uncertain for distant galaxies, central velocity dispersion and circular velocity are relatively easy to determine from galaxy spectra, pushing the analysis of the TF relation to higher redshifts. In addition, this method is ideal in the case of large galaxy surveys, where a classification based on visual inspection is impractical.
The parameter $\sigma/V_{\rm C}$ is tracked by the emission of a fraction of the stellar populations, those that are not rotationally supported. These are mostly the bulge stars, a component of intermediate to old age, with a higher mass-to-light ratio than the disk. The prominence of this component causes the velocity-luminosity relation to shift from that of the Sc types (close to pure disks). Thus $\sigma/V_{\rm C}$ is a good proxy for galaxy morphology, it directly relates to the bulge-to-total mass ratio, which in turn can be linked to the bulge-to-disk luminosity ratios traditionally used in the morphology classifications. For this reason the varying slope of the TF relation according to $\sigma/V_{\rm C}$ corresponds to that seen for varying morphology types classified according to luminosity ratios.
The parameter $\sigma/V_{\rm C}$ has the additional advantage that it is well defined in all galaxies, and therefore it can be used to expand the present analysis to S0 and elliptical galaxies, where $M_{\rm bulge}/M_{\rm disk}>1$. A future work, based on a larger observed galaxy sample that includes ellipticals and S0s, will address the determination of a generalised galaxy manifold, defined by the circular velocity $[V_{\rm C}]$, the ratio of random-over-total motions$ \sigma/V_{\rm C}$, and the luminosity $L$ (or alternatively the total mass-to-light ratio).
In this work we characterised the morphology dependence of the Tully-Fisher relation with a physical parameter, and employed it along with circular velocity and luminosity to define a three-dimensional manifold that determines the structure of spiral galaxies. We built and analysed a sample of observed galaxies and compared the observed Tully-Fisher relation and the central galaxy velocity dispersion with the predictions by a hierarchical semi-analytic model based on Croton et al. (2006). Our results are the following:
$\bullet$ the model predicted K-band TF relation is a good match to the data; the hierarchical galaxy formation model fully captures the velocity-luminosity relation for spirals. The model galaxies, classified as Sa, Sb and Sc galaxies with a photometric criterion, show a differentiation of the TF slope, zero-point and scatter with the galaxy type;
$\bullet$ we define a theoretical galaxy velocity dispersion as the component of the rotation curve generated by the spherical, pressure supported mass components, i.e. bulge and dark matter halo, and traced by the stars in the bulge; to compare it with the central (aperture-defined) velocity dispersion measured from galaxy spectra, we compute the mass-average of such component over its density profile;
$\bullet$ we compare the observed ratio of the velocity dispersion over total circular velocity $\sigma/V_{\rm C}$ as a function of $V_{\rm C}$, with the predictions of the semi-analytic model, finding a good match. The model predicts a correspondence between $\sigma/V_{\rm C}$ a and the photometrically-determined galaxy type, with the earlier-types exhibiting a higher $\sigma/V_{\rm C}$ and a larger scatter;
$\bullet$ we divide the observed galaxies in 3 subsamples of different average $\sigma/V_{\rm C}$ following the model trend, and recalculate the TF relation separately for the 3 subsamples; we find that they follow 3 distinct TF relation, with decreasing slope for increasing $\sigma/V_{\rm C}$. The slope of the TF relation for each class of galaxies characterised by $\sigma/V_{\rm C}$ is in agreement with previous results in the literature for Sa, Sb and Sc galaxies. In addition, this method naturally exclude the TF outliers, thus reducing the scatter on the TF relation;
$\bullet$ we find that $\sigma/V_{\rm C}$ is a good dynamical parameter to characterise galaxy morphology, yielding a classification consistent with the photometrically defined Sa, Sb and Sc types.
We conclude that $\sigma/V_{\rm C}$ is a good, physically motivated third parameter to characterise the TF across the spiral galaxy population. Along with the total velocity $V_{\rm C}$ and the luminosity $M_{\rm K}$, $\sigma/V_{\rm C}$ it thus defines a three-dimensional spiral galaxy manifold that fully characterise the spiral galaxy population.
Acknowledgments {#acknowledgments .unnumbered}
===============
We would like to thank the anonymous Referee for her/his comments and suggestions, very beneficial to this work. We would like to thank Barbara Catinella, Simon Mutch and Darren Croton for their insight and the useful discussions. JM is funded by the Australian Research Council Discovery Projects. This publication makes use of data products from the Two Micron All Sky Survey, which is a joint project of the University of Massachusetts and the Infrared Processing and Analysis Center/California Institute of Technology, funded by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration and the National Science Foundation. This research has made use of the NASA/ IPAC Infrared Science Archive, which is operated by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, under contract with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. Funding for SDSS-III has been provided by the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation, the Participating Institutions, the National Science Foundation, and the U.S. Department of Energy Office of Science. The SDSS-III web site is http://www.sdss3.org/. SDSS-III is managed by the Astrophysical Research Consortium for the Participating Institutions of the SDSS-III Collaboration including the University of Arizona, the Brazilian Participation Group, Brookhaven National Laboratory, Carnegie Mellon University, University of Florida, the French Participation Group, the German Participation Group, Harvard University, the Instituto de Astrofisica de Canarias, the Michigan State/Notre Dame/JINA Participation Group, Johns Hopkins University, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Max Planck Institute for Astrophysics, Max Planck Institute for Extraterrestrial Physics, New Mexico State University, New York University, Ohio State University, Pennsylvania State University, University of Portsmouth, Princeton University, the Spanish Participation Group, University of Tokyo, University of Utah, Vanderbilt University, University of Virginia, University of Washington, and Yale University.
Ahn, C. P., et al., 2012, ApJS, 203, 21A Bedregal, A. G., Aragon-Salamanca, A. & Merrifield, M. R., 2006, MNRAS, 373, 1125
Begum, A., Chengalur, J. N., Karachentsev, I. D. & Sharina, M. E., 2008, MNRAS, 386, 138
Bernardi, M., et al., 2003, AJ, 125, 1817 Cappellari, M., et al., 2006, MNRAS, 366, 1126C
Catinella, B., Giovanelli, R. & Haynes, M. P., 2006, ApJ, 640, 751
Catinella, B., et al., 2010, MNRAS, 403, 683 Catinella, B., et al., 2012, MNRAS, 420, 1959C Catinella, B., et al., 2013ArXiv1308.1676C Courteau, S., 1997, AJ, 114, 2402
Courteau, S., Andersen, D. R., Bershady, M. A., MacArthur, L. A. & Rix, H.-W., 2003, ApJ, 594, 208
Courteau, S., Dutton, A. A., van den Bosch, F. C., MacArthur, L. A., Dekel, A., McIntosh, D. H. & Dale, D. A., 2007, ApJ, 671, 203
Croton, D. J., Springel, V., White, S. D. M., De Lucia, G., Frenk, C. S., Gao, L., Jenkins, A., Kauffmann, G., Navarro, J. F. & Yoshida, N., 2006, MNRAS, 365, 11
Dressler, A., Lynden-Bell, D., Burstein, D., Davies, R. L., Faber, S. M., Terlevich, R. & Wegner, G., 1987, ApJ, 313, 42
Dutton, A.A., van den Bosch, F.C., Dekel, A. & Courteau, S., 2007, ApJ, 654, 27D
Djorgovski, S. & Davis, M., 1987, ApJ, 313, 59D
Faber, S. M. & Jackson, R. E., 1976, ApJ, 204, 668F
Giovanelli, R., Haynes, M. P., Herter, T., Vogt, N. P., da Costa, L. N., Freuding, W., Salzer, J. J. & Wegner, G., 1997, AJ, 113, 53
Hernquist, L., 1990, ApJ, 356, 359H
Iodice, E., Arnaboldi, M., Bournaud, F., Combes, F., Sparke, L. S., van Driel, W. & Capaccioli, M., 2003, ApJ, 585, 730
Maraston, C. 2005, MNRAS, 362, 799
Masters, K.L., Springbob, C. M., Haynes, M. P. & Giovanelli, R., 2006, ApJ, 653, 861
Masters, K.L., Springbob, C.M. & Huchra, J.P., 2008, AJ, 135, 1738M
McGaugh, S. S., Schombert, J. M., Bothun, G. D. & de Blok, W. J. G., 2000, ApJ, 533, L99
Mould, J. R., et al., 2000, ApJ, 529, 786M Neistein, E., Maoz, D., Rix, H.-W. & Tonry, J. L., 1999, AJ, 117, 2666
Pforr, J., Maraston, C. & Tonini, C., 2012, MNRAS, 422, 3285
Pforr, J., Maraston, C. & Tonini, C., 2013, MNRAS, 435, 1389
Salucci, P., Lapi, A., Tonini, C., Gentile, G., Yegorova, I. & Klein, U., 2007, MNRAS, 378, 41S
Simien, F. & de Vaucouleurs, G., 1986, ApJ, 302, 564S
Skrutskie, M. F., et al., 2006, AJ, 131, 1163 Springob, C. M., Masters, K. L., Haynes, M. P., Giovanelli, R. & Marinoni, C., 2007, ApJS, 172, 599S
Tonini, C., Lapi, A., Shankar, F. & Salucci, P., 2006, ApJ, 638L, 13T
Tonini, C., Lapi, A. & Salucci, P., 2006 ApJ, 649, 591T
Tonini, C., Maraston, C., Ziegler, B., Bohm, A., Thomas, D., Devriendt, J. & Silk, J., 2011, MNRAS, 415, 811T
Tonini, C., Bernyk, M., Croton, D., Maraston, C. & Thomas, D., 2012, ApJ, 759, 43T
Tonini, C., 2013, ApJ, 762, 39T
Tully, R.B., & Fisher, J. R., 1977, A&A, 54, 661T
Verheijen, M. A. W., 2001, Apj, 563, 694
Williams, M. J., Bureau, M. & Cappellari, M., 2010, MNRAS, 409, 1330
Yegorova, I.A. & Salucci, P., 2007, MNRAS, 377, 507Y
Zaritsky, D., Zabludoff, A. I. & Gonzalez, A. H., 2008, ApJ, 682, 68Z
[^1]: Least Squares fit with two coefficients: slope and zero-point.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: |
The multi-TeV $\gamma$-rays from the Galactic Center (GC) have a cutoff at tens of TeV, whereas the diffuse emission has no such cutoff, which is regarded as an indication of PeV proton acceleration by the HESS experiment. It is important to understand the inconsistency and study the possibility that PeV cosmic-ray acceleration could account for the apparently contradictory point and diffuse $\gamma$-ray spectra.
In this work, we propose that the cosmic rays are accelerated up to $>$PeV in GC. The interaction between cosmic rays and molecular clouds is responsible for the multi-TeV $\gamma$-ray emissions from both the point source and diffuse sources today. Enhanced by the small volume filling factor (VFF) of the clumpy structure, the absorption of the $\gamma$-rays leads to a sharp cutoff spectrum at tens of TeV produced in the GC. Away from galactic center, the VFF grows and the absorption enhancement becomes negligible.
As a result, the spectra of $\gamma$-ray emissions for both point source and diffuse sources can be successfully reproduced under such self-consistent picture. In addition, a “surviving-tail" at $\sim$100 TeV is expected from the point source, which can be observed by future projects CTA and LHAASO. Neutrinos are simultaneously produced during proton-proton (PP) collision. With 5-10 years observations, the KM3Net experiment will be able to detect the PeV source according to our calculation.
author:
- 'Yi-Qing Guo$^1$, Zhen Tian$^1$, Zhen Wang$^1$, Hai-Jin Li$^{2,3}$, Tian-Lu Chen$^{2,3}$'
bibliography:
- 'gc.bib'
title: 'The Galactic Center: A PeV Cosmic-Ray Acceleration Factory'
---
Introduction
============
It is well known that the GC, with a supermassive black hole ($\sim$4 $\times$ $10^6 M_\sun$), is a good laboratory for the study of astrophysical phenomena. Historically, there have been many discussions on the possibility that the GC is a dominant source of galactic cosmic rays [@1981AZh....58..959P; @1981ICRC....2..344S; @1983JPhG....9.1139G; @2013NJPh...15a3053G; @2013JPhG...40f5201G]. With state-of-art technologies, current $\gamma$-ray observations provide unprecedented sensitivity in studying the acceleration activities in the GC.
Very high energy $\gamma$-rays from hundreds of GeV to tens of TeV in the direction of the GC have been observed by several atmospheric Cerenkov telescopes, such as CANGAROO [@2004ApJ...606L.115T], VERITAS [@2004ApJ...608L..97K; @2015arXiv150806311S], HESS , and MAGIC [@2006ApJ...638L.101A]. Later observations by HESS found the source spectrum has an exponential cutoff at about tens of TeV with the implication of intrinsic origin . This implies that the maximum accelerated energy for a proton is $\sim$200 TeV as shown [@2013JPhG...40f5201G]. The diffuse $\gamma$-ray emission is also observed at GC disk range by the HESS experiment [@2006Natur.439..695A]. The more interesting thing is that the $\gamma$-ray emission is correlated with the density of molecular hydrogen, which is generally regarded as a hadronic source. Simultaneously, the spectrum for the GC point source is the same as the diffuse one, and they may possibly share the same origin: the GC supermassive black hole. Just recently, the diffuse $\gamma$-ray emissions around the GC have been observed by the HESS experiment [@2016Natur.531..476H]. The results support that the $\gamma$-ray emissions come from $\sim$PeV energy proton and the most plausible accelerator is the GC [@2016Natur.531..476H]. Several models have been proposed to explain the $\gamma$-ray emission and discuss the PeV acceleration at the GC region [@2016arXiv160400003F; @2016arXiv160408791C]. The direct criterion to PeV CR acceleration in the GC region is the observation of high-energy neutrinos. Several 30 TeV to 2 PeV neutrinos have been observed from the GC direction by the IceCube experiment [@2013PhRvL.111b1103A; @2013Sci...342E...1I]. Some works have been discussed the possibility of the GC origin [@2014PhRvD..90b3010A; @2014PhRvD..90f3012B; @2015ApJ...806..159K; @2015PhRvD..92b3001F].
The problem is how to understand the cutoff in the spectrum of the central source. One possible reason is the absorption of $\gamma$-rays by interactions with the ambient infrared radiation field. But calculations showed that the absorption effect is not sufficient . It is possible that the absorption of $\gamma$-rays is underestimated because the infrared radiation field near the GC may be irregular. As a matter of fact, the material in the GC region is clumpy, dense, and fragmented [@2011AJ....142..134E]. The degree of irregularity can be described by the VFF, which is defined as the ratio of the volume of clumpy structure to the total volume of the GC. When the VFF is much smaller, the material density of the clumpy structure is much higher than the fixed total material.
The VFF in circumnuclear disk is at the level of 1$\%$ . At the central cavity [@1993ApJ...402..173J; @1987ApJ...318..124G], the gas density is large enough for self-gravity to form a clumpy structure to overcome the strong tidal shear of the black hole, and this will make the VFF even smaller, $\sim 0.1\%$ [@1993ApJ...402..173J; @1985ApJ...297..766G]. One important consequence is that the infrared radiation component of interstellar radiation field (ISRF) should have a VFF similar to the gas material. The reason is that the infrared background light comes from the reemitting of the gas after absorbing the starlight. A small VFF means that the $\gamma$-rays experience much many more background photons being generated or passing through the dense gas region. That causes a much stronger absorption and attenuation at high energy. So the observed $\gamma$-ray cutoff at tens of TeV can possibly be due to the attenuation of the ISRF. Away from the GC, the VFF grows, the absorption will become less and less important.
In this work, we propose that the CR could have been accelerated to $\sim$PeV during the GC activity in past and are producing the high-energy $\gamma$-rays by $PP$-collision today. We further suggest that observed the sharp cutoff $\gamma$-ray spectrum is due to the absorption of the ISRF enhanced by the dense clumpy structure in the GC. Considering the density of the ISRF and absorption efficiency, the higher-energy $\gamma$-ray around 100 TeV can escape and the surviving tail is predicted, which can be tested by future projects, such as CTA and LHAASO experiments. Simultaneously, neutrinos can be produced during the $PP$-collision and can be observed by the KM3Net experiment in a few years of operation. The paper is organized in the following way. In Sec. 2, we present the detailed modeling of this picture. Sec. 3 is the discussions and Sec. 4 gives the conclusions.
Model and results
=================
During the violent activities, the accretion of stars and gas by the supermassive black hole could be effective in accelerating particles. The maximum energy that protons can achieve for diffusive shock acceleration is [@2005ApJ...619..306A] $$E_{\rm max} \sim eBR \approx 10^{14}\left(\frac{B}{\rm G}\right)
\left( \frac{M}{4\times 10^6M_\odot}\right)\left(\frac{R}{\rm 10R_g}\right)\ {\rm eV}$$ where $B$ is the magnetic field and $R$ is the size of the acceleration region. As in [@2005ApJ...619..306A], we assume the acceleration takes place within $10$ Schwarzschild radii ($R_g\sim10^{12}$ cm) of the black hole. To accelerate protons to above $\sim$PeV requires magnetic field strength of tens of G in the acceleration region . Such a condition could be reached in the very central region of the GC [@2005ApJ...619..306A; @2013Natur.501..391E]. On the other hand, if the acceleration takes place in larger regions, the required magnetic field could be smaller. When the accelerated CRs diffuse out of the GC, the hadronic interaction with interstellar medium (ISM) will occur and produce similar amounts of $\gamma$-rays and neutrinos. The detailed model calculations are discussed in the following.
The $\gamma$-ray emission in the GC with the break spectrum of protons in high energy
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The $\gamma$-ray emission from the point source in the GC has a broken power law spectrum at tens of TeV. The best fit of the cutoff can be described by exponential function in high energy . While adopting the traditional model of the ISRF, the absorption effect is too small to explain the observed cutoff spectrum of HESS J1745-290 . The alternative solution attributes it to the intrinsic cutoff, which characterizes the acceleration limit of the flaring event. For comparison, the broken spectrum of protons can be simply adopted to exponential cutoff (EC) as $e^{-E/E_c}$ or superexponential cutoff (SEC) as $e^{-(E/E_c)^s}$, where E is the proton energy, $E_c=200$ TeV is the critical energy and $s>>1$ denotes the sharp break. The key points are the density distribution of CRs and the ISM distribution in the GC region. For sake of simplicity, the average density $n_{\rm gas}$=$10^3 cm^{-3}$ is assumed in the GC point and diffuse regions [@2011ApJ...726...60C; @2012ApJ...753...41L]. The total energy of the CRs is dependent on its spectral index. Due to the energy break at 200 TeV, the spectrum of CRs becomes soft at tens of TeV. Here the spectral index 2.15 (2.24) and total energy of 0.86$\times 10^{48}$(1.86$\times 10^{48}$) erg is adopted for the EC (SEC) mode. Under such scenario, the spectrum of $\gamma$-rays are calculated as shown in Fig.\[acellerateMax\]. From this figure, it is clear that the proton spectrum with SEC is much better to fit the observation.
{width="47.00000%"} {width="47.00000%"}
Although the $\gamma$-ray emission in the point source of the GC can be explained by adopting the SEC of injection CRs, it is hard to reproduce the diffuse one around GC region under the same scenario. The alternative method, like the absorption in the heavy ISRF, should be considered to understand the possible physical mechanism in one unified way.
$\gamma$-ray absorption with an inhomogeneous ISRF in the GC
------------------------------------------------------------
The Galaxy is not transparent to very high energy $\gamma$-rays. The main three processes resulting in energy losses of photons are the photoelectric effect, Compton scattering and pair production. The photoelectric effect and Compton scattering are negligible for the $\gamma$-ray with the energy higher than tens of TeV [@2014ApJ...795..100G]. So the dominant contribution to the attenuation comes from pair production, which leads to the change in the $\gamma$-ray spectrum. In this work, the absorption can be divided into two components: within the source region and on the way from the source region to the Earth. For the latter, previous studies have shown that the absorption is just 10$\%$ for 20 TeV $\gamma$-rays and 20$\%$ for 50 TeV $\gamma$-rays, which is far less than what is required in order to explain the cutoff spectrum of the point source at the GC . Absorption in the source region might be more complicated and need special consideration.
The energy-dependent absorption of $\gamma$-ray can be described as $e^{-\tau(E)}$, where $\tau(E)$ is the optical depth for $\gamma$-ray in energy E. Similar to previous work , $\tau(E)$ can be described in the source region as $$\begin{aligned}
\tau(E) & = & \int _{R_0} dr \int d\cos(\theta) \int
\frac{dn(\epsilon,r)}{d\epsilon} \nonumber \times\\
& & \sigma_{\gamma\gamma}(E,\epsilon,\cos\theta)
\frac{1-\cos\theta}{2} d \epsilon,
\label{eqEBL}\end{aligned}$$ where $\epsilon$ is the energy of the ISRF photon, $\sigma_{\gamma\gamma}$ is the pair production cross section and can be precisely derived [@1967PhRv..155.1404G]. Then the attenuation is only dependent on the the differential number density $dn(\epsilon,r)/d\epsilon$ and the size of the ISRF region $R_0$ with the value of 2 pc.
The average photon intensity at the far-infrared band from the GC region has been measured by Herschel PACS and SPIRE [@2011AJ....142..134E] and can be defined as $I_\epsilon ~(photons~ s^{-1} cm^{-2} sr^{-1})$. In the traditional way, the attenuation of $\gamma$-rays is calculated by adopting this homogeneous radiation field. In fact, the radiation field can be described by the point source formula, as $I_\epsilon \propto 1/r^2$. So the photon density in the GC region can be approximately estimated as $dn(\epsilon,r)/d\epsilon = \frac{4\pi}{c}\cdot I_\epsilon \propto \frac{4\pi}{c} \cdot 1/r^2$. However, the radiation field is very clumpy with a VFF (denoted as $f_V$). We can consider the effect of the clumpy structure by replacing $r \rightarrow r\cdot f_V^{1/3}$. Under such situation, the photon density in the clumpy structure should be corrected to $dn(\epsilon,r)/d\epsilon \sim\frac{4\pi}{c}I_\epsilon/f_V^{2/3}$ and the corresponding integration of $dr$ is the radius of the clumpy structure as $R_0\cdot f_V^{1/3}$. In this work, the attenuation of $\gamma$-rays is calculated by adopting this enhanced differential number density $dn(\epsilon,r)/d\epsilon$. So compared with the traditional calculation, the absorption should be enlarged by a factor of $1/f_V^{1/3}$ after considering the VFF $f_V$ based on Equation \[eqEBL\]. One special case of our model is that the $\gamma$-rays are produced in the very center of the GC and the attenuation is similar to the work [@2005ApJ...619..306A; @2016arXiv160408791C].
Fig.\[HerschelFilling\] shows the attenuation with different VFFs. In this calculation, the injection spectrum of protons is assumed as a power law with a break energy at 4 PeV (left panel of Fig.\[HerschelFilling\]) and 100 PeV (right panel of Fig.\[HerschelFilling\]). The break energy reflects the maximum energy that protons can achieve in the GC activity. The choice of 4 PeV originates from the knee position of all particle spectra and 100 PeV comes from the newest observation of light nuclei [@2016Natur.531...70B]. The spectral index is assumed to be 2.3 for both point and diffuse one. The total energy $3.08\times 10^{48}$ and $2.16 \times 10^{48}$ erg is fixed for the point and diffuse one respectively. The gas density $n_{gas}=10^3 cm^{-3}/f_V$ is adopted after considering the VFF, which keeps the same amount as the above calculation with an average density of $10^3 cm^{-3}$. It is clear that the attenuation effect can be significantly enlarged in case of the VFF. Taking into account the newly estimated photon density and by adopting a VFF of about $0.1\%$, the observed spectrum from the point source of GC can be well described. Away from the GC, the VFF will grow, which leads to the weaker of ISRF. In the diffuse emission of the GC, a similar calculation is performed with $1\%$ VFF, which is roughly consistent with the observation. The typical features of a surviving tail is expected at $\sim$100 TeV for the point source. We hope that the high precise measurements of the $\gamma$-ray spectrum from TeV to hundreds of TeV will be performed by future projects, such as CTA [@2011arXiv1111.2183C] and LHAASO [@2010ChPhC..34..249C], and can give the ultimate answer to our model.
{width="47.00000%"} {width="47.00000%"}
Neutrino emission
-----------------
When the observed $\gamma$-rays are mainly from the decay of the neutral pions which are the products of hadronic interaction between CRs and the ambient gas, a similar amount of neutrinos are expected to be produced from the charged pion decay. The $\gamma$-ray spectrum may be distorted by the absorption interaction, and neutrinos can carry the spectrum of the parent CR interaction. The neutrino spectrum can thus provide decisive information to distinguish whether intrinsic acceleration or absorption of the ISRF should be responsible for the cutoff spectrum of the $\gamma$-rays.
On average, $PP$-collisions an produce equal number of neutral pion and charged pion. Each neutral pion decays to a pair of $\gamma$-rays and each charged pion decays into two muon neutrinos and one electron neutrino. The initial neutrino flux ratio is approximately $\nu_e:\nu_\mu:\nu_\tau$ = 1:2:0 from charged pion decay. However, the flavor ratio is close to $\nu_e:\nu_\mu:\nu_\tau$ = 1:1:1 at the Earth after vacuum oscillation through traversal of astrophysical distances. So the typical energy of the neutrino($\nu + \bar {\nu }$) coming from charged pion decay is $\sim$0.5 of the $\gamma$-ray energy from neutral pion decay.
High-energy neutrinos can be detected by neutrino telescopes which use either ice or water as target and detector medium. Neutrinos undergo charge current or neutral current interaction with target matter and produce leptons inside the detector (as a contained event) or in the vicinity of the detector (through-going event). The high-energy muons can generate Cerenkov light while electrons and tau particles may develop to shower which can also generate Cerenkov light for further detection.
There are two modes of muon event rates: one is the contained event, and the other is the through-going event. The contained event is described as the interaction for neutrinos with nucleons inside the detector and given by [@1996APh.....5...81G; @1998PhRvD..58i3009G; @2005PhRvD..71i3010G; @2006PhRvD..74f3007K] $$\left ( \frac{dN_\mu}{dE_\mu}\right )_{con} = k V_{det}\frac{d\Phi _\nu}{dE_\nu}
e^{E _ \nu/E _ \nu ^ {cut}} \sigma_{CC}(E_\nu)e^{-\tau}$$ where $V_{det}$ is the detector volume, which is adopted to be 1 km$^3$; $E_\nu^{cut}$ is the high-energy cutoff of the neutrino spectrum; the term $k$=$N_A\rho T<1-y(E_\nu)>^{-1}$ takes into account observation time (T), normalization of the muon spectrum, and the molar density of water (KM3Net) or ice (IceCube). The through-going event is described as the interaction for neutrinos with nucleons outside the detector and is given by [@1996APh.....5...81G; @1998PhRvD..58i3009G; @2005PhRvD..71i3010G; @2006PhRvD..74f3007K] $$\left ( \frac{dN_\mu}{dE_\mu}\right )_{thr} = \frac{N_A\rho TA_{det}}{\alpha +\beta E_\mu}
\times \int \limits _{E_{\mu}}^{+\infty} dE_\nu \frac{d\Phi _\nu}{dE_\nu} e^{-E_\nu/E^{cut}_\nu}
\sigma _{CC}(E_\nu)e^{-\tau}$$
Based on the above formula, the total muon event number is calculated for the KM3Net experiment. As shown in Fig.\[neutrino\], it is obvious that the KM3Net has the potential ability to observe GC neutrinos with a few years of operation when the break energy of the protons is more than PeV. On the contrary, if the break energy of the protons is at $\sim$200 TeV, the GC neutrino events can not be separated from atmospheric neutrino background. The observation years to reach a 3$\sigma$ significance level for different cases are estimated and listed in Table 1.
![The observation of total muon number in one year above an assumed muon energy by KM3Net experiment.[]{data-label="neutrino"}](neutrinoNew.eps){width="48.00000%"}
---------------- --------------- ----------------------- ----------------------------- ----------------
Mode $E_{th}(TeV)$ $N_{\mu +\bar {\mu}}$ $N_{\mu +\bar {\mu}}^{atm}$ yrs(3$\sigma$)
200 TeV energy 1 1.04 1.90 29.6
cut-off 5 0.26 0.13 35.2
10 0.11 0.03 56.4
4 PeV energy 1 1.65 1.90 12.1
cut-off 5 0.57 0.13 10.0
10 0.3 0.03 6.9
100 PeV energy 1 1.92 1.90 8.9
cut-off 5 0.75 0.13 5.1
10 0.45 0.03 5.7
---------------- --------------- ----------------------- ----------------------------- ----------------
: Comparison between the expected signal and the atmospheric neutrino background for different break energy of proton\
Discussion
==========
The open question is how to distinguish the production mechanism of the $\gamma$-ray cutoff between the intrinsic acceleration ability of CRs and the attenuation of the ISRF. One possible way is to observe the typical feature of the surviving tail. The other effective way is to find an instance of the clumpy structure. If the line shape of the calculated spectrum of $\gamma$-ray emission in the clumpy structure is consistent with the result observed by the HESS experiment, this can further support our model of adopting the VFF.
In the central region, the minispiral is a region with a stellar population cluster and density structure, which consists of four main components: the northern arm, the western arc, the eastern arm and the bar . In those streamers, it is very bright in the near-infrared wave band and possible $PP$-collision regime. Recently, ALMA has also observed some separated clumpy structures [@2013ApJ...767L..32Y]. We take clump 3 as an instance of the clumpy structure to estimate the attenuation of high-energy $\gamma$-rays. The clumps in the vicinity of the GC are exposed to strong tidal forces that tend to disrupt the clouds, except that the self-gravity is large enough to overcome the tidal shear. The tidal limit for the clump mass $M_{cl}$ and the clump radius $r_{cl}$ is given :
$$\frac{3}{5}\frac{GM_{cl}^2}{r_{cl}} \geq \frac{1}{5}M_{cl}r_{cl}^2|f^\prime({R})|$$
where $f^\prime(R)$ is the derivative of $f(R)$, $f(R)=\frac{GM(R)}{R^2}$ and $R$ is the clump’s distance to the GC. The mass distribution can be defined as $M(R)=M_0+M_1R^{1.25}$, where $M_0=4\times 10^6M_{\odot}$ and $M_1=1.6\times 10^6M_{\odot}$pc$^{-1.25}$. Consider $R$=0.12 pc, $M_{cl}\sim$ 30 M$_\odot$, the critical clump radius $r_{crit}\sim 1500$ AU. In this calculation, we take the critical radius $r_{crit}$ as the clump size. In addition, the radiation field of clump 3 is given by the ALMA experiment [@2013ApJ...767L..32Y]. The attenuation of $\gamma$-rays can be estimated based on Equation \[eqEBL\] as shown in Figure \[bumpAlma\]. It is obvious that our calculation of the $\gamma$-ray spectrum is consistent with the HESS observation line shape. This further gives the possibility that the enhanced density of photons by the VFF leads to the cutoff of the $\gamma$-ray spectrum for the GC point source.
![The calculated spectrum after the attenuation of Clump 3 with YSO candidate 526817 in it.[]{data-label="bumpAlma"}](bumpAlma.eps){width="48.00000%"}
In addition, the overall behavior of the GC is quite silent now, except for some continuous weak activities [@1982ApJ...258..135B; @1992ApJ...387..189D; @2009ApJ...698..676D; @2011ApJ...728...37D; @2016MNRAS.456.1438Y]. It is obvious that such weak activities cannot supply enough energy to satisfy the power requirement of the $\gamma$-ray emission observed by the HESS experiment. However, there is sufficient evidence to prove that the GC had the violent activities in the past, such as X-ray outbursts and Fermi-Bubbles [@2010ApJ...724.1044S]. The HESS Collaboration also proposed that the activity should operate for about 1000 years to satisfy their observations. In our calculation, we also think that such past activity supplied the required the power required to accelerate the protons to PeV energy.
Conclusion
==========
The GC is a unique laboratory for studying the origin, acceleration, and propagation of CRs. Considering the inhomogeneous distribution of the ISRF in the GC, $\gamma$-ray absorption is found to be enhanced largely. If the VFF of the clumpy structure is assumed to be 0.1$\%$, the absorption of the $\gamma$-rays can lead to the sharp cut-off at about tens of TeV and a “survived-tail” at about 100 TeV and sharp cutoff for $\gamma$-ray spectrum are expected. Away from GC, the VFF grows up and the attenuation becomes less important. The “surviving tail” as the tagged feature can be observed by future projects, such as CTA and LHAASO. High-energy neutrino detection is crucial in distinguishing whether the absorption or the intrinsic acceleration is the cause of the $\gamma$-ray spectrum cutoff. If our model is right, the KM3Net experiment will reach a 3 $\sigma$ observation for multi-TeV muon track neutrinos in about $5\sim 10$ years of observation. Owing to the higher background numbers of atmospheric neutrinos for IceCube than KM3Net, the sensitivity to GC region for IceCube is a little lower than for KM3Net [@2014ApJ...796..109A]. More years of operation would be required for the IceCube experiment to reach a 3$\sigma$ significance level of observation.
Acknowledgements {#acknowledgements .unnumbered}
================
We thank Prof. Hong-Bo Hu and Qiang Yuan for helpful discussion. This work is supported by the Ministry of Science and Technology of China, Natural Sciences Foundation of China (11405182, 11135010, 11663006, 11647311)
*Note added*:At the same time, a similar study was submitted that draws a consistent conclusion concerning gamma ray absorption [@2016arXiv160408791C].
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
author:
- '[^1]'
bibliography:
- 'bibliography.bib'
title: '**Voliro: An Omnidirectional Hexacopter With Tiltable Rotors**'
---
Introduction {#sec:introduction}
============
System Description {#sec:system}
==================
Modelling {#sec:modelling}
=========
Control {#sc:control}
=======
Evaluation {#sec:evaluation}
==========
Discussion and Conclusion {#sec:conclusion}
=========================
Acknowledgment {#acknowledgment .unnumbered}
==============
The authors would like to acknowledge Philipp Andermatt, Cliff Li. Alexis Müller, Kamil Ritz, and Kevin Schneider who were part of the Voliro focus project team and contributed in numerous ways to the development and deployment of the Voliro prototypes.
[^1]: Contact: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'A dissipative scheme is proposed to prepare tripartite $W$ state in a Rydberg-atom-cavity system. It is an organic combination of quantum Zeno dynamics, Rydberg antiblockade and atomic spontaneous emission to turn the tripartite $W$ state into the unique steady state of the whole system. The robustness against the loss of cavity and the feasibility of the scheme are demonstrated thoroughly by the current experimental parameters, which leads to a high fidelity above $98\%$.'
author:
- 'Dong-Xiao Li'
- 'Xiao-Qiang Shao[^1]'
- 'Jin-Hui Wu'
- 'X. X. Yi'
bibliography:
- 'Wr.bib'
title: 'Dissipation induced $W$ state in a Rydberg-atom-cavity system'
---
\[theorem\][Lemma]{} \[theorem\][Corollary]{} \[theorem\][Proposition]{} \[theorem\][Definition]{} \[theorem\][Example]{} \[theorem\][Conjecture]{}
With the rapid development of quantum information, different specific tasks appear and require various multipartite entanglements [@pra062315ref8; @pra062315ref14]. An crucial representative of multipartite entanglements is the $W$ state [@PhysRevA.62.062314], which exhibits the high robustness against the loss of particle: While all parts but two parts of the $N$-part $W$ state are collapsed by the measurement, the state of the remaining two-qubit system is still entangled. Therefore, the $W$ state is widely used in quantum information processing, such as quantum cloning machines [@chen2012ref20] and quantum memories [@pra042113ref22], and multifarious schemes are put forward to prepare the $W$ state [@PhysRevA.83.050303; @PhysRevA.87.013842; @PhysRevLett.117.140502]. Fujii *et al.* used linear optics and postselections to generate an $N$-qubit $W$ state among separated quantum nodes [@PhysRevA.83.050303] and [ Lin *et al.* prepared the $W$ state with three trapped atomic ions by laser fields [@PhysRevLett.117.140502].]{}
One of the primary obstacles of the generation of multipartite entanglements is the quantum noise from environment, which is inevitable and will result in the decoherence and dissipation [@pra042323ref4]. Nevertheless, the dissipative schemes of preparing entanglements improve the character of the quantum noise by considering it as an important resource to achieve the goals, and now are in widespread uses [@fiberref38; @chen2012; @PhysRevA.87.042323; @Shen:14; @prl040501; @Li:17], *e.g.* Kastoryano *et al.* exploited the decay of cavity to prepare the maximally entangled state of two atoms in an cavity [@fiberref38]. Chen *et al.* [@chen2012] and Sweke *et al.* [@PhysRevA.87.042323] extended the method to dissipatively prepare $W$ state within context of cavity quantum electrodynamics. However, they both required precisely tailored condition to achieve the proposal. In addition, Reiter *et al.* dissipatively produced many-body entanglements of atoms coupled to common oscillator modes [@prl040501], which required many classical and quantized fields.
The Rydberg blockade effect has recently become of interest in the literature [@prl013001ref11]. The phenomena of Rydberg blockade effect can be intuitively understood by a blockade sphere [@pra033422ref1]. Within the radius of blockade sphere, the dipole-dipole interaction will induce a large energy shift to significantly suppress two or more Rydberg atoms excited simultaneously. On the other hand, an opposite effect, the Rydberg antiblockade, has also been predicted by Ates *et al.* in a three-level two-photon Rydberg excitation scheme, which induces the simultaneous excitations of two Rydberg atoms and the inhibition of Rydberg blockade [@klmoeref30]. The antiblockade effect provides a new perspective for quantum entanglement and multiqubit logic gates [@klmoeref32; @klmoeref35; @pra062315]. Quite recently, Shao *et al.* designed a simplified proposal through Rydberg atoms to prepare a Greenberger-Horne-Zeilinger (GHZ) state by dissipation [@pra062315] with fewer classical and quantized fields than those in [@prl040501].
 The flow chart of the scheme, where $|W'\rangle=(|110\rangle+|101\rangle+|011\rangle)/\sqrt{3}, |D_1\rangle=(|00e\rangle-|e00\rangle)/\sqrt{2},
|D_2\rangle=(2|0e0\rangle-|e00\rangle-|00e\rangle)/\sqrt{6},
|D_3\rangle=(|10e\rangle-|1e0\rangle)/\sqrt{2},
|D_4\rangle=(|01e\rangle-|e10\rangle)/\sqrt{2},
|D_5\rangle=(|e01\rangle-|0e1\rangle)/\sqrt{2},$ and $|T_{1p}\rangle=(|1pp\rangle+|p1p\rangle+|pp1\rangle)/\sqrt{3}$. (b) Atomic level configuration.](flowgraph.eps)
In this work, we consider a dissipative scheme to realize a tripartite $W$ state, $|W\rangle=(|100\rangle+|010\rangle+|001\rangle)/\sqrt{3}$, with an optical cavity trapping three five-level Rydberg atoms which include two ground states $|0\rangle$ and $|1\rangle$, an excited state $|e\rangle$, and two Rydberg states $|r\rangle$ and $|p\rangle$. The flow chart of the present scheme is plotted in Fig. \[flowgraph\](a). It can be separated into two simultaneous processes: (i) The Zeno pumping aims to pump the states with one or two atoms in $|0\rangle$ into the excited states $|D_1\rangle,|D_2\rangle,|D_3\rangle,|D_4\rangle$ and $|D_5\rangle$, which further decay to $\{ |000\rangle,~|W'\rangle,~|W\rangle \}$ by the atomic spontaneous emission. (ii) The purpose of the Rydberg pumping is to drive the states $\{ |000\rangle,~|W'\rangle,~|111\rangle \}$ to the excited states $|T_{1p}\rangle,|rrr\rangle,|pp0\rangle,|p0p\rangle$ and $|0pp\rangle$, which can also spontaneously emit to the states with one or two atoms in $|0\rangle$. The two simultaneous processes create a cycle between all ground states except $|W\rangle$ and lead to the system stable at $|W\rangle$ finally. On the whole, the present scheme has fourfold features: (i) The spontaneous emission is a powerful resource to achieve target state and the decay of cavity is availably depressed by quantum Zeno dynamics in Zeno pumping. (ii) The realization of the scheme is independent of initial state. [ (iii) Compared with [@chen2012], [@prl040501] and [@pra062315], it is easier to operate in experiment. There needs no precisely tailored Rabi frequencies, coupling strength between cavity and atoms, or atom-dependent light shift of ground state in our proposal.]{} And the $W$ state can be accomplished with fewer classical and quantized fields. (iv) The fidelity of the $W$ state can be above $98\%$ with the current experimental parameters.
![\[effzeno\] (a) The effective transitions of Zeno pumping. (b) The effective transitions of Rydberg pumping.](effzeno.eps)
The corresponding atomic level is shown in Fig. \[flowgraph\](b) and it can be divided into two parts: (i) The ground states $|0\rangle$ and $|1\rangle$ are coupled resonantly to the excited state $|e\rangle$ by a quantized cavity mode with strength $g$ and a classical laser field with Rabi frequency $\Omega$, respectively. For simplicity, we consider the excited states decay to the ground states with the same branching ratio $\gamma_e/2$. (ii) The transitions $|0\rangle\leftrightarrow|r\rangle$ and $|1\rangle\leftrightarrow|p\rangle$ are dispersively driven by two independent classical fields with the same Rabi frequency $\Omega_r$ and different detuning $\Delta_1=-2\Delta,~\Delta_2=-\Delta$, respectively. The Rydberg state $|r(p)\rangle$ decays to the ground states with the same rate $\gamma_{r(p)}/2$ and in what follows, we consider $\gamma_r=\gamma_p=\gamma$. In the interaction picture, the corresponding Hamiltonian $H_I$ can be written as ($\hbar=1$) $
H_I=H_I^Z+H_I^R,$ with $H_I^Z=\sum_{i=1}^3\Omega|e\rangle_i\langle1|+g|e\rangle_i\langle0|a+{\rm H.c.},$ and $H_I^R=\sum_{i=1}^3\Omega_r(|r\rangle_i\langle0|e^{-2i\Delta t}+|p\rangle_i\langle1|e^{-i\Delta t}+{\rm H.c.})+\sum_{i<j}U_{rr}(|rr\rangle_{ij}\langle rr|+|pp\rangle_{ij}\langle pp|)+U_{rp}(|pr\rangle_{ij}\langle pr|+|rp\rangle_{ij}\langle rp|),$ where $a$ denotes the annihilation operator of the quantized cavity mode, and $H_I^Z$ and $H_I^R$ represent the Zeno pumping and the Rydberg pumping, respectively. The Rydberg-mediated interactions are described by $U_{pp}=U_{rr}$ when both atoms occupy the same Rydberg states and $U_{pr}=U_{rp}$ when the two atoms occupy the different Rydberg states, and we consider the interaction $U^{ij}$ of $i$-th and $j$-th atoms as $U_{rr}^{(12)}=U_{rr}^{(23)}=U_{rr}^{(31)}=U_{rr}$. Generally speaking, the interaction energy lies on angular degrees of freedom, which leads to the distinction of the coupling strengths when $|r\rangle,~|p\rangle$ represent different Zeeman sublevels, *i.e.* $U_{rr}\neq U_{rp}$ [@prl033607ref15]. When we choose the suitable principle quantum number [@prl033607ref15; @pra043802], the Rydberg-mediated interactions satisfy $U_{rr}\gg U_{rp}$ and the last term of $H_I^R$ can be neglected. Then the Hamiltonian reads as $
H_I=H_I^Z+H_I^R,
$ where $H_I^Z=\sum_{i=1}^3\Omega|e\rangle_i\langle1|+g|e\rangle_i\langle0|a+{\rm H.c.},H_I^R=\sum_{i=1}^3$ $\Omega_r(|r\rangle_i\langle0|+|p\rangle_i\langle1|+{\rm H.c.})-2\Delta|r\rangle_i\langle r|-\Delta|p\rangle_i\langle p|+\sum_{i<j}U_{rr}(|rr\rangle_{ij}\langle rr|+|pp\rangle_{ij}\langle pp|).$ The decay of $i$-th atom and cavity can be described by Lindblad operators as $L_i^{1(2)}=\sqrt{\gamma/2}|0(1) \rangle_i\langle r|,L_i^{3(4)}=\sqrt{\gamma/2}|0(1)\rangle_i\langle p|,$ $L_i^{5(6)}=$ $\sqrt{\gamma_e/2}|0(1)\rangle_i\langle e|,$ $L^{c}=\sqrt{\kappa}a.$ Combining the Hamiltonian of system and the Lindblad operators, the Markovian master equation of system can be obtained as $
\dot\rho=$ $-i[H_I,\rho]+\mathcal{L}^a\rho+\mathcal{L}^c\rho,
$ where the superoperators, $\mathcal{L}^a\rho=$ $\sum_{k=1}^6\sum_{i=1}^3L_i^k\rho L_i^{k\dag}-(L_i^{k\dag} L_i^k\rho+\rho L_i^{k\dag} L_i^k)/2$ and $\mathcal{L}^c\rho=$ $L^c\rho L^{c\dag}-(L^{c\dag} L^c\rho+\rho L^{c\dag} L^c)/2$, denote the decay of the atoms and cavity, respectively.
In order to interpret the physical principle of the present scheme, we analyze the effective Hamiltonian of the Zeno pumping and the Rydberg pumping in detail. The Hamiltonian of Zeno pumping, $H_I^Z$, can be reformulated as $H_I^Z=\Omega H^Z_1+gH^Z_2,$ where $H_1^Z=\sum_{i=1}^3|e\rangle_i\langle1|+{\rm H.c.}$ and $H_2^Z=\sum_{i=1}^3|e\rangle_i\langle0|a+{\rm H.c.}$. According to the rigorous extensions of the quantum Zeno dynamics [@myolref20; @myolref22], in the limit of $g\gg\Omega$, $H_I^Z$ can be further simplified as $H_I^Z=\sum_ngE_nP_n+\Omega P_nH_1^ZP_n$, where $P_n=|E_n\rangle\langle E_n|$ and $|E_n\rangle$ is the eigenstate of $H_2^Z$ corresponding to the eigenvalue $E_n$.
[ If the system is initialized in the ground state with the cavity in the vacuum state $|0\rangle_c$, the system will only evolve in the subspace of $E_0=0$ corresponding to the basis $\{ |001\rangle,|010\rangle,|100\rangle,|011\rangle,|101\rangle,|110\rangle,|D_l\rangle \}\otimes|0\rangle_c$, where $|D_l\rangle\otimes|0\rangle_c~(l=1,2,3,4,5)$ are the dark states of $H_2^Z$.]{} Then the Hamiltonian of Zeno pumping can be simplified as $
H_{\rm eff}^Z=\Omega P_0H_1^ZP_0=\left(H_{\rm eff1}^Z+H_{\rm eff2}^Z\right)\otimes|0\rangle_c\langle0|,
$ where $H_{\rm eff1}^Z$ $=\Omega|001\rangle( \langle D_1|/\sqrt{2}-\langle D_2|/\sqrt{6} )-\Omega|100\rangle( \langle D_1|/\sqrt{2}+$ $\langle D_2|/\sqrt{6} )+2\Omega|010\rangle\langle D_2|/\sqrt{6}+{\rm H.c.}$ and $H_{\rm eff2}^Z=\Omega|101\rangle( \langle D_3|+$ $\langle D_5| )/\sqrt{2}+\Omega|011\rangle( \langle D_4|-\langle D_5| )/\sqrt{2}-\Omega|110\rangle( \langle D_3|+\langle D_4|$ $ )/\sqrt{2}+{\rm H.c.}.$ [ The above results are similar to the effective Hamiltonian of simplified $Z$ pumping in [@pra062315]. However, our Zeno pumping aims to stabilize the system to the subspace in the basis of $\{ |000\rangle,|111\rangle,|W'\rangle,|W\rangle \}$, thus the atom-dependent light shift $\delta_i$ is unwanted.]{} Based on the $H_{\rm eff}^Z$, the status of cavity has been restrained in the vacuum state resulting in the significant inhibition of the decay of cavity and we omit the effective Lindblad operator of cavity. Then we expand the atomic Lindblad operators, $L_i^k$, by $\{ |001\rangle,|010\rangle,|100\rangle,|011\rangle,|101\rangle,|110\rangle,|D_l\rangle \}$, and obtain the effective Lindblad operators of atoms as $L_{\rm eff}^{1(2)}=\sqrt{\gamma_e/12}$$|100(001)\rangle\langle D_1|,$$L_{\rm eff}^{3}$$=$$\sqrt{\gamma_e/3}$$|010\rangle\langle D_1|,$$L_{\rm eff}^{4(5)}$$=$$\sqrt{\gamma_e/2}$ $|000\rangle\langle D_{1(2)}|,$$L_{\rm eff}^{6(7)}$$=$$\sqrt{\gamma_e/4}$$|100(001)\rangle\langle D_2|,$$L_{\rm eff}^{8(9)}$$=$$\sqrt{\gamma_e/4}$ $|110(101)\rangle\langle D_3|,$$L_{\rm eff}^{10(11)}$$=$$\sqrt{\gamma_e/2}$$|100(010)\rangle\langle D_{3(4)}|,$$L_{\rm eff}^{12(13)}$$=$ $\sqrt{\gamma_e/4}$$|110(011)\rangle\langle D_4|,$$L_{\rm eff}^{14(15)}$$=$$\sqrt{\gamma_e/4}$$|101(011)\rangle\langle D_5|$ and $L_{\rm eff}^{16}=\sqrt{\gamma_e/2}|001\rangle\langle D_5|.$ The effective Markovian master equation of the Zeno pumping can be written as $\dot\rho=-i[H_{\rm eff}^Z,\rho]+\mathcal{L}_{\rm eff}\rho,$ where $\mathcal{L}_{\rm eff}\rho=\sum_{k=1}^{16}L_{\rm eff}^k\rho L_{\rm eff}^{k\dag}-\frac{1}{2}(L_{\rm eff}^{k\dag}L_{\rm eff}^k\rho+\rho L_{\rm eff}^{k\dag}L_{\rm eff}^k).$
In Fig. \[effzeno\](a), we plot the effective transitions of Zeno pumping, where we have omitted the symbol of the cavity in vacuum state. As an example, we choose $|011\rangle$ as an initial state and investigate the corresponding evolution. Firstly, it will be pumped to the excited states $|D_4\rangle$ and $|D_5\rangle$ by the effective classical fields with Rabi frequencies $\pm\Omega/\sqrt{2}$, respectively. Then the excited state $|D_{4(5)}\rangle$ will decay to the ground states of one atom in $|0\rangle$ and two atoms in $|0\rangle$. On the one hand, the ground states of one atom in $|0\rangle$ will circulate the above processes. On the other hand, the ground states of two atoms in $|0\rangle$ will be driven to the excited states $|D_1\rangle$ and $|D_2\rangle$, which can revert to the ground states of two atoms in $|0\rangle$ or $|000\rangle$ by spontaneous emission. Finally, the system initialized in $|011\rangle$ will be stable at the steady subspace spanned by $|000\rangle,|W'\rangle$ and $|W\rangle$. As for the system initialized in $|111\rangle$, it will not evolve to any other state due to the limit of $g\gg\Omega$. In general, the system will eventually reach the mixed states of $|000\rangle,|111\rangle,|W'\rangle$ and $|W\rangle$ with an arbitrary initial state.
To realize the preparation of $|W\rangle$, we also need to utilize the Rydberg pumping to drive the states $|000\rangle,|111\rangle$ and $|W'\rangle$ into excited states and the target state $|W\rangle$ becomes the unique steady state of total system. We select the strength of Rydberg interaction $U_{rr}=2\Delta$ and $\Delta\gg\Omega_r$ to realize the Rydberg antiblockade. Neglecting the order of $\mathcal{O}(\Omega_r^2/\Delta^2)$, the total effective Hamiltonian of Rydberg pumping can be obtained as $
H_{\rm eff}^R=H^{R_0}_{\rm eff}+H^{R_I}_{\rm eff}
$ [@pra062315ref38], where $H^{R_0}_{\rm eff}=3\Omega_r^2(|111\rangle\langle111|+|T_{1p}\rangle\langle T_{1p}|)/\Delta+3\Omega_r^2(|000\rangle\langle000|$ $+|rrr\rangle\langle rrr|)/2\Delta+5\Omega_r^2(|110\rangle\langle110|+|101\rangle\langle101|+|011\rangle\langle011|+|pp0\rangle\langle pp0|+|p0p\rangle\langle p0p|+|0pp\rangle\langle 0pp|)/2\Delta+2\Omega_r^2(|100\rangle\langle100|+|010\rangle\langle010|+|001\rangle\langle001|)/\Delta$ stands for the Stark-shift term and $H^{R_I}_{\rm eff}=2\Omega_r^2(|110\rangle\langle pp0|+|101\rangle\langle p0p|+|011\rangle\langle0pp|)/\Delta
+2\sqrt{3}\Omega_r^2|111\rangle\langle T_{1p}|/\Delta+3\Omega_r^3|000\rangle\langle rrr|/2\Delta^2+{\rm H.c.}$ denotes the interaction term. We can find that all steady states of Zeno pumping but $|W\rangle$ are no longer stable due to the Rydberg pumping. These states are all pumped to the excited states and further decay to ground states $|0\rangle$ and $|1\rangle$ by the spontaneous emission of Rydberg states, which has been described by $L_i^{1(2)}$ and $L_i^{3(4)}$. The detailed processes of the effective transitions have been illustrated in Fig. \[effzeno\](b). There are four groups of ground states, $ \{ |000\rangle \},\{ |111\rangle \},\{ |011\rangle,|101\rangle,|110\rangle \} $ and $\{ |001\rangle,|010\rangle,|100\rangle \}$, which can be pumped to the three groups of excited states, $\{|rrr\rangle\},\{ |T_{1p}\rangle \}$ and $\{ |pp0\rangle,|p0p\rangle,|0pp\rangle \}$ through effective classical fields with Rabi frequencies $3\Omega_r^3/2\Delta^2,2\sqrt{3}\Omega_r^2/\Delta$ and $2\Omega_r^2/\Delta$, respectively. Moreover, the excited states will spontaneously emit to the ground states again. The total system of Rydberg pumping will repeat the processes of pumping and decaying until it is stabilized into the unique steady state $|W\rangle$ and our purpose achieves.
In Fig. \[omegadelta\](a), we plot the steady-state fidelity of target state $|W\rangle$ as functions of $\Delta$ and $\Omega$ with a perfect cavity, where the fidelity is defined as $F=\sqrt{\langle W|\rho_{ss}(t)|W\rangle}$ and $\rho_{ss}(t)$ is the steady-state solution by solving the full master equation $\dot\rho=0$. It forcefully proves the feasibility of the scheme that there are wide ranges of $\Delta$ and $\Omega$ to make the fidelity exceed $99\%$. Investigating the change of $\Omega/g$, we can find that, although the limit of Zeno pumping requires $g\gg\Omega$, it is not necessary that the less $\Omega/g$ the better the quality of target state. In the range of $g\gg\Omega$, when the other parameters are fixed, there is a optimal value of $\Omega/g$ to maximise the fidelity of tripartite $W$ state. The scheme also need another limiting condition $\Delta\gg\Omega_r$ to achieve the Rydberg antiblockade. We have set $g=\Omega_r$ in the Fig. \[omegadelta\](a). Hence the decreasing of $\Delta/g$ will destroy the limit of $\Delta\gg\Omega_r$ and lead to a decline in fidelity of tripartite $W$ state.
To discuss the robustness of the proposal against the loss of cavity and the influence of atomic spontaneous emission, a contour plot (dashed lines) of the steady-state fidelity of $|W\rangle$ state is shown with different $\kappa$ and $\gamma_e$ in Fig. \[omegadelta\](b). The atomic spontaneous emission is an important resource in our protocol. Consequently, the small $\gamma_e$ will reduce the fidelity of $|W\rangle$. On the other hand, since the quantum Zeno dynamics makes the cavity keep at the vacuum state, the fidelity can be still above $98\%$ even if $\kappa=0.1g$ and $0.058g<\gamma_e<0.12g$. It reflects the protocol is robust against the loss of cavity and also demonstrates the feasibility of the scheme.
In the following, we consider the dependence of the fidelity on $gt$ in Fig. \[omegadelta\](c). The system is initialized at the state $|000\rangle|0\rangle_c$. The solid line represents the evolution of the target-state fidelity governed by the full master equation, which can reach $99\%$ at $gt=5\times10^4$. The fidelity of target state governed by the effective master equation (empty circles) is in good agreement with the solid line, which means the validity of the effective system. Therefore, the behavior of the actual system can be forecasted by the effective system.
In the above investigation, we have considered the Rydberg-mediated interactions satisfy $U_{rr}\gg U_{rp}$ with suitable principle quantum number and ignore the terms of $U_{rp}$. Even for large $U_{rp}$, we find the terms of $U_{rp}$ have no effect on the mission of Rydberg pumping and the state $|W\rangle$ is still the unique steady state of total system as long as $U_{rp}\neq1.5\Delta$. While $U_{rp}=1.5\Delta$, the transitions $|100\rangle\leftrightarrow|prr\rangle,|010\rangle\leftrightarrow|rpr\rangle$ and $|001\rangle\leftrightarrow|rrp\rangle$ will occur and break the principle of the Rydberg pumping, which can be written as $5\Omega_r^3(|100\rangle\langle prr|+|010\rangle\langle rpr|+|001\rangle\langle rrp|)/2\Delta^2+{\rm H.c.}$ and cause the $|W\rangle$ is no longer the steady state of the whole system. Then we estimate the character of system for different $U_{rp}$ by steady-state purity (empty triangles) in the inset of Fig. \[omegadelta\](c). When the system is in a pure steady state, the purity will be qual to unit. On the contrary, the purity will be less than unit. In the inset, the purity is around $97.95\%$ with all $U_{rp}$ except $U_{rp}=1.5\Delta$, which means the status of system is nearly a pure state except for the situation of $U_{rp}=1.5\Delta$. In order to further certify the above analysis about $U_{rp}$, we plot the steady-state fidelity of state $|W\rangle$ as a function of $U_{rp}$ (empty circles) in the inset. Similarly, the fidelity is almost constant with $99.4\%$ as long as $U_{rp}\neq1.5\Delta$. Combining the two curves of the inset, we successfully prove the validity of the above analysis and the general applicability of the present scheme.
Finally, we investigate the experimental feasibility. In experiment, the Rabi laser frequency $\Omega_r$ can be adjusted continuously between $2\pi\times(0,100)$ MHz [@prl090402; @pra062315]. In [@brennecke2007], Brennecke *et al.* achieved the strong coupling of a Bose-Einstein condensate to the quantized filed of an ultrahigh-finesse optical cavity. The relevant cavity quantum electrodynamics (cavity QED) parameters were chosen as $(g,\kappa,\gamma_e)=2\pi\times(10.6,1.3,3.0)$ MHz. In [@klmoeref43], the decay rate of Rydberg state was $\gamma=2\pi\times0.03$ MHz. Thus, we calculate the steady-state fidelity via these parameters, which can reach $98.42\%$ with $\Omega_r=2g,\Omega=0.002g$ and $\Delta=100g$. When we select another group of cavity QED parameters, $(g,\kappa,\gamma_e)=2\pi\times(185,53,3)$ MHz, provided by Volz *et al.* in [@pra062315ref43], and choose the decay rate of $20$D Rydberg state as $\gamma=2\pi\times0.144$ MHz [@pra052504], the fidelity can be realized at $98.87\%$ with the other parameters, $\Omega_r=100$ MHz, $\Omega=0.002g $ and $\Delta=24g$. Furthermore, the fidelity can be enhanced to $99.09\%$ with the experimental parameters [@pra062315ref41] $(g,\kappa,\gamma_e,\gamma)=2\pi\times(14.4,0.66,3,0.03)~ {\rm MHz},\Omega_r=1.6g,\Omega=0.006g$ and $\Delta=80g$. In conclusion, the results plenarily exhibit the experimental feasibility of our scheme.
In summary, we successfully propose a dissipative scheme to generalize the tripartite $W$ state. The scheme can be equivalently separated into two simultaneous processes, which are Zeno pumping and Rydberg pumping, respectively. The Zeno pumping combines the quantum Zeno dynamics with atomic spontaneous emission to stabilize the system at mixed states of $|111\rangle,|000\rangle,|W'\rangle$ and $|W\rangle$. The Rydberg pumping utilizes the atomic spontaneous emission and antiblockade to break up the stability of the above states but $W$ state. [ Combining the two pumps, the tripartite $W$ state becomes the unique state of the whole system, which means the target state can be achieved from an arbitrary initial state. Ultimately, the fidelity of target state can be above $98\%$ with the current experimental parameters. In experimental, the coupling of five trapped ions with cavity has been realized [@PhysRevLett.116.223001] and we believe our scheme supplies a new prospect to prepare multipartite entanglements.]{}
X. Q. Shao would like to express his thanks to Dr F. Reiter for his valuable discussion. This work is supported by National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC) under Grants No. 11775048, No. 11674049, No. 11774047.
[^1]: Corresponding author: [email protected]
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
author:
- 'John Augustine[^1]'
- 'William K. Moses Jr.[^2]'
bibliography:
- 'references.bib'
title: 'Dispersion of Mobile Robots: A Study of Memory-Time Trade-offs [^3]'
---
**Keywords:** Dispersion, Load balancing, Mobile robots, Collective robot exploration, Scattering, Uniform deployment, Graph algorithms, Deterministic algorithms, Distributed algorithms
Introduction {#sec:intro}
============
Technical Preliminaries {#sec:prelims}
=======================
Lower Bounds on Time & Memory {#sec:lower-bounds}
=============================
Dispersion with $O(\log n)$ Bits of Memory {#sec:logn-memory}
==========================================
Dispersion with $O(n \log n)$ Bits of Memory {#sec:n-logn-memory}
============================================
Conclusions and Future Work {#sec:conc}
===========================
Acknowledgements {#acknowledgements .unnumbered}
================
We would like to thank Vishvajeet Nagargoje for useful discussions at various stages of this work. We would like to thank Narayanaswamy N. S. for his useful insight which lead to the improvement in the memory complexity for the rooted tree algorithm.
[^1]: Department of Computer Science & Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Madras, Chennai, India. [email protected]. Research supported in part by an Extra-Mural Research Grant (file number EMR/2016/003016) funded by the Science and Engineering Research Board, Department of Science and Technology, Government of India.
[^2]: Department of Computer Science and Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Madras, Chennai, India. [email protected]. Research supported in part by an Extra-Mural Research Grant (file number EMR/2016/003016) funded by the Science and Engineering Research Board, Department of Science and Technology, Government of India.
[^3]: A preliminary version of this paper was accepted to the International Conference on Distributed Computing and Networking 2018 [@AM18].
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'The existence of a finite electric dipole moment (EDM) $d_a$ of the closed-shell atom Yb implies parity and time reversal violations involving the nuclear sector. An important effect which can contribute to the Yb EDM is the tensor-pseudotensor electron-nucleus interaction characterized by the coupling constant $C_T$. Within the Standard Model (SM) of particle physics $C_T=0$, as this form of interaction is not allowed. If a finite $d_a$ of Yb is observed in experiments, then an estimate of $C_T$ can be obtained by combining with the theoretical calculations. A non-zero $C_T$ implies physics beyond the standard model. In this paper we present the result of our [*ab initio*]{} calculation of the EDM Yb using different many-body methods.'
address:
- |
Physical Research Laboratory,\
Navarangpura, Ahmedabad–380 009.
- |
Non–Accelerator Particle Physics Group,\
Indian Institute of Astrophysics,\
Sarjapur Road, Koramangala,\
Bangalore-34
- |
Department of Physical Chemistry,\
Indian Association for Cultivation of Science ,\
Calcutta-32
author:
- Angom Dilip Singh
- Bhanu Pratap Das
- Debashis Mukherjee
title: Coupled Electron Pair Approximation Calculation of the Electric Dipole Moment of Atomic Yb
---
ł
Introduction
============
Discrete symmetry violations in atoms are important phenomena to probe for physics beyond the Standard Model(SM) of the particle physics. The electric dipole moment(EDM) of an atom, which is a signature of the simultaneous parity and time-reversal (P-T) symmetry violations is one such. There are several possible sources of P-T violation effects within an atom, the tensor pseudo-tensor electron nucleus interaction is an example which is semi-leptonic in nature. The atomic Yb, which is a closed-shell atom having a $Z=70$ is a very good candidate for atomic EDM experiments to probe for the nuclear sector effects. An additional advantage of using a rare Earth atom like Yb is the closely spaced energy levels. The experimental results when compared with the theoretical results can yield signatures of physics beyond the SM.
Among the closed-shell atoms, the atom EDM of Xe[@vold] and Hg[@romalis1] have been measured. Though the Hg experiment has set the record of being the most sensitive spectroscopy ever done, the result obtained is null and sets an upper bound to atomic Hg EDM as $ 2.1\times 10^{-28}ecm$. Still, it has set bounds on the parameters in particle physics models[@romalis1]. Improving the accuracy further is an important challenge in atomic EDM experiments. Atomic Yb offer a possibility of achieving this by using the techniques of laser cooling and trapping. It is also desirable that the EDM measurements be done in other closed-shell atoms to verify the physical effects observed.
Atomic Yb also has the advantage of being relatively simple in level structure among the rare Earth elements. It has been studied theoretically using a variety of atomic many-body methods and there are ongoing experimental studies. The excitation energies has been studied using relativistic coupled-cluster method[@kaldor]; the hyperfine structure constants and electric-dipole transition properties have been studied using multireference relativistic many-body perturbation theory[@porsev1; @porsev2]; and the oscillator strength of some of the important transitions were investigated using multi-configuration relativistic Hartree-Fock[@migdalek]. The lifetime of some of the crucial levels have been measured experimentally[@budker] and atomic Yb has been laser cooled and trapped[@watanabe; @honda]. It is the candidate for the atomic EDM experiments using the methods of laser cooling and trapping of atoms which are in progress[@takahashi; @romalis2].
The P-T violating effects which can be probed using atomic Yb are the tensor pseudotensor (T-PT) electron-nucleus interaction[@barr] and the Schiff moment[@flambaum]. An observation of a finite EDM of atomic Yb could mean nonzero $C_T$, which is a signature of physics beyond the SM as $C_T$ is zero within SM. Hence the theories which allow T-PT electron-nucleus interactions would play a role in understanding nature. The parameter $C_T$ is extracted from the experimental result of atomic EDM by combining with the theoretical calculations. Accurate atomic theory calculations are needed to obtain precise $C_T$.The atomic EDM can also put bounds on the parameters of alternative models in particle physics. The Schiff moment which arises due to either nucleon EDM or P-T violating interactions between the nucleons can also contribute to the Yb EDM and can be used to extract the nuclear P-T violation parameters. We have calculated the contribution to atomic Yb EDM from both these effects but in this paper we will present the result of our calculations for T-PT contribution alone, in a later paper we will present the result of our Schiff moment Computation.
The calculation of Yb EDM within a limited set of configuration state functions (CSFs) using diagonalization and Bloch equation based many-body perturbation theory ( MBPT) methods was reported in an earlier paper[@angom]. For convenient of reference this paper is called as paper-I hereafter. As a followup, in this paper we present results of calculations using much larger CSF space. In addition, we discuss the drawbacks common to the diagonalization and Bloch equation based perturbation methods, improvements are discussed and results of using these methods are presented. In this paper we present the method of the calculation.
Bloch Equation Based Many-Body Perturbation Theory
==================================================
This section is a brief overview of the interaction used in the calculation and Bloch equation based MBPT. A detailed description of which are given in the paper-I. The effective T-PT electron-nucleus interaction Hamiltonian obtained by treating the nucleus nonrelativistically is $$H_{_{\rm PTV}}= i 2\sqrt{2}\bigg ( C_TG_F\bigg )
\bigg ( \vec{I}\!\cdot\! \beta\vec{\alpha}\bigg ) \rho_N(r),$$ where $C_T$ is the T-PT electron-nucleus coupling constant, $G_F$ is the Fermi coupling constant, $\vec{I}$ is the nuclear spin, $\beta$ and $\alpha$ are the Dirac matrices and $\rho_N(r)$ is the nuclear density. This interaction Hamiltonian is effective only within the nuclear region, where $\rho_N(r)$ is non-zero. And the dependence on $\vec{I}$ implies that it is observable only in odd isotopes of Yb which has nonzero $\vec{I}$. We use Fermi nuclear density model for our calculations.
The Bloch equation of an atom with unperturbed Hamiltonian $H_0$ and the residual coulomb interaction $V_{\rm es}$ as the perturbation is $$\left [ \Omega_{\rm es}, H_0\right ] = V_{\rm es}\Omega_{\rm es}
-\chi_{\rm es}PV_{\rm es}\Omega_{\rm es}.
$$$$ Where $\Omega_{\rm es}$ is the wave-operator, $\chi_{\rm es}= \Omega_{\rm es}
-1 $ is the correlation operator, $P$ and $Q$ are the projection operators of the model and complementary space. The first and second terms on the right hand side are the principal and renormalization terms respectively. Using Epstein-Nesbet(E-N) partitioning $H_0$ and $V_{\rm es}$ can be defined in terms of a set of CSFs as $$\begin{aligned}
H_0 &= &\sum_i {{\Big \langle}}\Phi_i{\Big |}H_{\rm atom}{\Big |}\Phi_i{{\Big \rangle}}{\Big |}\Phi_i{{\Big \rangle}}{{\Big \langle}}\Phi_i{\Big |}+\sum_i {{\Big \langle}}\overline{\Phi}_i{\Big |}H_{\rm atom}{\Big |}\overline{\Phi}_i{{\Big \rangle}}{\Big |}\overline{\Phi}_i{{\Big \rangle}}{{\Big \langle}}\overline{\Phi}_i{\Big |}, \nonumber \\
V_{\rm es} &= &\sum_{ij} {{\Big \langle}}\Phi_i{\Big |}H_{\rm atom}{\Big |}\Phi_j{{\Big \rangle}}{\Big |}\Phi_i{{\Big \rangle}}{{\Big \langle}}\Phi_j{\Big |}+\sum_{ij} {{\Big \langle}}\overline{\Phi}_i{\Big |}H_{\rm atom}{\Big |}\overline{\Phi}_j{{\Big \rangle}}{\Big |}\overline{\Phi}_i{{\Big \rangle}}{{\Big \langle}}\overline{\Phi}_j{\Big |},
\nonumber \end{aligned}$$ where $H_{\rm atom}$ is the Dirac-Coulomb atomic Hamiltonian, and $\{|\Phi_i\rangle\}$ and $\{|\overline{\Phi}_i\rangle\}$ are the even and odd parity CSF spaces respectively. The Dirac-Coulomb Hamiltonian of an atom with $N$ electrons in atomic units ( $e=1$, $\hbar=1$, and $m_e=1$ ) is $$H_{\rm atom} = \sum_{i=1}^N \bigg ( c\vec{\alpha}_i\cdot\vec{p}_i +
(\beta_i-1)c^2 - V_{\rm nuc}(r_i)\bigg ) + \frac{1}{2}
\sum_{i,j}^{N,N}\frac{1}{r_{ij}},$$ where $\vec{\alpha}_i$ is the Dirac matrix, $\vec{p}_i$ is the momentum of the electron and $V_{\rm nuc}$ is the nuclear potential. Introduce the P-T violating interaction Hamiltonian $H_{_{\rm PTV}}$ as perturbation and define the total perturbation Hamiltonian $V$ as $$V = V_{\rm es} + H_{_{\rm PTV}},$$ The interaction Hamiltonian $H_{_{\rm PTV}}$ can also be expressed in terms of CSFs as in $H_0$ and $V_{\rm es}$. Treating $V$ as the perturbation and defining $\Omega({\rm edm})$ as the total wave operator $$\Omega({\rm edm}) = \Omega_{\rm es} + \Omega_{\rm es,edm},$$ where $\Omega_{\rm es}$ remains the same and $\Omega_{\rm es,edm}$ is the wave-operator which has one order of $H_{_{\rm PTV}}$ and all possible orders of $V_{\rm es}$ before and after $H_{_{\rm PTV}}$. The $H_{_{\rm PTV}}$ is treated to first order since it scales as $G_F$, which is very small. The expression of the atomic EDM $d_a$ is $$d_a = {{\Big \langle}}\Phi_0{\Big |}\Omega^{\dagger}_{\rm es}\vec{D}\Omega_{\rm es,edm}{\Big |}\Phi_0
{{\Big \rangle}}+ {{\Big \langle}}\Phi_0{\Big |}\Omega^{\dagger}_{\rm es,edm}\vec{D}
\Omega_{\rm es}{\Big |}\Phi_0 {{\Big \rangle}}= {{\Big \langle}}\Phi_0{\Big |}\vec{D}_{\rm eff}{\Big |}\Phi_0{{\Big \rangle}},$$ where $\vec{D}_{\rm eff} = \Omega^{\dagger}_{\rm es}\vec{D}\Omega_{\rm es,edm}
+ \Omega^{\dagger}_{\rm es,edm}\vec{D} \Omega_{\rm es}$ is the effective atomic EDM operator. It is the dipole operator dressed with the all order residual coulomb interaction and one order of $H_{_{\rm PTV}}$ arranged in all possible sequence. The Bloch equation based MBPT has been used for the calculation with a large CSFs space as it is more efficient in terms of execution time unlike the direct matrix diagonalization approaches.
Size Consistent Theory in Closed-Shell Systems
==============================================
An atomic many-body theory is size consistent if the properties calculated using it scales linearly as the number of the electrons. The diagonalization and the Bloch equation based methods are size consistent within a complete CSF space. But it is size inconsistent if the configuration space considered is incomplete. A consequence of incomplete cancellation of the unlinked terms, which scales nonlinearly to the number of electrons. The cancellation is complete when the CSF space is complete. To study atomic EDM which has important implications and small in magnitude it is preferable to use atomic-many body theory which is size-consistent even with an incomplete CSF space. It is also difficult to satisfy the condition of completeness for heavy atoms, which are important candidates for the atomic EDM experiments as the number of possible CSFs runs into millions for a moderate size orbital space.
Size Consistency with Linked Diagram Theorem
--------------------------------------------
The wave-operator calculated using the Bloch equation within an incomplete CSF space is size-consistent if only the linked terms are retained[@goldstone]. The incomplete cancellation of the unlinked terms is then avoided $$\bigg [ \Omega_{\rm es}, H_0\bigg ]P = Q\bigg ({\mbox{$V_{\rm es}$}}\Omega_{\rm es}P -
\chi_{\rm es}P{\mbox{$V_{\rm es}$}}\Omega_{\rm es}P\bigg )_{\rm linked}
= Q\bigg ({\mbox{$V_{\rm es}$}}\Omega_{\rm es}P - \chi_{\rm es}W \bigg )_{ \rm linked},
\label{eqn2.1}$$ where $W = P{\mbox{$V_{\rm es}$}}\Omega_{\rm es}P$. Redefine the wave-operator in terms of orders of excitation and consider only the single and double excitations. The wave-operator and correlation-operator are $$\Omega_{\rm es} = I + \Omega_{\rm es}(1) + \Omega_{\rm es}(2)
= \sum_{m=0}^{2}\Omega_{\rm es}(m) \,\,\,\, \mbox{\rm and } \,\,\,\,
\chi_{\rm es} = \sum_{m=1}^{2} \Omega_{\rm es}(m) ,$$ where $m$ is the order of excitation. The closed-shell single and double excitation wave-operator diagrams are shown in Fig\[fig1\]. Similarly, the ${\mbox{$V_{\rm es}$}}$ diagrams are shown in Fig\[fig2\]. Unlike the single particle approach, the diagrams are used as representation of the physical effects and cannot be evaluated directly using the usual Goldstone rules as E-N partitioning is used. The $W$ is the energy and hence a number for closed-shell sytems. From the definitions $$\bigg [ \Omega_{\rm es}(m), H_0\bigg ] = Q\bigg ({\mbox{$V_{\rm es}$}}+ {\mbox{$V_{\rm es}$}}\Omega_{\rm es}
(1) + {\mbox{$V_{\rm es}$}}\Omega_{\rm es}(2) - \Omega_{\rm es}(m)W\bigg )_{ m,{\rm linked}}.$$ Let $|\Phi_0\rangle $ be the reference configuration and $\{|\Phi_{\alpha}\rangle \}$ be the configuration space spanned by singly and doubly excited configurations. The wave-operators can then be expressed as $$\Omega_{\rm es}(1) = \sum_{ar} {\Big |}\Phi_a^r {{\Big \rangle}}{{\Big \langle}}\Phi_0 {\Big |}x_a^r
\,\,\,\, \mbox{\rm and } \,\,\,\,
\Omega_{\rm es}(2) = \sum_{abrs} {\Big |}\Phi_{ab}^{rs} {{\Big \rangle}}{{\Big \langle}}\Phi_0 {\Big |}x_{ab}^{rs}.$$ Where $x_a^r$ and $x_{ab}^{rs}$ are the excitation amplitudes. For closed-shell systems with a single reference, $W$ is just a number or closed diagrams. The term $\Omega_{\rm es}W$ is therefore unlinked and does not contribute to the linked Bloch equation. The one-body wave-operator equation is $$\bigg [ \Omega_{\rm es}(1), H_0 \bigg ]P\!\! =\!\! \sum_{ar}\Bigg [
{{\Big \langle}}\Phi_{a}^{r}{\Big |}{\mbox{$V_{\rm es}$}}{\Big |}\Phi_0{{\Big \rangle}}+ \!\sum_{a'r'} {{\Big \langle}}\Phi_{a}^{r}{\Big |}{\mbox{$V_{\rm es}$}}{\Big |}\Phi_{a'}^{r'}{{\Big \rangle}}x_{a'}^{r'}+\!\!\sum_{a'b'r's'}\!\!{{\Big \langle}}\Phi_{a}^{r}{\Big |}{\mbox{$V_{\rm es}$}}{\Big |}\Phi_{a'b'}^{r's'}{{\Big \rangle}}x_{a'b'}^{r's'} \Bigg ]_{\rm linked}
\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\! {\Big |}\Phi_{a}^{r}{{\Big \rangle}}{{\Big \langle}}\Phi_0 {\Big |}\label{eqn2.2}$$ Similarly, the two-body wave-operator the equation is $$\bigg [ \Omega_{\rm es}(2), H_0 \bigg ]P\!\!=\!\! \sum_{abrs}\Bigg [
{{\Big \langle}}\Phi_{ab}^{rs}{\Big |}{\mbox{$V_{\rm es}$}}{\Big |}\Phi_0{{\Big \rangle}}+ \!\sum_{a'r'} {{\Big \langle}}\Phi_{ab}^{rs}{\Big |}{\mbox{$V_{\rm es}$}}{\Big |}\Phi_{a'}^{r'}{{\Big \rangle}}x_{a'}^{r'} +\!\! \sum_{a'b'r's'} \!\!{{\Big \langle}}\Phi_{ab}^{rs}{\Big |}{\mbox{$V_{\rm es}$}}{\Big |}\Phi_{a'b'}^{r's'} {{\Big \rangle}}x_{a'b'}^{r's'}\Bigg ]_{\rm
linked}\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!{\Big |}\Phi_{ab}^{rs}{{\Big \rangle}}{{\Big \langle}}\Phi_0 {\Big |}\label{eqn2.3}$$ Introduce $H_{_{\rm PTV}}$ as perturbation and redefine the perturbation Hamiltonian as $V = {\mbox{$V_{\rm es}$}}+ {\mbox{$H_{_{\rm PTV}}$}}$. The corresponding wave-operators are $$\Omega(1) = \Omega_{\rm es}(1) + \Omega_{\rm es,edm}(1)
\,\,\,\, \mbox{\rm and } \,\,\,\,
\Omega(2) = \Omega_{\rm es}(2) + \Omega_{\rm es,edm}(2) .$$ Wave-operators $\Omega_{\rm es}(1) $ and $\Omega_{\rm es}(2)$ are same as before but $\Omega_{\rm es,edm}(1)$ and $\Omega_{\rm es,edm}(2)$ connect $\{|\Phi_i\rangle \}$ to $\{|\overline{\Phi}_i\rangle \}$, where $\{|\overline{\Phi}_i\rangle \}$ is the configuration space opposite in parity to $|\Phi_0\rangle $. Within the total configuration space $\Omega_{\rm es,edm}(1)$ and $\Omega_{\rm es,edm}(2)$ can be represented as $$\Omega_{\rm es,edm}(1) = \sum_{ar}{\Big |}\overline{\Phi}_a^r{{\Big \rangle}}{{\Big \langle}}\Phi_0{\Big |}\overline{x}_a^r \,\,\,\, \mbox{\rm and} \,\,\,\,
\Omega_{\rm es,edm}(2) = \sum_{abrs}{\Big |}\overline{\Phi}_{ab}^{rs}{{\Big \rangle}}{{\Big \langle}}\Phi_0{\Big |}\overline{x}_{ab}^{rs}$$ The equations of $\Omega_{\rm es,edm}(1)$ is $$\begin{aligned}
\bigg [ \Omega_{\rm es,edm}(1),H_0 \bigg ]P &= &\!\!\!\sum_{ar}\Bigg [ {{\Big \langle}}\overline{\Phi}_a^r{\Big |}{\mbox{$H_{_{\rm PTV}}$}}{\Big |}\Phi_0{{\Big \rangle}}+ \sum_{a'r'}{{\Big \langle}}\overline{\Phi}_a^r{\Big |}{\mbox{$H_{_{\rm PTV}}$}}{\Big |}\Phi_{a'}^{r'}{{\Big \rangle}}x_{a'}^{r'} + \!\!\sum_{a'b'r's'}\!{{\Big \langle}}\overline{\Phi}_a^r{\Big |}{\mbox{$H_{_{\rm PTV}}$}}{\Big |}\Phi_{a'b'}^{r's'}{{\Big \rangle}}x_{a'b'}^{r's'}
\nonumber \\
&&\!\!\!+\sum_{ct}{{\Big \langle}}\overline{\Phi}_a^r{\Big |}{\mbox{$V_{\rm es}$}}{\Big |}\overline{\Phi}_c^t {{\Big \rangle}}\overline{x}_c^t +
\sum_{cdtu}{{\Big \langle}}\overline{\Phi}_{a}^{r}{\Big |}{\mbox{$V_{\rm es}$}}{\Big |}\overline{\Phi}_{cd}^{tu}{{\Big \rangle}}\overline{x}_{cd}^{tu}\Bigg ]_{\rm linked}
\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!{\Big |}\overline{\Phi}_a^r{{\Big \rangle}}{{\Big \langle}}\Phi_0 {\Big |}\label{eqn2.4}\end{aligned}$$ The wave-operator defined by equation (\[eqn2.4\]) has only one order of as terms of the form $\langle \Phi_i|{\mbox{$H_{_{\rm PTV}}$}}|\overline{\Phi}_j\rangle \overline{x}$ are excluded. The equation of $\Omega_{_{\rm PTV}}(2)$ is $$\begin{aligned}
\bigg [ \Omega_{_{\rm PTV}}(2),H_0 \bigg ]P &= &\sum_{abrs}\Bigg [
\sum_{a'r'}{{\Big \langle}}\overline{\Phi}_{ab}^{rs}{\Big |}{\mbox{$H_{_{\rm PTV}}$}}{\Big |}\Phi_{a'}^{r'}{{\Big \rangle}}x_{a'}^{r'}
+ \sum_{a'b'r's'}{{\Big \langle}}\overline{\Phi}_{ab}^{rs}{\Big |}{\mbox{$H_{_{\rm PTV}}$}}{\Big |}\Phi_{a'b'}^{r's'}
{{\Big \rangle}}x_{a'b'}^{r's'} +\sum_{ct}{{\Big \langle}}\overline{\Phi}_{ab}^{rs}{\Big |}{\mbox{$V_{\rm es}$}}{\Big |}\overline{\Phi}_c^t {{\Big \rangle}}\overline{x}_c^t \nonumber \\
&&+ \sum_{cdtu}{{\Big \langle}}\overline{\Phi}_{ab}^{rs}{\Big |}{\mbox{$V_{\rm es}$}}{\Big |}\overline{\Phi}_{cd}^{tu}
{{\Big \rangle}}\overline{x}_{cd}^{tu}\Bigg ]_{\rm linked}
\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!{\Big |}\overline{\Phi}_{ab}^{rs}{{\Big \rangle}}{{\Big \langle}}\Phi_0 {\Big |}\label{eqn2.5}\end{aligned}$$ The term $\langle \overline{\Phi}_{ab}^{rs}|{\mbox{$H_{_{\rm PTV}}$}}|\Phi_0\rangle $ does not contribute as the one-body interaction Hamiltonian cannot create double excitations. The equations (\[eqn2.2\])–(\[eqn2.5\]) are the required wave-operator equations.
Size Consistency with Connected Diagrams
----------------------------------------
Consider the term ${{\Big \langle}}\Phi_{ab}^{rs}{\Big |}{\mbox{$V_{\rm es}$}}{\Big |}\Phi_{a'}^{r'}{{\Big \rangle}}x_{a'}^{r'}$ in (\[eqn2.3\]) the diagrams of which are given in Fig.\[fig3\]. Among the diagrams (a) is linked but disconnected and remaining are connected. The disconnected diagrams in the wave-operator can introduce unlinked terms in the next iteration and hence a selection of only linked terms is required, this is difficult in terms of CSFs as all the contributions are combined. The other method of separating the wave-operator is in terms of connected cluster operators. It is easier to select connected terms, since it can be done without separating cluster operator into subcomponents. Consider the term $\langle\Phi_{ab}^{rs}|{\mbox{$V_{\rm es}$}}|\Phi_{a'}^{r'}\rangle x_{a'}^{r'}$ again, the disconnected contributions has $a'$ and $r'$ in $|\Phi_{ab}^{rs}\rangle$ and excitation is through the one-body part in ${\mbox{$V_{\rm es}$}}$, avoiding these terms make the contributions from $\langle\Phi_{ab}^{rs}|{\mbox{$V_{\rm es}$}}|\Phi_{a'}^{r'}\rangle x_{a'}^{r'}$ connected. The third term in (\[eqn2.5\]) still has disconnected terms but using the the same method these can be removed. After these modifications all the terms of the cluster equations are connected. To distinguish from the linked diagram excitation operators define the cluster-operator as $T_n$, then $$T_n = \bigg ( \Omega(n) \bigg ) _{\rm conn} \,\,\,\, {\rm and }\,\,\,\,
T = \sum_{n=1}^{N} T_n$$ Taking only the linear terms of one and two-particle cluster-operators, the wave-operator is $$\Omega_{\rm es}=1 + T_{\rm es}(1) + T_{\rm es}(2)\,\,\,\, {\rm and }\,\,\,\,
W = {\mbox{$V_{\rm es}$}}T .$$ The wave-operator $\Omega_{\rm es}$ is approximated by the linear cluster terms for the following reasons:
1. The correlation introduced by $T_1^2$ is very small compared to the contribution from $T_2$, which represents a large part of the electron-electron correlation effect.
2. Among the four-body cluster operators $T_2^2$ is the major contributor but in the present formalism this term can not be included as the CSF coupling is not in particle-hole form.
3. Though $T_1$ does not contribute significantly to the electron-electron correlation it is important since and the dipole operators are single-electron operators.
The equation of the cluster-operator treating as the perturbation is $$\bigg [ T_{\rm es}, H_0\bigg ] P = \bigg( Q{\mbox{$V_{\rm es}$}}\Omega_{\rm es}P -
\chi_{\rm es}WP \bigg ) _{\rm conn}$$ In closed-shell systems $\chi_{\rm es}W$ is always disconnected and do not contribute to the cluster equation $$\bigg [ T_{\rm es}, H_0\bigg ] P = \bigg( Q{\mbox{$V_{\rm es}$}}\Omega_{\rm es}P
\bigg ) _{\rm conn}.$$ These are the CEPA-0 equations and do not include the EPV diagrams. The linked EPV diagrams should be avoided but unlinked EPV terms should be retained. After suitable transformations the unlinked EPV terms can be converted into connected terms[@frantz], thus the cluster-operator equation is $$\bigg [ T_{\rm es}, H_0\bigg ] P = \bigg( Q{\mbox{$V_{\rm es}$}}\Omega_{\rm es} P
\bigg )^{\rm EPV} _{\rm linked}+ \bigg ( Q{\mbox{$V_{\rm es}$}}\Omega_{\rm es}P
\bigg)^{\rm EPO}_{\rm conn}.$$ Where the first term is EPV and second term is non-EPV. By rearranging $$\bigg ( Q{\mbox{$V_{\rm es}$}}\Omega_{\rm es}P\bigg )^{\rm EPV}_{\rm linked} =
- \bigg ( Q\chi_{\rm es}WP \bigg )^{\rm EPV} .$$ Then, the cluster-operator equations are $$\bigg [ T_{\rm es}, H_0\bigg ] P=\bigg ( Q{\mbox{$V_{\rm es}$}}\Omega_{\rm es}P
\bigg )^{\rm EPO}_{\rm conn} - \bigg ( Q\chi_{\rm es}WP \bigg )^{\rm EPV}$$ The one-particle cluster operator equation is $$\bigg [ T_{\rm es}(1), H_0 \bigg ]P = \!\!\sum_{ar}\Bigg [
{{\Big \langle}}\Phi_{a}^{r}{\Big |}{\mbox{$V_{\rm es}$}}{\Big |}\Phi_0{{\Big \rangle}}+ \!\!\sum_{a'r'} {{\Big \langle}}\!\Phi_{a}^{r}{\Big |}{\mbox{$V_{\rm es}$}}{\Big |}\Phi_{a'}^{r'}{{\Big \rangle}}{\cal T}_{a'}^{r'} + \!\!\!\sum_{a'b'r's'} \!\!\!{{\Big \langle}}\Phi_{a}^{r}{\Big |}{\mbox{$V_{\rm es}$}}{\Big |}\Phi_{a'b'}^{r's'} {{\Big \rangle}}{\cal T}_{a'b'}^{r's'}
-\!\bigg ({\cal T}^r_aW\bigg )^{\rm EPV}\Bigg ] {\Big |}\Phi_{a}^{r}{{\Big \rangle}}{{\Big \langle}}\Phi_0 {\Big |}.
\label{eqn2.6}$$ The cluster amplitudes are denoted by ${\cal T}$ to distinguish from the one-particle cluster amplitudes represented by $t$. Here the calculation is using CSFs and ${\cal T}_a^r $ is the amplitude of the cluster operator which excites the reference CSF $|\Phi_0\r$ to the CSF $|\Phi_a^r\r$. Similarly, the two-particle cluster amplitudes can be defined. $$\bigg [ T_{\rm es}(2), H_0 \bigg ]P = \!\!\sum_{abrs}\Bigg [ {{\Big \langle}}\Phi_{ab}^{rs}
{\Big |}{\mbox{$V_{\rm es}$}}{\Big |}\Phi_0{{\Big \rangle}}+ \!\!\sum_{a'r'} \!{{\Big \langle}}\Phi_{ab}^{rs}{\Big |}{\mbox{$V_{\rm es}$}}{\Big |}\Phi_{a'}^{r'}
{{\Big \rangle}}{\cal T}_{a'}^{r'} + \!\!\!\sum_{a'b'r's'} \!\!\!{{\Big \langle}}\Phi_{ab}^{rs}{\Big |}{\mbox{$V_{\rm es}$}}{\Big |}\Phi_{a'b'}^{r's'} {{\Big \rangle}}{\cal T}_{a'b'}^{r's'} -\!\bigg ( {\cal T}^{rs}_{ab} W
\bigg )^{\rm EPV} \Bigg ] {\Big |}\Phi_{ab}^{rs}{{\Big \rangle}}{{\Big \langle}}\Phi_0 {\Big |}.
\label{eqn2.7}$$ Similarly, the PT-violating cluster-operators $T_{_{\rm PTV}}$ are evaluated using the equations $$\begin{aligned}
\bigg [ T_{\rm es,edm}(1),H_0 \bigg ]P\!\!\! &= &\!\!\!\sum_{ar}\Bigg [ {{\Big \langle}}\overline{\Phi}_a^r{\Big |}{\mbox{$H_{_{\rm PTV}}$}}{\Big |}\Phi_0{{\Big \rangle}}+ \sum_{a'r'}{{\Big \langle}}\overline{\Phi}_a^r{\Big |}{\mbox{$H_{_{\rm PTV}}$}}{\Big |}\Phi_{a'}^{r'}{{\Big \rangle}}{\cal T}_{a'}^{r'} + \!\!\sum_{a'b'r's'}\!\!{{\Big \langle}}\overline{\Phi}_a^r{\Big |}{\mbox{$H_{_{\rm PTV}}$}}{\Big |}\Phi_{a'b'}^{r's'}{{\Big \rangle}}{\cal T}_{a'b'}^{r's'}
\nonumber \\
&&\!\!\!\!+\sum_{ct}\!{{\Big \langle}}\overline{\Phi}_a^r{\Big |}{\mbox{$V_{\rm es}$}}{\Big |}\overline{\Phi}_c^t {{\Big \rangle}}\overline{\cal T}_c^t + \!\!\sum_{cdtu}{{\Big \langle}}\overline{\Phi}_{a}^{r}{\Big |}{\mbox{$V_{\rm es}$}}{\Big |}\overline{\Phi}_{cd}^{tu}{{\Big \rangle}}\overline{\cal T}_{cd}^{tu} -\!\! \bigg (
\overline{t}^r_a W \!\bigg )^{\rm EPV} \Bigg ]{\Big |}\overline{\Phi}_a^r{{\Big \rangle}}{{\Big \langle}}\Phi_0{\Big |}\label{eqn2.8}\end{aligned}$$ and $$\begin{aligned}
\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!
\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!
\bigg [ T_{\rm es,edm}(2),H_0 \bigg ]P \!\!&= &\!\!\sum_{abrs}\Bigg [
\sum_{a'b'r's'}{{\Big \langle}}\overline{\Phi}_{ab}^{rs}{\Big |}{\mbox{$H_{_{\rm PTV}}$}}{\Big |}\Phi_{a'b'}^{r's'}
{{\Big \rangle}}{\cal T}_{a'b'}^{r's'}
+\sum_{ct}{{\Big \langle}}\overline{\Phi}_{ab}^{rs}{\Big |}{\mbox{$V_{\rm es}$}}{\Big |}\overline{\Phi}_c^t {{\Big \rangle}}\overline{t}_c^t \nonumber \\
&&+\,\sum_{cdtu}{{\Big \langle}}\overline{\Phi}_{ab}^{rs}{\Big |}{\mbox{$V_{\rm es}$}}{\Big |}\overline{\Phi}_{cd}^{tu}
{{\Big \rangle}}\overline{\cal T}_{cd}^{tu} -\bigg ( \overline{\cal T}^{rs}_{ab} W
\bigg ) ^{\rm EPV} \Bigg ] {\Big |}\overline{\Phi}_{ab}^{rs}{{\Big \rangle}}{{\Big \langle}}\Phi_0 {\Big |}\label{eqn2.9}\end{aligned}$$ Using the cluster-operators $$\Omega_{\rm es,edm} = \Omega_{\rm es,edm}(1) + \Omega_{\rm es,edm}(2) .$$ The atomic EDM $d_a$ can be calculated using the operators as $$d_a = {{\Big \langle}}\Phi_0{\Big |}\vec{D}_{\rm eff} {\Big |}\Phi_o{{\Big \rangle}},$$ where $\vec{D}_{\rm eff}=\Omega^{\dagger}_{\rm es}\vec{D}\Omega_{\rm es,edm}
+ \Omega^{\dagger}_{\rm es,edm}\vec{D} \Omega_{\rm es}$ is same as before except that the wave-operator is now in terms of connected clusters. The cluster equations are similar to the CEPA-2 equations[@kutzelnigg; @ahlrichs], the explicit CEPA-0 equations are same as these equations without the EPV terms.
Analysis of the Cluster Equations
=================================
The cluster based formalism is not an order by order formalism but an iterative scheme where the Bloch equation is defined in orders of excitations rather than the orders of perturbation. It is possible to separate the contributions from various many-body effects cleanly using Moller-Plesset partitioning and an added advantage is the one-to-one correspondence with the diagrams using Goldstone evaluation rules. Such an approach has been used[@blundell] to calculate parity non-conservation in atomic cesium to very high accuracy. The E-N partitioning mixes the contributions, but it has the advantage of capturing the static correlation effects very effectively. The CEPA-0 equations are exactly the linearized singles and doubles coupled cluster equations, the CEPA-2 equations includes a class of non-linear terms.
The Singly Excited Amplitude Cluster Equation
---------------------------------------------
The diagrammatic representation of the principal terms in (\[eqn2.6\]) are shown in Fig.\[fig4\]. The contribution from each of the diagrams are as described:
1. Diagram (a) contributes to the first term $\l \Phi_a^r|H_{\rm es}|\Phi_0\r$ of the cluster equation and is independent of any cluster amplitudes. It is an important term as the iteration proceeds from this term.
2. The diagrams (b),(c),(d),(e) and (f) contribute to the second term $\l \Phi_a^r|H_{\rm es}|\Phi_{a'}^{r'}\r {\cal T}^{r'}_{a'}$ and the ${\mbox{$V_{\rm es}$}}$ matrix element is coupled with the single excitation cluster amplitude. These start contributing from the second iteration, where the cluster amplitude ${\cal T}_{a'}^{r'}$ is just the matrix element $\l \Phi_{a'}^{r'}|{\mbox{$V_{\rm es}$}}|\Phi_0\r$ in the first iteration.
3. Diagrams (g),(h),(i) and (j) contribute to the third term $\l
\Phi_a^r|{\mbox{$V_{\rm es}$}}|\Phi_{a'b'}^{r's'}\r {\cal T}^{r's'}_{a'b'}$ and couple the double excitation cluster amplitude with the ${\mbox{$V_{\rm es}$}}$ matrix element. Similar to the second term, these diagrams start contributing from the second iteration.
Consider the diagrams (c) and (e), though they resemble the Hartree-Fock potential scattering diagram these are very different. Consider the the bubble part of the diagram (c), it is summed over the occupied orbitals common to both the initial and the final CSFs in the matrix element of ${\mbox{$V_{\rm es}$}}$. An example in Yb is if the initial and final CSFs are $|\Phi_{a'b'}^{r's'}\r =|7s^2\r $ and $|\Phi_{ab}^{rs}\r = |7s8s\r$ respectively, the bubble part in (c) has all the occupied orbitals except the $6s$ orbital. This is because both the CSFs do not have $6s$, where as in the Hartree-Fock scattering diagram the bubble should have contribution from all the occupied orbitals. A similar description is true of diagrams (d) and (f) too.
The term $({\cal T}_a^rW)^{\rm EPV}$ picks up the effect of the non-linear terms $T_{es}(1)^2$ and $T_{es}(1)T_{es}(2)$, which have $T_{es}(1)$ amplitudes. This implies that the wave-operator assumes the form $$\Omega_{es} = 1+ T_{\rm es}(1) + T_{\rm es}(2) +\bigg [
T_{\rm es}(1)T_{\rm es}(1) + T_{\rm es}(1)T_{\rm es}(2) +
T_{\rm es}(2)T_{\rm es}(2) \bigg ] ^{\rm EPV}
\label{eqn3.1}$$ Terms which are not included in the single excitation cluster amplitude equation are $$\bigg [ T_{\rm es}(1) T_{\rm es}(1) + T_{\rm es}(1)T_{\rm es}(2) +
T_{\rm es}(2)T_{\rm es}(2) \bigg ]^ {\rm EPO}.$$ A later section describes the method to choose EPV terms from the renormalization part.
The Doubly Excited Cluster Amplitude Equation
---------------------------------------------
The diagrams of the principal terms of the double excitation cluster amplitude (\[eqn2.7\]) are shown in Fig.\[fig5\]. The first term is similar to that of the single excitation cluster amplitude equation. The second term can be separated as $$\begin{aligned}
\sum_{a'r'}{{\Big \langle}}\Phi_{ab}^{rs}{\Big |}{\mbox{$V_{\rm es}$}}{\Big |}\Phi_{a'}^{r'}{{\Big \rangle}}{\cal T}_{a'}^{r'} &=&
{{\Big \langle}}\Phi_{ab}^{rs}{\Big |}{\mbox{$V_{\rm es}$}}{\Big |}\Phi_{a}^{r}{{\Big \rangle}}{\cal T}_{a}^{r} + \sum_{a'\ne a,b}
{{\Big \langle}}\Phi_{ab}^{rs}{\Big |}{\mbox{$V_{\rm es}$}}{\Big |}\Phi_{a'}^{r}{{\Big \rangle}}{\cal T}_{a'}^{r} +
\sum_{r'\ne r,s}{{\Big \langle}}\Phi_{ab}^{rs}{\Big |}{\mbox{$V_{\rm es}$}}{\Big |}\Phi_{a}^{r'}{{\Big \rangle}}{\cal T}_{a}^{r'}
\nonumber \\
&&+ \sum_{a'\ne a,b}{{\Big \langle}}\Phi_{ab}^{rs}{\Big |}{\mbox{$V_{\rm es}$}}{\Big |}\Phi_{a'}^{s}{{\Big \rangle}}{\cal T}_{a'}^{s}
+ \sum_{r'\ne r,s}{{\Big \langle}}\Phi_{ab}^{rs}{\Big |}{\mbox{$V_{\rm es}$}}{\Big |}\Phi_{b}^{r'}{{\Big \rangle}}{\cal T}_{b}^{r'}
\nonumber \end{aligned}$$ The first term on the right hand side has connected as well as disconnected terms, from which only the connected terms should be retained. The remaining terms are connected and hence linked too since the conditions $a'\ne a,b; r' \ne r,s $ exclude the disconnected terms. Then $$\sum_{a'r'}{{\Big \langle}}\Phi_{ab}^{rs}{\Big |}{\mbox{$V_{\rm es}$}}{\Big |}\Phi_{a'}^{r'}{{\Big \rangle}}{\cal T}_{a'}^{r'} =
\!\!{{\Big \langle}}\Phi_{ab}^{rs}{\Big |}{\mbox{$V_{\rm es}$}}{\Big |}\Phi_{a}^{r}{{\Big \rangle}}{\cal T}_{a}^{r}
\!\!\!+\!\!\! \sum_{r'\ne r,s}\!\!\!\bigg (\delta_{a'a} + \delta_{a'b} \bigg)
{{\Big \langle}}\Phi_{ab}^{rs}{\Big |}{\mbox{$V_{\rm es}$}}{\Big |}\Phi_{a'}^{r'}{{\Big \rangle}}{\cal T}_{a'}^{r'}
\!\!\! + \!\!\!\sum_{a'\ne a,b}\!\!\!\bigg (\delta_{r'r} + \delta_{r's}
\bigg ){{\Big \langle}}\Phi_{ab}^{rs}{\Big |}{\mbox{$V_{\rm es}$}}{\Big |}\Phi_{a'}^{r'} {{\Big \rangle}}{\cal T}_{a'}^{r'}$$ Similarly, the third term can be expanded to $$\begin{aligned}
\sum_{a'b'r's'}\!\!\!{{\Big \langle}}\Phi_{ab}^{rs}{\Big |}{\mbox{$V_{\rm es}$}}{\Big |}\Phi_{a'b'}^{r's'}{{\Big \rangle}}{\cal T}_{a'b'}^{r's'}\!\!\! &= & \!\!\!\!\!
\sum_{b'\ne a,b}\!\!\!\sum_{s'\ne r,s}{{\Big \langle}}\Phi_{ab}^{rs}{\Big |}{\mbox{$V_{\rm es}$}}{\Big |}\Phi_{ab'}^{rs'}{{\Big \rangle}}{\cal T}_{ab'}^{rs'} + \!\!\!
\sum_{r'\ne r,s}\Bigg [ {{\Big \langle}}\Phi_{ab}^{rs}{\Big |}{\mbox{$V_{\rm es}$}}{\Big |}\Phi_{ab}^{r's}{{\Big \rangle}}{\cal T}_{ab}^{r's} +\!\!\!\sum_{s'\ne r,s}\!\!\!{{\Big \langle}}\Phi_{ab}^{rs}{\Big |}{\mbox{$V_{\rm es}$}}{\Big |}\Phi_{ab}^{r's'} {{\Big \rangle}}{\cal T}_{ab}^{r's'}\Bigg ] \nonumber \\
&&\!\!\!+\!\!\!
\sum_{a'\ne a,b}\Bigg [ {{\Big \langle}}\Phi_{ab}^{rs}{\Big |}{\mbox{$V_{\rm es}$}}{\Big |}\Phi_{a'b}^{rs} {{\Big \rangle}}{\cal T}_{a'b}^{rs} +\!\!\!\sum_{b'\ne a,b}\!\!\!{{\Big \langle}}\Phi_{ab}^{rs}{\Big |}{\mbox{$V_{\rm es}$}}{\Big |}\Phi_{a'b'}^{rs}{{\Big \rangle}}{\cal T}_{a'b'}^{rs}\Bigg ], \nonumber \end{aligned}$$ where all the terms are connected. The triply and quadruply excited terms are excluded. Each of the diagrams has an exchange diagram too. Terms corresponding to each of the diagrams are:
1. Diagram (a) correspond to the first term in the cluster equation and has no dependence on any of the cluster amplitude.
2. $\l\Phi_{ab}^{rs}|{\mbox{$V_{\rm es}$}}|\Phi_{a}^{r}\r {\cal T}_{a}^{r}$ contribute to diagrams (b) and (c). The final CSF in this term has a hole-particle pair in common with the cluster amplitude.
3. $(\delta_{a'a}+\delta_{a'b})\l\Phi_{ab}^{rs}|{\mbox{$V_{\rm es}$}}|\Phi_{a'}^{r'}
\r {\cal T}_{a'}^{r'}$ contribute to diagram (c). Though the topology of the diagram is same as that of $\l\Phi_{ab}^{rs}|{\mbox{$V_{\rm es}$}}|\Phi_{a}^{r}\r {\cal T}_{a}^{r}$, it is an EPO diagram. The ${\mbox{$V_{\rm es}$}}$ interaction changes the state of the particle and picks up a part of core-virtual correlation effect, which can be identified as core-polarization.
4. $(\delta_{r'r}+\delta_{r's})\l\Phi_{ab}^{rs}|{\mbox{$V_{\rm es}$}}|\Phi_{a'}^{r'}
\r {\cal T}_{a'}^{r'}$ contribute to diagram (b). This also has similar topology with $\l\Phi_{ab}^{rs}|{\mbox{$V_{\rm es}$}}|\Phi_{a}^{r}\r {\cal T}_{a}^{r}$ but is again an EPO diagram, where there is a change of the hole state and correspond to core-core correlation effect.
5. $\l\Phi_{ab}^{rs}|{\mbox{$V_{\rm es}$}}|\Phi_{ab'}^{rs'}\r {\cal T}_{ab'}^{rs'}$ contribute to diagram (h) and (i). These are EPO diagrams where a hole-particle change to another hole-particle pair. These contribute to the core-virtual correlation effects.
6. The term $\l\Phi_{ab}^{rs}|{\mbox{$V_{\rm es}$}}|\Phi_{ab}^{r's}\r {\cal T}_{ab}^{r's}$ contribute to diagrams (f) and (g). These are EPO diagrams where one of the particle states in ${\cal T}_{ab}^{r's}$ is excited to another particle state. This can also contribute to EPV diagrams of the first kind, if it is a hole-line EPV diagram then it will correspond to (h) and (i) and if it is particle line EPV then diagram (j).
7. $\l\Phi_{ab}^{rs}|{\mbox{$V_{\rm es}$}}|\Phi_{ab}^{r's'}\r {\cal T}_{ab}^{r's'}$ contribute to diagram (j). This is a double excitation where the particle states from the cluster amplitude ${\cal T}_{ab}^{r's'}$ are excited to different particle states but the hole states remain intact. These terms capture the virtual-virtual correlation effects.
8. $\l\Phi_{ab}^{rs}|{\mbox{$V_{\rm es}$}}|\Phi_{a'b}^{rs}\r {\cal T}_{a'b}^{rs}$ contribute to diagram (d) and (e). These diagrams correspond to a change of the hole state and are EPO diagrams which capture the single-body hole-hole interaction component. This term can also contribute EPV diagrams, the hole line EPV diagram arising from this term is (k) and the particle line EPV diagrams are (h) and (i).
9. $\l\Phi_{ab}^{rs}|{\mbox{$V_{\rm es}$}}|\Phi_{a'b'}^{rs}\r {\cal T}_{a'b'}^{rs}$ contribute to (j) and is a hole-hole correlation term.
Thus terms in the cluster equation contribute to different physical effects. So far only the first three terms in the cluster equation have been considered. The last term in the doubly excited cluster amplitude $({\cal T}^{rs}_{ab} W )^{\rm EPV}$ is a renormalization term. It picks up a set of terms non-linear in cluster amplitude $$T_{\rm es}(1)T_{\rm es}(2) + T_{\rm es}(2) T_{\rm es}(2).$$ These pick up a class of EPV terms which are non-linear in cluster amplitudes. Consider the expression of $W$ $$W = P{\mbox{$V_{\rm es}$}}\bigg (T_{\rm es}(1) + T_{\rm es}(2)\bigg ) P .$$ The term $T_{\rm es}(1)T_{\rm es}(2)$ is picked up through $P{\mbox{$V_{\rm es}$}}T_{\rm es}(1)P$ in $W$, which implies that $({\cal T}_{ab}^{rs}P{\mbox{$V_{\rm es}$}}T_{\rm es}(1))^{\rm EPV}$ can have one hole(particle) EPV line or a pair of hole-particle EPV lines. Whereas in the single excitation cluster amplitude equation, the contribution from $T_{\rm es}(1)T_{\rm es}(2)$ is captured through the term $({\cal T}_{a}^{r}P{\mbox{$V_{\rm es}$}}T_{\rm es}(2))^{\rm EPV}$ in $({\cal T}_{a}^{r}W)^{\rm EPV}$. But the number of EPV hole-lines or EPV particle-lines are the same in both. In general the number of EPV hole-lines and particle-lines in $(T_{\rm es}(n)P{\mbox{$V_{\rm es}$}}T_{\rm es}(m)P)^{\rm EPV}$ is limited by the ${\mbox{$V_{\rm es}$}}$ if $m,n > 2$ and by the cluster amplitudes if $m< 2$ or $n < 2$. Although $T_{\rm es}(1)T_{\rm es}(2)$ is included in the single as well as the double excitation cluster amplitudes the topology of the diagrammatic representations are different. Diagrams from $({\cal T}_a^rW)^{\rm EPV}$ has only a pair of hole-particle lines where as $({\cal T}_{ab}^{rs}W)^{\rm EPV}$ has two pairs of hole-particle lines.
Selection of EPV Terms and Connected Terms
------------------------------------------
The terms linear in cluster amplitude cannot violate Pauli exclusion principal. It is possible only when there are CSFs which are EPV, which is not possible. The EPV diagrams arise from renormalization terms, which are non-linear in cluster amplitude . The diagrams representing the renormalization terms are the cluster diagrams multiplied by the energy diagrams and hence unlinked but these can suitably be rearranged to yield connected diagrams.
To select the EPV terms all the orbitals are tagged with labels which are prime numbers. The CSFs are also assigned a number which is the product of the prime numbers corresponding to the labels of the holes and particles of the CSFs. Consider a doubly excited CSF $|\Phi_{ab}^{rs}\rangle$, the prime numbers $n_a, n_b, n_r\mbox{\rm and } n_s$ be the labels of the hole and particle states and ${\cal N}_{ab}^{rs}$ their product, these five numbers identify the CSF. However, only three if the CSF is singly excited. To maintain consistency the remaining two indices are filled with another prime number not used in labeling the orbitals, let this number be $N_P$ but set the corresponding multiplying factor in $n$ as unity. According to this scheme, the ground/reference state of Yb is identified by $N_P, N_p, N_p, N_p \mbox{\rm and} 1$. Similarly, labels are also given to the cluster amplitudes.
The terms to retain from $({\cal T}_a^rW)^{\rm EPV}$ are those having CSFs in $W$ identified by ${\cal N}$ which can be divided by one or more of the numbers identifying hole(particle) of the cluster amplitude ${\cal T}$. The number of possible division is the number of common hole/particle lines between ${\cal T}$ and $W$. During the selection process division by $N_p$ should be discarded as this does not represent any hole of particle states and this is automatically achieved as the corresponding multiplying factor in $n$ is unity. The advantage of this scheme is that it reduces the number of operations required in the selection process.
The term $\l\Phi_{ab}^{rs}|{\mbox{$V_{\rm es}$}}|\Phi_{a'}^{r'}\r {\cal T}_{a'}^{r'}$ of the doubly excited cluster amplitude equation has disconnected components if both the hole and particle states in the initial CSF are present in the final CSF. These are discarded and only the connected components are chosen. This can be implemented while calculating the matrix elements of ${\mbox{$V_{\rm es}$}}$. During the matrix element calculation the total number of hole states of the initial and final CSFs is calculated. If this is equal to three then these contribute to $\l\Phi_{ab}^{rs}|{\mbox{$V_{\rm es}$}}|\Phi_{a'}^{r'}\r {\cal T}_{a'}^{r'}$. In the next step the connected component is chosen by selecting the ${\mbox{$V_{\rm es}$}}$ matrix element which has $r'$. Then the doubly excited cluster amplitude equation has only connected components. However the discarded components are disconnected but linked.
The Configuration Space Considered
==================================
The configuration space is spanned by the CSFs constructed from the $V^{\rm N-1}$ orbitals. The CSFs are generated by single or double excitations from the occupied orbitals to the bound and the continuum virtual orbitals in all possible ways such that it yields the required final angular momentum. For the single reference MBPT, the reference CSF of Yb is $|6s^2\r$, which be referred as $|\Phi_0\r$. Hence the occupied orbitals are $(1$-$6)s$,$(2$-$5)p*$, $(2$-$5)p$,$(3$-$4)d*$, $(3$-$4)d$,$4f*$ and $4f$ respectively. The CSF space generated is not a complete active space but complete for the single and double excitations from the most important outer occupied orbitals within the orbital orbital space. The occupied-orbital shells of the configurations that has been considered are
single excitation:=${\Big |}4f\!*^64f^86s{{\Big \rangle}}$, ${\Big |}4f\!*^56s^{2}{{\Big \rangle}}$ ${\Big |}4f^76s^{2}{{\Big \rangle}}$, ${\Big |}5p\!*^{1}6s^{2}{{\Big \rangle}}$ ${\Big |}5p^{3}6s^{2}{{\Big \rangle}}$ and ${\Big |}5s^16s^2{{\Big \rangle}}$\
double excitation:${\Big |}4f\!*^{6}4f^{8}{{\Big \rangle}}$, ${\Big |}4f\!\!*^{5}6s{{\Big \rangle}}$ ${\Big |}4f^{7}6s{{\Big \rangle}}$, ${\Big |}4f\!\!*^{4}6s^{2}{{\Big \rangle}}$, ${\Big |}4f^{6}6s^{2}{{\Big \rangle}}$, ${\Big |}4f\!\!*^54f^76s^2{{\Big \rangle}}$ ${\Big |}5p\!*^16s{{\Big \rangle}}$,${\Big |}5p^36s{{\Big \rangle}}$,\
${\Big |}5p\!*^14f^56s^2{{\Big \rangle}}$, ${\Big |}5p^34f\!\!*^56s^2{{\Big \rangle}}$, ${\Big |}5p\!*^34f^56s^2{{\Big \rangle}}$, ${\Big |}5p^34f^56s^2{{\Big \rangle}}$, ${\Big |}5s^16s{{\Big \rangle}}$,${\Big |}5s^14f\!\!*^56s^2{{\Big \rangle}}$, ${\Big |}5s^14f^76s^2{{\Big \rangle}}$,\
${\Big |}5s^15p\!*^16s^2{{\Big \rangle}}$ and ${\Big |}5s^15p^36s^2{{\Big \rangle}}$.\
The remaining electrons are distrubuted among the virtual orbitals in all possible ways. From all the CSFs only the $J\!=\!0$ even parity and $J\!=\!1$ odd parity CSFs are chosen. The number of non-relativistic CSFs generated are given in Table\[table1\]. Although not included in the table, CSFs with excitations from $5s$ are also included in the CSF space.
The total number of odd and even parity CSFs with bound virtual orbitals are 9930 and 17087 respectively. The modulus of the EN-partitioned energies of the CSFs–the diagonal Hamiltonian matrix elements–are as shown in the histograms Fig.4. The two histograms are plotted such the the lowest $|E|$ is shifted to zero and the the range between the lowest and the highest are divided into ten units. The zero on $|E|$ axis are 14064.9531 and 14065.0068 hartrees for the even and odd parity CSFs respectively. Similarly, the highest $|E|$ are 14067.6720 and 14067.5996 hartrees respectively. From the histogram, the number of CSFs with low and high energies are less whereas the number of the configurations that can give the intermediate energy are large. As a result the perturbation series converges fast as only a few of the configurations are quite close to $|\Phi_0\r$ and the energy separation with the rest of the CSFs is quite large.
Number of odd parity CSFs in the intermediate energy is more than the even parity as the odd parity configuration space can have many possible intermediate couplings to give $J\!=\!1$, to limit the number of CSFs within the memory limitations a selection of CSFs is done. The double excitations to $d$ and $f$ symmetries above the energy of the converged orbitals are not included. Another constraint on the choice of configurations is: there shouldn’t be more than four open shells in the non-relativistic notation and eight in the relativistic form, choosing only singly and doubly excited configurations satisfies this condition for a closed-shell atom like Yb. This constraint is due to the angular co-efficient computation program.
Results
=======
The atomic Yb EDM is calculated using the Bloch equation based MBPT and the size-consistent CEPA equations. As a part of the calculation the ground state energy is also computed. The results with different methods are given in the following sections.
Bloch Equation Based MBPT
-------------------------
### Calculation of $\Omega_{\rm es}$ and $E_0$
Using the wave-operator $\Omega_{\rm es}$ the ground state wave-function $|\Psi_0\r $ and energy $E_0$ are $${\Big |}\Psi_0 {{\Big \rangle}}= \frac{\Omega_{\rm es}{\Big |}\Phi_0{{\Big \rangle}}}
{{{\Big \langle}}\Phi_0{\Big |}\Omega_{\rm es}^{\dagger}\Omega_{\rm es}{\Big |}\Phi_0{{\Big \rangle}}}
\;\;\;\;\;{\rm and } \;\;\;\;\;
E_0 = {{\Big \langle}}\Phi_0{\Big |}{\mbox{$V_{\rm es}$}}\Omega_{\rm es}{\Big |}\Phi_0{{\Big \rangle}}.$$ The denominator in the expression of $|\Psi_0\rangle$ is the normalization factor. The first order energy correction of the ground state is zero Since the calculations are using the EN-partitioned Hamiltonian.
The even parity CSF space of the calculation is spanned by 9930 CSFs, of which core part of first 4435, 4436-9094 and remaining CSFs are $|4f^{14}6s\r , |4f^{14}\r , |4f^{13}6s^2\r |4f^{13}6s\r$ and $|4f^{12}6s^2\r$, and $|5p^54f^{14}6s^2\r$, $|5p^54f^{14}6s\r$ and $|5p^54f^{13}\r$, and $|5s5p^64f^{14}6s^2\r$ respectively. Using this set of CSFs the ground state wave-function is $$\begin{aligned}
{\Big |}\Psi_0 {{\Big \rangle}}&=& 0.9251\;23{\Big |}6s^2{{\Big \rangle}}+ 0.1172\;17{\Big |}6p*\!^2 {{\Big \rangle}}+ 0.1169\;21 {\Big |}6s7s {{\Big \rangle}}+ 0.0996\;76{\Big |}6p\!^2 {{\Big \rangle}}\nonumber \\
&&-0.0600\;60{\Big |}5d^2{{\Big \rangle}}+ 0.0568\;61{\Big |}6p7p{{\Big \rangle}}-0.0497\;43{\Big |}5d\!*^2 {{\Big \rangle}}+0.0480\;54{\Big |}6p\!*7p\!*{{\Big \rangle}}\nonumber \\
&&+0.0443\;18{\Big |}6p8p {{\Big \rangle}}-0.0442\;15{\Big |}6s8s{{\Big \rangle}}-0.0320\;73{\Big |}5d6d{{\Big \rangle}}+\ldots .
\nonumber \end{aligned}$$ Where only the ten important CSFs are given explicitly and the normalization constant is $1.0809\;37$. As expected, the most important CSFs in $|\Psi_0\r$ are doubly excited except for $|6s7s\r$, which is a singly excited CSF and does not interact very strongly with the ground state CSF $|6s^2\r$ but contributes significantly by correlation through other CSFs when the residual interaction is taken to higher orders. Values of $E_0$ with increasing size of the even CSF space is given in Table\[table2\]. CSFs are added to the calculation in sequence of excitations from the deeper core orbitals. As the size of the CSF space is increased more complicated many-body effects are included in the computation.
An important quantity that can be extracted from Table\[table2\] is the change in $E_0$. Define the correlation energy $\Delta E_0$ as the energy difference between the CSF energy of $|6s^2\r$ and the energy calculated using the CSFs in the even-parity CSF space. From the plot of $\Delta E_0$ in Fig\[fig7\]a it is evident that the change in the ground state ASF energy is not uniform but in steps interrupted by regions of very minimal changes. Most significant changes of $\Delta E_0$ occur while increasing the CSFs from 100 to 500, from 1000 to 2000 and from 6435 to 7435 CSFs respectively. These changes are not the combined effect of all the CSFs added but due to a few important ones. The largest change of $\Delta E_0$ is while increasing from 1000 to 2000 CSFs which corresponds to contribution from the core configuration $|4f^{14}\r$, that is double excitation from the $6s$ orbital shell. The remaining two are due to the core configurations $|4f^{13}6s\r$ and $|5p^56s\r$. Each contribute $-0.0041\;82$, $-0.0179\;26$ and $-0.0045\;07$ hartrees respectively, the combined effect adds to 81.20% of the total correlation energy $-0.0304\;50$ hartrees. From these it can be concluded that, the most important CSFs contributing to the correlation energy have core configurations $|4f^{13}6s\r$, $|4f^{14}\r$ and $|5p^56s\r$. As to be expected the doubly excited CSFs are most important to capture the correlation effects and the low lying double excitations from $6s$ orbital shell has the most significant contribution to correlation energy, it contributes 54.74% of the correlation energy.
The plot (b) in Fig:\[fig7\] indicates the need to include ${\mbox{$V_{\rm es}$}}$ to high orders to capture the correlation effects accurately. From the graph the correlation effect due to two order of ${\mbox{$V_{\rm es}$}}$ is $-0.0436\;033$ hartrees and decreases in magnitude monotonically till fourth order to $-0.0306\;67$hartrees but increases in the fourth order to $-0.0343\;38$hartrees. This trend of oscillation about the final value of $\Delta E_0$ continues till convergence. The cycle of the oscillation has a period of four orders, that is in four orders it goes to the same side of the final value of $\Delta E_0$ and the amplitude of the oscillation decreases with each cycle. Over all, the value of $\Delta E_0$ behaves like a damped oscillator with a cycle of four orders. If $E_0$ is calculated by truncating the perturbation to the first few orders where the amplitude of oscillation is quite significant the value of $\Delta E_0$ can be erroneous.
The Fig.\[fig8\] shows the trend of wave-operator convergence. The first graph Fig.\[fig8\]a is the value of the convergence criteria plotted against the order of perturbation and second graph Fig.\[fig8\]b is $\log_{10}$ of the convergence criteria plotted against the order of perturbation. From the first graph it is evident that the convergence criteria begins with a small value but as shown in the second graph in terms of order of magnitude, the convergence is not so fast. The convergence is monotonic with very regular fluctuations. The wave-operator $\Omega_{\rm es}$ is stored in an order by order sequence. These are accessed as and when required during the calculation of $\Omega_{\rm es,edm}$.
### Calculation of $\Omega_{\rm es,edm}$ and $d_a$
The wave-operator $\Omega_{\rm es,edm}$ is calculated introducing the interaction Hamiltonian and adding opposite parity CSFs to the CSF space. Once is applied to the wave-operator $\Omega_{\rm es}$, it maps onto the odd-parity component of the CSF space and can never be mapped back to the even-parity space as is treated to first order only. This is followed by a sequence of residual coulomb interaction ${\mbox{$V_{\rm es}$}}$, which accounts for the correlation effects within the odd-parity sub-space. In sum total it is a sequence of perturbations applied to the ground state CSF $|6s^2\r$, where is sandwiched between all possible arrangements of ${\mbox{$V_{\rm es}$}}$. After the wave-operator $\Omega_{\rm es.edm}$ is calculated, the mixed parity ground state wave-function $|\widetilde{\Psi}_0\r$ can be written in terms of the wave-operators $\Omega_{\rm es}$ and $\Omega_{\rm es,edm}$ as $${\Big |}\widetilde{\Psi}_0 {{\Big \rangle}}= {\Big |}\Psi_0{{\Big \rangle}}+ {\Big |}\Psi_{\rm corr}^0{{\Big \rangle}}=
\bigg (\Omega_{\rm es} + \Omega_{\rm es,edm}\bigg ) {\Big |}\Phi_0 {{\Big \rangle}}$$ The value of $d_a$ can be calculated using the expression $$d_a = {{\Big \langle}}\widetilde{\Psi}_0 {\Big |}\vec{D} {\Big |}\widetilde{\Psi}_0{{\Big \rangle}}=2{{\Big \langle}}\Phi_0 {\Big |}\Omega_{\rm es}^{\dagger}\vec{D} \Omega_{\rm es,edm}{\Big |}\Phi_0 {{\Big \rangle}}$$ Choosing the odd parity CSF as mentioned in Sec. V the correction to the ground state $|\Psi_0\r$ from the opposite parity sub-space due to is $$\begin{aligned}
{\Big |}\Psi_{\rm corr}^0 {{\Big \rangle}}\!\! &= &\!{\cal A}\bigg (-55.1403\;73 {\Big |}6s 6p\!*
\!{{\Big \rangle}}-17.3681\;84{\Big |}6s 7p\!*\!{{\Big \rangle}}+ 10.8231\;86 {\Big |}6s6p {{\Big \rangle}}\nonumber \\
&&\!\!\!-9.5064\;23 {\Big |}5p\!*7s{{\Big \rangle}}-9.2841\;00 {\Big |}5s 6p\!*\! {{\Big \rangle}}+7.8322\;72{\Big |}6s 8p\!*\!{{\Big \rangle}}+7.1950\;56 {\Big |}6p\!* 5d*\!{{\Big \rangle}}\nonumber \\
&&\!\!\!+5.5464\;22{\Big |}6s 9p\!*\!{{\Big \rangle}}+5.5189\;58 {\Big |}6p5d\!*\! {{\Big \rangle}}+5.1246\;77{\Big |}5p\!*8s\!{{\Big \rangle}}+\ldots \bigg ) .
\nonumber\end{aligned}$$ Where ${\cal A}= \sqrt{2}C_T\sigma_NG_{_F}$ and only the first ten important CSFs are listed. The coefficients are much larger than unity but these should be scaled by the parameter $ \sqrt{2}G_{_F}$. The product of the coupling constant $C_T$ and nuclear spin $\sigma_N$ is retained as a parameter and $C_T$ can be estimated after combining with the experimental results. The above expression for $|\Psi_{\rm corr}^0\r$ shows that:
1. Like in the lowest order single-particle calculation, the coefficients of the CSFs $|6snp\!*\r$ flip sign for $n\!\ge\!8$.
2. Most of the important CSFs are singly excited with respect to the ground state CSF $|6s^2\r$, which is to be expected since is a single particle interaction Hamiltonian.
3. Singly excited configurations like $|6s6p\r$ can contribute through three possible many-body routes. First excites $|6s^2\r$ to $|6snp\!*\r$ then a sequence of ${\mbox{$V_{\rm es}$}}$ connects it to $|6s6p\r$, second a sequence of ${\mbox{$V_{\rm es}$}}$ connects $|6s^2\r$ to $|6p\!*6p\r$ and takes it to $|6s6p\r$ and third a sequence of ${\mbox{$V_{\rm es}$}}$ takes $|6s^2\r$ to a CSF $|\Phi_i\r$ which connects to $|\Phi_j\r$ via and another sequence of ${\mbox{$V_{\rm es}$}}$ connects it to $|6s6p\r$. Although $|6s6p\r$ cannot connect directly to the ground state $|6s^2\r$ as $6p$ is close to zero within the nucleus, it is the third most important CSF which contributes to $|\Psi_{\rm corr}^0 \r $. This demonstrates the importance of many-body effects.
4. The two most important doubly excited odd-parity CSFs for the evaluation of EDM are $|6p\!*5d\!\r$ and $|6p5d\!*\r$. More interesting is the second as both the virtual orbitals involved cannot contribute to the matrix elements. Among the possible many-body routes which can contribute to the co-efficient of $|6p5d\!*\r$ one possibility is through the deeper occupied orbitals $5p*$ and $5s$, which would contribute to core polarization effects.
The value of $d_a$ is calculated using different sets of CSFs, where the number of either the even or odd CSFs are fixed to the maximum allowed and then increase the number of CSFs in the opposite parity CSF space. The results of such a sequence of calculations is given in the Table \[table3\]. If the previous sequence of calculation shows the importance of occupied orbitals in the whole CSF space, these two sequences demonstrates the significance of the occupied orbitals in CSF sub-space of each parity.
Like the correlation energy $\Delta E_0$ there is a significant change of $d_a$ when CSFs with double excitations from $6s$ are included. To appreciate the change better the values of $d_a$ in the two sequence are plotted in Fig.\[fig8\]. Consider the sequence where the number of even-parity CSFs is fixed, $d_a$ increase with the number of the odd-parity CSFs, which implies that there are no appreciable cancellations due to the odd parity CSFs added. In the second sequence where the number of odd-parity CSFs is fixed, $d_a$ decreases as the number of even-parity CSFs is increased.
In both the sequence there is a significant change in $d_a$ when CSFs with double excitation from $6s$ orbital are added. But, the changes are different in sign, in the even CSF space the inclusion of CSFs with double excitation from $6s$ increases the value of $d_a$ where as in the odd-parity CSFs it decreases. Consider the expression for EDM it can be expanded as $$d_a = 2\bigg ({{\Big \langle}}\Phi_0 {\Big |}\vec{D} \Omega_{\rm es,edm}{\Big |}\Phi_0 {{\Big \rangle}}+\sum_n{{\Big \langle}}\Phi_0 {\Big |}\Omega_{\rm es}^{\dagger (n)}\vec{D}
\Omega_{\rm es,edm}{\Big |}\Phi_0 {{\Big \rangle}}\bigg ) .$$ Which can be rewritten in terms of CSF coefficients as $$d_a = 2\bigg [{{\Big \langle}}\Phi_0 {\Big |}+\sum_i{{\Big \langle}}\Phi_i {\Big |}{\cal C}_i^{\rm (es)}\bigg ]\vec{D} \Omega_{\rm es,edm}{\Big |}\Phi_0 {{\Big \rangle}}= 2\sum_j\bigg [{{\Big \langle}}\Phi_0 {\Big |}+\sum_{i\ne 0}{{\Big \langle}}\Phi_i {\Big |}{\cal C}_i^{\rm (es)}\bigg ] \vec{D} {\cal C}_j^{\rm (es,edm)}{\Big |}\overline{\Phi}_j {{\Big \rangle}}.
\label{eq5.1}$$ Where the definitions of all the quantities are the same as defined in paper-I. Within the whole CSF space, the contribution from the first term is $5.4394\;39$ and the contribution from the second term is $-0.6417\;31$, which is just 11.80% of the first term. Five most important configurations in the second term from the even-parity sub-space are $|6p*^2\r$, $|6p^2\r$, $|6p\!*7p*\r$, $|5d*^2\r$ and $|6p7p\r$ and their contributions are $-0.8119\;50$, $0.2065\;15$, $-0.1001\;58$, $0.0738\;55$ and $0.0599\;84$ respectively, where $d_a$ is in units of $C_T\sigma_N\times 10^{-12}ea_0$. All these are doubly excited CSFs and mixes with the ground state CSF significantly but the singly excited CSF $|6s7s\r$ which is the third important CSF of $|\Psi_0\r$ does not contribute strongly. In addition there is shift in the sequence of the important CSFs compared to the sequence of contribution to $|\Psi_0\r$, this is due to difference of dipole and coupling strengths between different CSFs.
Within the whole CSF space considered the value of $d_a$ is $4.4438\;58$. In absolute terms this is $0.4804\;56$ less compared to the lowest order result of $4.9243\;136$ calculated in an earlier section. A major contribution to this difference is the many-body effects, this is because the direct contributions from the CSFs added to the configuration space is small. Which implies that the contribution from the many-body effects is just 10.81% of the total value and the change is negative. An added advantage of the order by order approach is that the contribution to $d_a$ can be calculated in terms of the order of residual coulomb interaction. Earlier while calculating the ground state ASF energy it was shown how a truncation in the order of ${\mbox{$V_{\rm es}$}}$ perturbation can give an inaccurate value of $E_0$.
Cluster Based Formulations
---------------------------
The CEPA-0 wave-operator equations of $\Omega_{es}$ and $\Omega_{es,edm}$ are identical to the linearized coupled-cluster equations. The atomic Yb EDM $d_a$ calculated using CEPA-0 using the same sequence of CSFs as in Table \[table3\] are given in Table \[table4\] and the following can be inferred:
1. The results from CEPA-0 do not differ significantly from the MBPT results for the singly excited CSFs with core configurations $|6s\rangle$ and $|4f^{13}6s^2\rangle$. This is because the non-linear terms do not contribute since the configuration space is spanned by singly excited CSFs.
2. A significant difference from the MBPT results is expected when doubly excited CSFs are included in the CSF space. This is observed when the CSFs having core configuration $|4f^{13}6s^1\rangle$ are included. The change of $d_a$ calculated using MBPT by fixing the number of odd parity CSFs to 17087 is $-0.5599\,84$, whereas CEPA-0 reduces the change to $-0.1091\,50$.
3. Within the whole CSF space considered, the value of $d_a$ calculated using CEPA-0 is $5.9421\,36$, which is 25.21% larger than the MBPT result. The difference gives a rough estimate of the contribution from the non-linear terms in the cluster equation. It is a rough estimate as the MBPT calculation also includes the contribution from the size-inconsistent terms, which are unphysical and are not included in the CEPA formalism.
The CEPA-0 calculation does not include size-consistent non-linear terms of $\Omega_{es}$ and $\Omega_{es,edm}$. The results using the CEPA-2 equations are tabulated in Table \[table5\]. To make comparisons convenient the calculation is done with the same choice of CSF sequence as before. Comparing with the results from the calculations using MBPT and CEPA-0 give the following:
1. The calculation within the CSF space of singly excited even parity CSFs with core configurations $|6s\rangle$ and $|4f^{13}6s\rangle$ and all the odd parity CSFs is identical with the result calculated using CEPA-0. This implies that the contribution from the non-linear EPV terms with $T_{\rm es}(1)$ from the even parity subspace is negligible. But, it is different from the MBPT result of the same CSF space. And the difference of $0.2067\,67$ is due to the EPO non-linear terms, which are included in the MBPT.
2. Consider the calculation within the CSF space consisting of all the even parity CSFs and the singly excited odd parity CSFs having core configurations $|6s\rangle$ and $|4f^{13}6s\rangle$. The CEPA-2 and MBPT results differ by less than 2%. But, the result from CEPA-0 differs from both by more than 12%. This shows that the contribution from non-linear terms with $T_{\rm PTV}(1)$ is not negligible or the contribution from the size-consistent is significant, with the present results it is difficult to distinguish between the two.
3. The $d_a$ calculated within the whole CSF space considered is $4.5065\,25$ and is larger than the MBPT result by 1.4% and less than the CEPA-0 result by 31.86%. This implies that the contribution of non-linear terms to $d_a$ is very important.
The effect of the EPO unlinked terms in $\Omega_{\rm es,edm}$ can be estimated by calculating $T_{\rm es,edm}$ with the EPO renormalization terms included. The results are given in Table \[table6\]. The final value with the full CSF space is $4.2446\;91$, which is suppressed by 5.8% compared to the CEPA-2 result. This difference is due to the EPO contribution to the renormalization term in $\Omega_{\rm es,edm}$. Another property which can be compared to gain an insight on the contribution of the size-inconsistent terms is the energy of the ground state $E_0$. The value of $E_0$ calculated using the wave-operator $\Omega_{\rm es}$ derived here has no contribution from the size inconsistent terms but it excludes some of the less important size-consistent terms. The difference in the value $E_0$ calculated using the Bloch-equation and $\Omega_{\rm es}$ derived from the cluster equation gives the contribution from the size inconsistent terms. Like in $d_a$ the approximation is that the contribution form the EPO size consistent terms non-linear in cluster amplitudes is very small, then the difference in the result can in principle be accounted to the size inconsistent terms.
Conclusion
==========
Comparing the results from different methods, it is clear that a size-consistent theory is preferable for high accuracy computation of atomic EDM and the contribution from the non-linear terms in the cluster amplitude is also important. With the present calculation the difference between the MBPT and CEPA-2 result cannot be accounted distinctly to non-linear terms or the size-inconsistent terms. A better comparison can be made after including all the non-linear terms in the cluster amplitudes. As the orbital space is made larger, the size of the CSF space grows very large. This puts a limitation during the calculation as the memory requirement increases, it is manageable if the calculation is done at the level of single particle–Moller-Plesset partitioning of the atomic Hamiltonian. At the single particle level the cluster equation with the residual coulomb interaction Hamiltonian reduces to the method used used by Blundell [@blundell] and his collaborators. The inclusion of terms non-linear in cluster amplitudes is also relatively easy as compared to the EN-partitioning. To check the quality of the wave functions, experimentally known quantities like hyperfine constants and excitation energies needs to be calculated. These will be reported in our later papers.
Acknowledgments
===============
We thank our colleagues Rajat Choudury, Holger Merlitz and P. Panda for many useful discussions we had and the computer staff for making available to us the r10000 power challenge.
[99]{} T. G. Vold, F. J. Raab, H. Heckel and E. N. Fortson, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**52**]{}, 2229(1984). M. V. Romalis, W C Griffith and J. P. Jacobs and E. N. Fortson, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**86**]{}, 2505 (2001) E. Eliav, U. Kaldor, and Y. Ishikawa, Phys. Rev. A [**52**]{}, 291-296 (1995). S. Porsev, Yu. G. Rakhlina and M. G. Kozlov, J. Phys. B. [**32**]{}, 1113(1999). S. G. Porsev, Yu. G. Rakhlina and M. G. Kozlov, Phys. Rev. A [**60**]{}, 2781(1999). J. Migdalek and W. E. Baylis Phys. Rev. A [**33**]{}, 1417-1420 (1986) C. J. Bowers, D. Budker, E. D. Commins, D. DeMille, S. J. Freedman, A.-T. Nguyen, S.-Q. Shang, and M. Zolotorev Phys. Rev. A [**53**]{}, 3103-3109 (1996). M. Watanabe, R. Ohmukai, U. Tanaka, K. Hayasaka, H. Imajo and S. Urabi, JOSA B [**13**]{}, 2377,(1996). K. Honda, Y. Takahashi, T. Kuwamoto, M. Fujimoto, K. Toyoda, K. Ishikawa, and T. Yabuzaki, Phys. Rev. A [**59**]{}, R934-R937,(1999). Y. Takahashi, M. Fujimoto, T. Yabuzaki, Angom Dilip Singh, Manoj K. Samal and B. P. Das, in Proceedings of CP Violation and its Origin, edited by K. Hagiwara(KEK Reports, Tsukuba, 1997). M. V. Romalis and E. N. Fortson, Phys. Rev. A [**59**]{}, 4547(1999). S. M. Barr, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A [**8**]{},209,(1993). V. V. Flambaum and J. S. M. Ginges, arXiv:nucl-th/0108007 Angom Dilip, Bhanu Pratap Das, Warren F Perger, M K Samal and K P Geetha, Jour. Phys. B [**34**]{}, 3089(2001). Ingvar Lindgren and John Morrison, [*Atomic Many-Body Theory*]{}(Springer, New York, 1982). J. Goldstone, Proc. Roy. Soc.(London) [**A239**]{}, 267(1957). C. Bloch, Nucl. Phys. [**6**]{}, 329(1958). L. M. Frantz and R. L. Mills [**15**]{}, 16(1960). W. Kutzelnigg, [ Methods in Electronic Structure Theory]{}, Ed by H. F. Schaefer (Plenum, New York, 1977). S. A. Blundell, W. R. Johnson and J. Sapirstein, Phys. Rev. A [**43**]{}, 3407(1991). R. Ahlrichs, Comp. Phys. Comm. [**17**]{}, 31(1979).
(a)(b)
(a)(b)
(a)(b)
(a)(b)
------- ---------------------- ------ ------- --------------- ---------------------- ------ ------
Sl.no Occupied part Sl.no Occupied part
Even Odd Even Odd
1 $|6s\r$ 6 12 2 $|4f^{14}\r$ 147 287
3 $|4f^{13}6s^2\r$ 12 18 4 $|4f^{13}6s^1\r$ 1224 3618
5 $|4f^{12}6s^2\r$ 3045 7739 6 $|5p^54f^{14}6s^2\r$ 12 30
7 $|5p^54f^{14}6s^1\r$ 1044 1668 8 $|5p^54f^{13}6s^2\r$ 3604 2394
------- ---------------------- ------ ------- --------------- ---------------------- ------ ------
: The number of the CSFs with different occupied configurations.
\[table1\]
Sl. no No of CSF Energy Sl. no No of CSF Energy
-------- ----------- ------------------- -------- ----------- -------------------
1 100 $-14067.6714\;79$ 2 500 $-14067.6755\;69$
3 1000 $-14067.6756\;60$ 3 2000 $-14067.6942\;64$
5 3000 $-14067.6942\;68$ 6 4000 $-14067.6949\;91$
7 4435 $-14067.6949\;91$ 8 5435 $-14067.6974\;13$
9 6435 $-14067.6974\;21$ 10 7435 $-14067.7019\;28$
11 8435 $-14067.7040\;97$ 12 9094 $-14067.7040\;97$
13 9594 $-14067.7042\;26$ 14 9930 $-14067.7042\;26$
: The energy of the ground state ASF with increasing CSF-space size.
\[table2\]
-------- ------ ------- -------------- ---- ------- ------- --------------
Sl. no $d_a$ Sl. no $d_a$
Even Odd Even Odd
1 9930 12 $3.3654\;83$ 10 7 17087 $8.2430\;89$
2 9930 30 $3.3605\;54$ 11 19 17087 $8.2430\;89$
3 9930 3648 $3.4095\;46$ 12 1243 17087 $7.6831\;05$
4 9930 3846 $4.3895\;21$ 13 1390 17087 $4.2645\;44$
5 9930 11676 $4.3895\;43$ 14 4435 17087 $4.2118\;95$
6 9930 14070 $4.3916\;11$ 15 4448 17087 $4.1837\;51$
7 9930 14100 $4.3760\;30$ 16 6713 17087 $4.5282\;75$
8 9930 15768 $4.4424\;65$ 17 9094 17087 $4.4333\;81$
9 9930 17087 $4.4438\;58$ 18
-------- ------ ------- -------------- ---- ------- ------- --------------
: Values of $d_a$ for different number of even and odd parity configurations.
\[table3\]
-------- ------ ------- -------------- ---- ------- ------- --------------
Sl. no $d_a$ Sl. no $d_a$
Even Odd Even Odd
1 9930 12 $3.8250\;23$ 10 7 17087 $8.4499\;64$
2 9930 30 $3.8426\;96$ 11 19 17087 $8.4499\;64$
3 9930 3648 $3.9252\;41$ 12 1243 17087 $8.3408\;14$
4 9930 3846 $5.7783\;09$ 13 1390 17087 $5.5126\;26$
5 9930 11676 $5.7783\;88$ 14 4435 17087 $5.5091\;16$
6 9930 14070 $5.7820\;42$ 15 4448 17087 $5.3769\;11$
7 9930 14100 $5.8370\;85$ 16 6713 17087 $5.6132\;71$
8 9930 15768 $5.9437\;56$ 17 9094 17087 $5.9275\;26$
9 9930 17087 $5.9421\;36$
-------- ------ ------- -------------- ---- ------- ------- --------------
: Value of $d_a$ computed using the CEPA-0 formalism.
\[table4\]
-------- ------ ------- -------------- ---- ------- ------- --------------
Sl. no $d_a$ Sl. no $d_a$
Even Odd Even Odd
1 9930 12 $3.3130\;75$ 10 7 17087 $8.4499\;64$
2 9930 30 $3.3133\;86$ 11 19 17087 $8.4499\;64$
3 9930 3648 $3.3684\;39$ 12 1243 17087 $7.8528\;23$
4 9930 3846 $4.4589\;69$ 13 1390 17087 $4.3791\;81$
5 9930 11676 $4.4589\;33$ 14 4435 17087 $4.3758\;71$
6 9930 14070 $4.4608\;15$ 15 4448 17087 $4.3558\;36$
7 9930 14100 $4.4581\;78$ 16 6713 17087 $4.4547\;38$
8 9930 15768 $4.5149\;07$ 17 9094 17087 $4.4981\;25$
9 9930 17087 $4.5065\;25$
-------- ------ ------- -------------- ---- ------- ------- --------------
: Table : Values of $d_a$ computed with CEPA-2.
\[table5\]
-------- ------ ------- -------------- ---- ------- ------- --------------
Sl. no $d_a$ Sl. no $d_a$
Even Odd Even Odd
1 9930 12 $3.1704\;91$ 10 7 17087 $8.4499\;64$
2 9930 30 $3.1682\;67$ 11 19 17087 $8.4499\;64$
3 9930 3648 $3.2196\;53$ 12 1243 17087 $7.8521\;84$
4 9930 3846 $4.2130\;96$ 13 1390 17087 $4.3783\;45$
5 9930 11676 $4.2130\;54$ 14 4435 17087 $4.3042\;71$
6 9930 14070 $4.2147\;05$ 15 4448 17087 $4.2332\;39$
7 9930 14100 $4.2039\;41$ 16 6713 17087 $4.2802\;30$
8 9930 15768 $4.2539\;59$ 17 9094 17087 $4.2375\;23$
9 9930 17087 $4.2446\;91$ 18
-------- ------ ------- -------------- ---- ------- ------- --------------
: Values of $d_a$ computed with the EPO components included in the cluster amplitudes $\overline{\cal T}$.
\[table6\]
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
author:
- Patrick Bernard
title: 'Existence of $C^{1,1}$ critical sub-solutions of the Hamilton-Jacobi equation on compact manifolds'
---
Patrick Bernard\
CEREMADE, UMR CNRS 7534\
Université de Paris Dauphine\
Pl. du Maréchal de Lattre de Tassigny\
75775 Paris Cedex 16, France\
`[email protected]`\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Résumé: Nous donnons une preuve simple de l’existence d’une sous-solution $C^{1,1}$ de l’équation de Hamilton-Jacobi dans le contexte de la theorie de Mather. Nous donnons certaines conséquences dynamiques de ce résultat. Nous montrons que la solution peut être obtenue stricte en dehors de l’ensemble d’Aubry.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Abstract: We offer a simple proof of the existence of a $C^{1,1}$ solution of the Hamilton-Jacobi equation in the context of Mather theory. We derive some dynamical consequences of this result. We also prove that the solution can be obtained strict outside of the Aubry set.\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Online access to this text: `http://www.ceremade.dauphine.fr/ ~pbernard/`\
Annales Scientifiques de l’École Normale Supérieure, 40, No.3, (2007), 445-452.
Let $M$ be a compact manifold without boundary. A function $H(x,p):T^*M\lto {\mathbb{R}}$ is called a Tonelli Hamiltonian if it is $C^2$ and if, for each $x\in M$, the function $p\lmto H(x,p)$ is convex with positive definite Hessian and superlinear on the fibre $T_x^*M$. Each Tonelli Hamiltonian generates a complete $C^1$ flow $\psi_t$. We consider the Hamilton-Jacobi equation $$\tag{HJ}
H(x,du_x)=c,$$ with a special emphasis on sub-solutions. A function $u:M\lto {\mathbb{R}}$ is called a sub-solution of (HJ) if it is Lipschtiz and satisfies the inequality $H(x,du_x)\leq c$ at almost every point. Note that this definition is equivalent to the notion of viscosity sub-solutions, see [@Fa:un]. We denote by $C^{1,1}(M,{\mathbb{R}})$ the set of differentiable functions with Lipschitz differential. The goal of the present paper is to present a short and selfcontained proof of:\
**Theorem A**
Let $H$ be a Tonelli Hamiltonian. If the Hamilton-Jacobi equation (HJ) has a sub-solution, then it has a $C^{1,1}$ sub-solution. Moreover, the set of $C^{1,1}$ sub-solutions is dense for the uniform topology in the set of sub-solutions.
Fathi and Siconolfi recently proved the existence of a $C^1$ sub-solution in [@FS:04], see [@Massart] for the non-autonomous case. Our result is optimal in the sense that examples are known where a $C^{1,1}$ sub-solution exists, but no $C^2$ sub-solution, see Appendix A. There exists a real number $\alpha(H)$, called the Mañé critical value in the literature, such that the equation (HJ) has sub-solutions if and only if $c\geq \alpha(H)$. One can prove the existence of smooth sub-solutions for $c>\alpha(H)$ by standard regularization, see [@CIPP]. As a consequence, our Theorem is relevant for the sub-solutions of the critical equation $H(x,du_x)=\alpha(H)$, which are called the critical sub-solutions of (HJ). The study of the critical Hamilton-Jacobi equation $H(x,du_x)=\alpha(H)$ is the core of Fathi’s weak KAM theory.
A sub-solution $u$ is called strict on the open set $U\subset M$ if there exists a smooth non-negative function $V:M\lto {\mathbb{R}}$ which is positive on $U$ and such that $u$ is also a sub-solution of the equation $H(x,du_x)+V(x)=c$. By applying the Theorem to the Hamiltonian $H+V$, we obtain:\
**Addendum**
If there exists a sub-solution of (HJ) which is strict on the open set $U$, then there exists a $C^{1,1}$ sub-solution which is strict on $U$.
We now expose some dynamical consequences of the main result, which lead to a very short proof of the existence of invariant sets contained in Lipschitz graphs:\
**Theorem B**
There exists a unique non-empty compact set $\tilde {\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}}(H)\subset T^*M$ with the following properties:
1. $\tilde {\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}}(H)$ is invariant for the Hamiltonian flow, and $$\tilde {\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}}(H)\subset H^{-1}(\alpha(H)).$$
2. For each $C^1$ critical sub-solution $u$ of (HJ), we have $$\tilde {\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}}(H)\subset \Gamma_u:=\{(x,du_x) | x\in M\}.$$
3. There exists a critical $C^{1,1}$ sub-solution $u$ of (HJ) which is strict on the complement of the projection ${\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}}(H)$ of $\tilde {\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}}(H)$ onto $M$.
It is an easy consequence of Theorem B that the set $\tilde {\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}}(H)$ is a Lipschitz graph above ${\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}}(H)$ and is not empty. We explain in the course of the proof of Theorem B in section \[Aubry\] that $\tilde {\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}}(H)$ is the set usually called the Aubry set in the literature (although it was introduced by John Mather).
Let us quote explicitely the following:\
**Corollary**
There exists a critical $C^{1,1}$ sub-solution which is strict outside of the projected Aubry set.
We give some examples in Appendix A, which explain why $C^{1,1}$ regularity is optimal. Theorem A is proved in Section 1, with the use of some properties of semi-concave functions which are recalled in Appendix B. Theorem B is proved in Section 2.
I wish to thank Cedric Villani, whose questions about the geometry of optimal transportation led me to the Proposition \[key\] which is the key of the proof.
The Lax-Oleinik semi-groups and sub-solutions
=============================================
We prove Theorem A. It is necessary to start with more definitions. We define the Lagrangian $L:TM\lto {\mathbb{R}}$ associated to $H$ by the relation $$L(x,v)=
\max_{p\in T_x^*M} p(v)-H(x,p).$$ Then we define, for each $t\geq 0$, the function $A_t:M\times M\lto {\mathbb{R}}$ by $$A_t(x,y):=\min_{\gamma}
\int_0^t c+L(\gamma(s),\dot \gamma(s))ds$$ where the minimum is taken on the set of curves $\gamma\in C^2([0,t],M)$ which satisfy $\gamma(0)=x$ and $\gamma(t)=y$. Following Fathi, we define the Lax-Oleinik semi-groups $T_t$ and $\breve T_t$ on $C^0(M,{\mathbb{R}})$ by $$T_t u(x)=\min_{y\in M}\big( u(y)+A_t(y,x)\big)
\;\;\text{ and }\;\;
\breve T_t u(x)=\max_{y\in M}\big( u(y)-A_t(x,y)\big).$$ The following useful Lemma is proved in Fathi’s book:
Given a Lipschitz function $u:M\lto {\mathbb{R}}$, the following properties are equivalent:
- $u$ is a sub-solution of (HJ).
- The inequality $u(y)-u(x)\leq A_t(x,y)
$ holds for each $t> 0$ and each $(x,y)\in M\times M$.
- The function $[0,\infty[\ni t\lmto T_tu(x)$ is non-decreasing for each $x\in M$.
- The function $[0,\infty[\ni t\lmto \breve T_tu(x)$ is non-increasing for each $x\in M$.
An important consequence is that the semi-groups $T_t$ and $\breve T_t$ preserve the set of sub-solutions. Another important property of these semigroups is that, for each $t>0$ and each continuous function $u$, the function $T_tu$ is semi-concave and the function $\breve T_t u$ semi-convex, see [@AMS; @Fa:un] and Appendix B for the definitions. Recall that a function is $C^{1,1}$ if and only if it is both semi-concave and semi-convex.
If $u$ is a sub-solution of (HJ), then for each $s> 0$ and $t> 0$, the function $T_s\breve T_t u$ is a sub-solution. We shall prove that, for each fixed $t>0$, this function is $C^{1,1}$ when $s$ is small enough. Ludovic Rifford has pointed out to the author that this is a kind of Lasry-Lions regularization, see [@LL]. Since $\breve T_t u$ is semi-convex, Theorem A follows from the following result, which may have other applications.
\[key\] Let $H$ be a Tonelli Hamiltonian. For each semi-convex function $v$, the function $T_sv$ is $C^{1,1}$ for each sufficiently small $s>0$.
In order to prove this proposition, it is enough to prove that the function $T_s v$ is semi-convex for small $s$, since we already know that it is semi-concave for all $s>0$. This follows from two Lemmas:
For each bounded subset $F\subset C^2(M,{\mathbb{R}})$ there exists a time $s_0>0$ such that, for each $s\in [0,s_0]$, the image $T_s(F)$ is a bounded subset of $C^2(M,{\mathbb{R}})$ and the following relation holds for all functions $f\in F$ and all $x\in M$ $$\label{eq}
T_sf(x(s))=f(x)+\int_0^s c+L(x(t),\dot x(t)) dt,$$ where $x(t)$ is the curve $\pi \circ \psi_t(x,df(x))$ ($\pi:T^*M\lto M$ is the projection and $\psi_t$ is the Hamiltonian flow).
Let us consider a $C^2$ function $f$ and the graph $\Gamma_f\subset T^*M$ of its differential. This graph is a $C^1$ Lagrangian manifold transversal to the fibers. It is known that, for $s\geq 0$ small enough, the Lagrangian manifold $\psi_s(\Gamma_f)$ is the graph of a $C^2$ function, and that this $C^2$ function is $T_sf$. Then, we have (\[eq\]). The maximum time $s_0$ such that these properties hold is uniform for families of functions which are bounded in $C^2$ norm (for then the associated graphs are contained in a given compact set, and are uniformly transversal to the verticals). In addition, one can choose $s_0$ in such a way that the set $\{T_sf,s\in [0,s_0],f\in F\}$ is bounded in the $C^2$ topology, (which amounts to say that the manifolds $\psi_s(\Gamma_f)$ are uniformly transversal to the fibers).
Let $v$ be a semi-convex function. Then there exists a bounded subset $F\subset C^{2}(M,{\mathbb{R}})$ and a time $s_0>0$ such that $$T_sv=\max _{f\in F} T_sf$$ for all $s\in [0,s_0]$, hence $T_sv$ is a semi-convex function for $s\geq 0$ small enough.\
If $v$ is semi-convex, then there exists a bounded subset $F\subset C^2(M,{\mathbb{R}})$ such that $v=\max _F f$ and such that for each $x$ and each $p\in \partial^-v(x)$ (the set of proximal sub-differentials of v at point $x$, see Appendix B), there exists a function $f\in F$ satisfying $(f(x),df(x))=(v(x),p)$, see Appendix B. Let us fix from now on such a family $F$ of functions, and consider the time $s_0$ associated to this family by the first Lemma. Notice that $$T_sv\geq \sup _{f\in F} T_sf$$ for all $s$, because for each $f\in F$ we have $f\leq v$ hence $T_sf\leq T_sv$. In order to prove that the equality holds for $s\in [0,s_0]$, let us fix a point $x\in M$. There exists a point $y$ such that $$T_sv(x)=v(y)+A_s(y,x).$$ Now let $(x(t),p(t)):[0,s]\lto T^*M$ be a Hamiltonian trajectory which is optimal for $A_s(y,x)$. We mean that $x(0)=y$, $x(s)=x$, and $$A_s(y,x)=\int_0^s c+L(x(t),\dot x(t)) dt.$$ It is known (see [@Fa:un; @AMS]) that $-p(0)$ is then a proximal super-differential of the function $z\lmto A_s(z,x)$ at point $y$. Since the function $z\lmto u(z)+A_s(z,x)$ is minimal at $y$, the linear form $p(0)$ is a proximal sub-differential of the function $u$ at point $y$. Let us consider a function $f\in F$ such that $(f(y),df(y))=(u(y),p(0))$. Then we have $(x(t),p(t))=\psi_t(y,df(y))$ and, by the first Lemma, $$T_sf(x)=T_sf(x(s))=f(y)+\int_0^sc+ L(x(t),\dot x(t)) dt
=u(y)+A_s(y,x)=T_su(x).$$ We have proved that, for each point $x\in M$, there exists a function $f\in F$ such that $T_sf(x)=T_su(x)$. This ends the proof.
The proof also implies:
\[cor\] If $u$ is a $C^{1,1}$ sub-solution, then there exists $\epsilon>0$ such that $T_{t}u$ and $\breve T_{t}u$ are $C^{1,1}$ sub-solutions when $t\in [0,\epsilon]$. In addition, we have, for these values of $t$, $$\Gamma_u=\psi_{t}\big(\Gamma_{\breve T_{t}u}\big)
=\psi_{-t}\big(\Gamma_{ T_{t}u}\big)$$ where $\Gamma_f$ is the graph of the differential of $f$.
The Aubry set {#Aubry}
=============
In this section, we consider only the critical case $c=\alpha(H)$, and prove Theorem B. Let us first define the projected Aubry set ${\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}}(H)\subset M$. This is the set of points $x\in M$ such that $H(x,du_x)=\alpha(H)$ for each $C^1$ sub-solution $u$. A similar definition is given in [@FS:05].
If $u_1$ and $u_2$ are two critial $C^1$ sub-solutions, then $du_1=du_2$ on ${\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}}(H)$.
If $du_1(x)\neq du_2(x)$, then, by the strict convexity of $H$, the function $(u_1+u_2)/2$ is a $C^1$ critical sub-solution which is strict at $x$. This implies that $x$ does not belong to ${\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}}(H)$.
As a consequence, we can define in a natural way the set $$\tilde {\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}}(H):=
\{(x,du_x)| x\in {\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}}(H)\}$$ where $u$ is any $C^1$ critical sub-solution.
There exists a $C^{1,1}$ critical sub-solution $u$ which is strict outside of ${\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}}(H)$.
By the Addendum of Theorem A, it is enough to prove that there exists a critical sub-solution which is strict outside of ${\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}}(H)$. Since $C^1(M,{\mathbb{R}})$ is separable, the set of critical $C^1$ sub-solutions of (HJ) endowed with the $C^1$ norm is separable. As a consequence, there exists a dense sequence $u_n$ of $C^1$ critical sub-solutions. The $C^1$ function $$u(x):=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty} \frac{u_n(x)}{2^n}$$ is a $C^1$ critical sub-solution of (HJ) which is strict outside of ${\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}}(H)$. Indeed, for each point $x\not \in {\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}}(H)$, there exists a $C^1$ critical sub-solution $v$ such that $H(x,dv_x)<\alpha(H)$. Since the sequence $u_n$ is dense for the $C^1$ topology, we conclude that $H(x,du_n(x))<\alpha(H)$ for some $n$. The desired conclusion follows by the convexity of $H$.
This Proposition implies that ${\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}}(H)$ is not empty. Otherwise, there would exist a critical sub-solution strict on $M$, which is a contradiction.
The set $\tilde {\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}}(H)$ is invariant.
Let us choose a $C^{1,1}$ critical sub-solution $u$ which is strict outside of the projected Aubry set. We have $\tilde {\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}}(H)=\Gamma_u\cap H^{-1}(\alpha(H))$. Let $\epsilon$ be given by corollary \[cor\]. We claim that $\psi_t(\tilde {\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}}(H))=\tilde {\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}}(H)$ for all $t\in [-\epsilon,\epsilon]$, where $\psi_t$ is the Hamiltonian flow. This claim clearly implies the desired result. Let $(x,du_x)$ be a point of $\tilde {\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}}(H)$ and $t\in [-\epsilon,\epsilon]$. Let us denote by $(y,dv_y)$ the point $\psi_t(x,du_x)$, where $v:= T_tu$. Since $v$ is a critical sub-solution, we have $(y,dv_y)\in \tilde {\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}}(H)$ provided $y\in {\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}}(H)$. In order to prove this inclusion, we denote by $w$ the function $w:=\breve T_tu$, which is a $C^{1,1}$ critical sub-solution. Since $x\in {\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}}(H)$, we have $du_x=dw_x$. This implies that $\psi_t(x,dw_x)=\psi_t(x,du_x)=(y,dv_y)$. Since $\psi_t(\Gamma_w)=\Gamma_u$, this implies that $dv_y=du_y$, and, by energy conservation, that $H(y,du_y)=\alpha(H)$. Since the sub-solution $u$ is strict outside of ${\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}}(H)$, we conclude that $y\in {\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}}(H)$.
If $u$ is a critical sub-solution (not necessarily $C^1$), then $T_tu(x)=\breve T_tu(x)=u(x)$ for all $t\geq 0$ and $x\in {\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}}(H)$. Therefore, if $u$ is a critical sub-solution, there exists a $C^{1,1}$ sub-solution which coincides with $u$ on ${\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}}(H)$.
The second part of the statement clearly follows from the first part: just take $T_{\epsilon}\breve T_t u$, which is equal to $u$ on ${\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}}(H)$. So we have to prove the first part of the statement. It is enough to prove the statement for $C^{1,1}$ critical sub-solutions, since these sub-solutions are dense for the $C^0$ topology. It is also enough to prove it for $t\leq \epsilon$. In order to do so, we observe, in the proof above, that $$v(y)=u(x)+\int_0^t \alpha(H)+ L(\gamma(s),\dot\gamma(s))ds\geq u(y)$$ (the last inequality holds because $u$ is a critcal sub-solution) and $$u(x)\geq w(x)=u(y)-\int_0^t \alpha(H)+ L(\gamma(s),\dot\gamma(s))ds
\geq v(y)-\int_0^t \alpha(H)+ L(\gamma(s),\dot\gamma(s))ds=u(x).$$ It follows that $u(x)=w(x)=\breve T_tu(x)$. As a consequence, all the inequalities involved are equalities, hence $u(y)=v(y)=T_tu(y)$. This equality can be proved at any point $y\in {\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}}(H)$ by taking $x=\pi\circ \psi_{-t}(y,du_y)$, where $\pi:T^*M\lto M$ is the projection. Indeed, in this case, we have $\psi_t(x,du_x)=(y,dv_y)=(y,du_y)$.
If $(\gamma(t),p(t)):{\mathbb{R}}\lto T^*M$ is a Hamiltonian trajectory contained in $\tilde {\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}}(H)$. It follows from the remarks above that the curve $\gamma(t)$ is calibrated by all critical sub-solutions $u$ in the sense that the equality $$u(\gamma(t))-u(\gamma(s))=
\int_s^t \alpha(H)+L(\gamma(\sigma),\dot \gamma(\sigma))d\sigma$$ holds for all $[s,t]\subset {\mathbb{R}}$. This implies that our definition of the Aubry set is the same as the one given in Fathi’s book.
Examples
========
Mechanical Hamiltonian system
-----------------------------
Let us consider the case $$H(x,p)=\frac{1}{2}\|p\|_x^2+V(x)$$ where $\|.\|_x$ is a Riemaniann metric on $M$ and $V$ is a smooth function on $M$. Then it is easy to see that $\alpha(H)=\max V$, and that there exists a smooth sub-solution to (HJ): any constant function is such a sub-solution!
Non-existence of a $C^2$ sub-solution
-------------------------------------
Let us now specialise to $M={\ensuremath{\mathbb{T}}}$, and consider the Hamiltonian $$H_P(x,p)=\frac{1}{2}(p+P)^2-\sin^2 (\pi x)$$ depending on the real parameter $P$. For $P=0$ this is a Mechanical system as discussed above, and the constants are sub-solutions of (HJ). Let $X(x):{\ensuremath{\mathbb{T}}}\lto {\mathbb{R}}$ be the function such that $X(x)=\sin(\pi x)$ for $x\in [0,1]$. Let us set $$a=\frac{2}{\pi}
=\int_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb{T}}}} X(x) dx.$$ The reader can check easily that $\alpha(H_P)=0$ for $P\in [-a,a]$. For each $P\in ]-a,a[$, the equation (HJ) has smooth sub-solutions. For these values of $P$, the Aubry set is the fixed point $(0,-P)$.
However, for $P=a$, there is one and only one critical sub-solution of (HJ), which turns out to be a solution. It is given by the primitive of the function $X-a$. This function is $C^{1,1}$ but not $C^2$. Note that the Aubry set, then, is not reduced to the hyperbolic fixed point $(0,-a)$ but is the whole graph of $X-a$.
Semi-concave functions {#semiconcave}
======================
We recall some useful facts on semi-concave functions, see for example [@CaSi; @Fa:un] for more material. In all this section, $M$ is a compact manifold of dimension $d$. It is useful to fix once and for all a finite atlas $\Phi$ of $M$ composed of charts $\varphi:B_3\lto M$, where $B_r$ is the open ball of radius $r$ centered at zero in ${\mathbb{R}}^d$. We assume that the sets $\varphi(B_1),\varphi\in \Phi$ cover $M$. A family $F$ of $C^2$ functions is said bounded if there exists a constant $C>0$ such that $$\|d^2(u\circ \varphi)_x\|\leq C$$ for all $x\in B_1, \varphi\in \Phi, u\in F$. Note that a bounded family is not required to be bounded in $C^0$ norm, but will automatically be bounded in $C^1$ norm and thus equi-Lipschitz. The notion of bounded family of functions does not depend on the atlas $\Phi$.
A function $u:M\lto {\mathbb{R}}$ is called semi-concave if there exists a bounded subset $F_u$ of the set $C^2(M,{\mathbb{R}})$ such that $$u=\inf_{f\in F_u}f.$$ A semi-concave function is Lipschitz. We say that the linear form $p\in T_xM$ is a proximal super-differential of the function $u$ at point $x$ if there exists a $C^2$ function $f$ such that $f-u$ has a minimum at $x$ and $df_x=p$. We denote by $\partial^+u(x)$ the set of proximal superdifferentials of $u$ at $x$. We say that a linear form $p\in T_xM$ is a $K$-super-differential of the function $u$ at point $x$ if for each chart $\varphi\in \Phi$ and each point $y\in B_2$ satisfying $\varphi(y)=x$, the inequality $$u\circ\varphi(z)-u\circ\varphi(y)
\leq p\circ d\varphi_y(z-y)+K\|z-y\|^2$$ holds for each $z\in B_2$. A function $u$ on $M$ is called $K$-semi-concave if it has a $K$-super-differential at each point. It is equivalent to require that, for each $\varphi\in \Phi$, the function $$u\circ \varphi(y)-K\|y\|^2$$ is concave on $B_2$. As a consequence, if $u$ is $K$-semi-concave and if $p$ is a proximal super-differential of $u$ at $x$, then $p$ is a $K$-super-differential of $u$ at $x$.
A function $u$ is semi-concave if and only if there exists a number $K>0$ such that $u$ is $K$-semi-concave. Then, there exists a bounded subset $F\subset C^2(M,{\mathbb{R}})$ such that $$u=\min _{f\in F} f$$ and, for each point $x\in M$ and each super-differential $p$ of $u$ at $x$, there exists a function $f\in F$ such that $(f(x),df(x))=(u(x),p)$.
Let us consider a smooth function $g:{\mathbb{R}}^d\lto {\mathbb{R}}$ such that $0\leq g \leq 1$, and such that $g=0$ outside of $B_2$ and $g=1$ inside $B_1$. Let us associate, to each chart $\varphi\in \Phi$, and each point $(x,p)\in T_xM$ satisfying $x\in \varphi(B_1)$, the function $f_{x,p,\varphi}:M\lto {\mathbb{R}}$ defined by $$f_{x,p,\varphi}\circ \varphi(z)
:=g(z)\big(u(x)+p\circ d\varphi_y(z-y)+K\|z-y\|^2\big)
+(1-g(z))\max u$$ for $z\in B_2$, where $y=\varphi^{-1}(x)$, and $f_{x,p,\varphi}=\max u$ outside of $\varphi(B_2)$. The functions $f_{x,p,\varphi}, \varphi\in \Phi,
x\in \varphi(B_1), p\in \partial^+u(x)$ form a bounded subset $F$ of $C^2(M,{\mathbb{R}})$. It is easy to check that $f=\min _{f\in F}f$.
A function $u$ is called semi-convex if $-u$ is semi-concave.
A function is $C^{1,1}$ if and only if it is semi-concave and semi-convex.
A very elementary proof of this statement is given in the book of Fathi. Another proof is given in [@CaSi], Corollary 3.3.8.
[10]{} P. Bernard, *The dynamics of pseudographs in convex Hamiltonian systems,* preprint.
P. Cannarsa and C. Sinestrari, Semiconcave functions, Hamilton-Jacobi equations and optimal control, *Progress in nonlinear differential equations and their applications*, Birkhäuser (2004).
G. Contreras, R. Iturriaga, G. P. Paternain and M. Paternain, *Lagrangian graphs, minimizing measures and Mañé’s critical values.* GAFA **8** (1998), no. 5, 788–809.
A. Fathi, Weak KAM Theorem in Lagrangian Dynamics, Book to appear.
A. Fathi and A. Siconolfi, *Existence of $C^1$ critical sub-solutions of the Hamilton-Jacobi equation,* Invent. Math. **155** (2004), no. 2, 363–388.
A. Fathi and A. Siconolfi, *PDE aspects of Aubry-Mather theory for quasiconvex Hamiltonians* Calc. of Var. **22** (2005), 185–228.
J. M. Lasry and J. L. Lions, *A Remark on regularization in Hilbert Spaces,* Israel J. Math. **55** (1986), no 3, 257–266.
D. Massart, *Sub-solutions of time-periodic Hamilton-Jacobi equations*, to appear in Erg. Theory and Dyn. Syst.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'We study the interplay between canonical heights and endomorphisms of an abelian variety $A$ over a number field $k$. In particular we show that whenever the ring of endomorphisms defined over $k$ is strictly larger than ${{\mathbb{Z}}}$ there will be ${{\mathbb{Q}}}$-linear relations among the values of a canonical height pairing evaluated at a basis modulo torsion of $A(k)$.[^1]'
author:
- Niko Naumann
title: 'Linear relations among the values of canonical heights from the existence of non-trivial endomorphisms'
---
Introduction {#sec1}
============
Let $A$ be an abelian variety over a number field $k$. In [@Ne] Néron constructed a canonical pairing $$A({\overline{k}})\times \hat{A}({\overline{k}})\longrightarrow{{\mathbb{R}}}.$$ The choice of a polarization then determines a height pairing $<,>$ on $A({\overline{k}})$. As observed in [@Ta] the Rosati involution of an endomorphism is the adjoint with respect to this canonical height pairing of the endomorphism acting on rational points. We show that this forces linear relations among the values of the height pairing.\
For the precise formulation let us first recall a part of the Albert classification (c.f. [@Mu], p. 201 for more details): If $A$ is $k$-simple then $D$:=End$_k^0(A)$:=End$_k(A)\otimes{{\mathbb{Q}}}$ is a skew field carrying an involution, viz. the Rosati involution. Then $A/k$ is said to be of type I if $D$ is a totally real number field; the involution is trivial in this case. Types II and III comprise quaternion algebras over totally real number fields. Finally, $A/k$ is of type IV if the center of $D$ is a CM field; the restriction of the involution to this field is then complex conjugation.\
Denote by $W \subseteq {{\mathbb{R}}}$ the ${{\mathbb{Q}}}$-span of $\langle A(k) , A(k) \rangle$. For $r := $rk$(A(k))$ we have
$$\label{eq:1}
\dim_{{{\mathbb{Q}}}} (W) \le \frac{r}{2} (r + 1 )$$
because $\langle , \rangle$ is symmetric. Taking into account endomorphisms of $A$ we can prove the following bound:
\[theorem1\] Assume $A$ is $k$-simple. Then $r$ is divisible by $[{\mathrm{End}\,}^0_k (A) : {{\mathbb{Q}}}]$ and we have $$\mbox{\rm dim}_{{\mathbb{Q}}}(W)\leq\frac{r}{2}(\frac{r}{[\mbox{\rm End}_k^0(A):{{\mathbb{Q}}}]}+\alpha)$$ where $\alpha = 1 , {\frac{1}{2}}, - {\frac{1}{2}}$ or $0$ according to whether ${\mathrm{End}\,}^0_k (A)$ is of type I, II, III or IV in the Albert classification.
If $r \neq 0$ and ${\mathrm{End}\,}^0_{k} (A) \neq {{\mathbb{Q}}}$ then dim$_{{\mathbb{Q}}}(W)<\frac{r}{2}(r+1)$, i.e. if there are non-torsion points in $A (k)$ and non-trivial (i.e. $\not\in{{\mathbb{Z}}}$ ) endomorphisms of $A$ defined over $k$ then the bound in theorem \[theorem1\] is strictly sharper than the a priori bound (\[eq:1\]). So the values of the height pairing on a basis modulo torsion of $A (k)$ satisfy non-trivial ${{\mathbb{Q}}}$-linear relations (inside ${{\mathbb{R}}}$).
As an example we prove:
\[theorem2\] Let $A/{{\mathbb{Q}}}$ be an abelian surface with real multiplication and let $D$ be the discriminant of ${\mathrm{End}\,}^0_{{\mathbb{Q}}}(A)$. Then there is a basis $P_1,...,P_{2n}\in A({{\mathbb{Q}}})\otimes{{\mathbb{Q}}}$ such that for any canonical height $h$ we have: $$h(P_{n+i})=Dh(P_i)\quad\mbox{ for }i=1,...,n$$
Examples of such surfaces are provided by modular abelian surfaces, c.f. also the discussion at the end of section \[sec3\].\
Next we generalize to higher dimensional abelian varieties the well known fact that the canonical height $h$ on an elliptic curve satisfies $$\label{eq:2}
h {\mbox{\scriptsize $\,\circ\,$}}\varphi = (\deg \varphi) h$$ for any endomorphism $\varphi$. For this we will have to deal simultaneously with heights associated to possibly different line-bundles. We are interested only in heights $h_{\cal L}$ afforded by [*symmetric*]{} line-bundles ${\cal L}$ and introduce $$SL(A/k):=\{ {\cal L} \in Pic(A_k) : [-1]^*({\cal L})\simeq {\cal L} \} \otimes{{\mathbb{Q}}}.$$
\[theorem3\] Assume $A$ is $k$-simple of dimension $g$. Let ${{\mathcal L}}_1 , \ldots , {{\mathcal L}}_s$ be symmetric line-bundles on $A$ constituting a ${{\mathbb{Q}}}$-basis of $SL(A/k)$. Then there are quadratic forms $$\alpha_{ij} : {\mathrm{End}\,}^0_k (A) \longrightarrow {{\mathbb{Q}}}\; ; \; i,j = 1 , \ldots , s$$ over ${{\mathbb{Q}}}$ such that for all $P \in A (k) \otimes {{\mathbb{Q}}}$ and $\varphi \in {\mathrm{End}\,}^0_k (A)$ we have $$h_{{{\mathcal L}}_i} (\varphi (P)) = \sum_j \alpha_{ij} (\varphi) h_{{{\mathcal L}}_j} (P) \; .$$ Finally: $$\det (\alpha_{ij} (\varphi)) = \deg (\varphi)^{s/g} \; .$$
Here deg is the degree extended to a homogeneous polynomial function on $ {\mathrm{End}\,}^0_k (A)$, c.f. [@Mu], 19, Thm. 2.
Section \[sec2\] contains the proofs of the above results. We give some examples and the proof of theorem \[theorem2\] in the last section. I would like to thank V. Talamanca for making a copy of [@Ta] available to me and J. Cremona for pointing out [@FLSSSW]. I would also like to thank the referee for making numerous remarks which led to a substantial improvement of the exposition.\
Proofs {#sec2}
======
We recall some fundamental facts about heights on abelian varieties over number fields, c.f. [@La], Chapter 5. There is a canonical homomorphism $${\mathrm{Pic}}(A_{{\overline{k}}}) \longrightarrow \{ \mbox{quadratic functions} \; A ({\overline{k}}) \to {{\mathbb{R}}}\} \; , \; {{\mathcal L}}\mapsto h_{{{\mathcal L}}}$$ which is natural in $A$. The function $h_{{\mathcal L}}$ is called the canonical height associated to ${{\mathcal L}}$. In particular, for the Poincaré bundle ${{\mathcal P}}$ on $A \times \hat{A}$ we have $$h_{{{\mathcal P}}} : A ({\overline{k}}) \times \hat{A} ({\overline{k}}) \longrightarrow {{\mathbb{R}}}\; .$$ Here $\hat{A}$ is the dual abelian variety of $A$. Recall the natural homomorphism $${\mathrm{Pic}}(A_{{\overline{k}}}) \longrightarrow {\mathrm{Hom}}_{{\overline{k}}} (A , \hat{A}) \; , \; {{\mathcal L}}\mapsto \varphi_{{{\mathcal L}}} \;$$ with $\varphi_{{{\mathcal L}}}(a)=t_a^*({{\mathcal L}})\otimes{{\mathcal L}}^{-1}$ ($t_a$ is translation by $a$), see [@Mu], II.8. For ${{\mathcal L}}\in {\mathrm{Pic}}(A_{{\overline{k}}})$ we denote by $$L_{{{\mathcal L}}} (x,y) := h_{{{\mathcal L}}} (x+y) - h_{{{\mathcal L}}} (x) - h_{{{\mathcal L}}} (y)\; ; \; x,y\in A({\overline{k}})$$ the bilinear form associated to $h_{{{\mathcal L}}}$. We say that a line-bundle ${{\mathcal L}}$ on $A$ is [*symmetric*]{} if \[-1\]$^*({{\mathcal L}})\simeq{{\mathcal L}}$.
\[lemma2\]
1. $h_{{{\mathcal P}}}$ is bilinear.
2. For ${{\mathcal L}}\in {\mathrm{Pic}}(A_{{\overline{k}}}) : L_{{{\mathcal L}}} (x,y) = - h_{{{\mathcal P}}} (x , \varphi_{{{\mathcal L}}} (y))$ and if ${{\mathcal L}}$ is symmetric then $h_{{{\mathcal L}}} (x) = - {\frac{1}{2}}h_{{{\mathcal P}}} (x, \varphi_{{{\mathcal L}}} (x))$.
3. For $\lambda \in {\mathrm{End}\,}_{{\overline{k}}} (A) : h_{{{\mathcal P}}} ( \lambda x , y) = h_{{{\mathcal P}}} (x , \hat{\lambda} y)$.
4. For the restriction of $h_{{{\mathcal P}}}$ to $A (k) \times \hat{A} (k)$ the kernels on both sides are exactly the torsion subgroups.
<!-- -->
1. [@La], Ch. 5, Prop. 4.3.
2. [@La], Ch. 5, Thm. 4.5.
3. $h_{{{\mathcal P}}} (\lambda x,y) = h_{{{\mathcal P}}} ((\lambda \times 1) (x,y)) = h_{(\lambda \times 1)^* ({{\mathcal P}})} (x,y) = h_{(1 \times \hat{\lambda})^* ({{\mathcal P}})} (x,y) = h_{{{\mathcal P}}} (x , \hat{\lambda} y)$.
4. As $A = \Hat{\Hat{A}}$ (over $k!)$ it suffices to consider the left kernel. $A (k)^{{\mathrm{tor}}}$ is orthogonal to $\hat{A} (k)$ because ${{\mathbb{R}}}$ is torsion free. Let $P \in A (k)$ be orthogonal to $\hat{A} (k)$. Choose ${{\mathcal L}}$ a symmetric ample line-bundle on $A$, defined over $k$. Then $h_{{{\mathcal L}}} (P) = - {\frac{1}{2}}h_{{{\mathcal P}}} (P , \varphi_{{{\mathcal L}}} (P)) = 0$ because $\varphi_{{{\mathcal L}}} (P) \in \hat{A} (k)$ and so $P \in A (k)^{{\mathrm{tor}}}$ by [@La], Ch. 5, Thm. 6.1.
Fix some symmetric ample line-bundle ${{\mathcal L}}$ on $A$, defined over $k$. Associated to this is the height pairing $L_{{\mathcal L}}$ and we denote by $\langle , \rangle$ the extension of $L_{{{\mathcal L}}} \, |_{A (k)}$ to $V := A (k) \otimes {{\mathbb{Q}}}$. Furthermore, ${{\mathcal L}}$ determines an involution $'$ on ${\mathrm{End}\,}^0_k (A) := {\mathrm{End}\,}_k (A) \otimes {{\mathbb{Q}}}$, the Rosati involution: $$\varphi' := \varphi^{-1}_{{{\mathcal L}}} \hat{\varphi} \varphi_{{{\mathcal L}}} \quad \mbox{for} \; \varphi \in {\mathrm{End}\,}^0_k (A) \; .$$ We have a natural representation $$\label{eq:3}
{\mathrm{End}\,}_k (A) \longrightarrow {\mathrm{End}\,}_{{{\mathbb{Z}}}} (A (k))$$ and as $A (k)$ is finitely generated $${\mathrm{End}\,}_{{{\mathbb{Q}}}} (A (k) \otimes {{\mathbb{Q}}}) \simeq {\mathrm{End}\,}_{{{\mathbb{Z}}}} (A (k)) \otimes {{\mathbb{Q}}}\; .$$ So from (\[eq:3\]) we get a natural representation $$\phi : {\mathrm{End}\,}^0_k (A) \longrightarrow {\mathrm{End}\,}_{{{\mathbb{Q}}}} (V) \; .$$
\[lemma1\] For $\varphi \in {\mathrm{End}\,}^0_k (A)$ and $v,w \in V$ we have $$\langle \phi(\varphi) v , w \rangle = \langle v , \phi(\varphi') w \rangle \; .$$
For $v,w \in V$ and $\varphi \in {\mathrm{End}\,}^0_k (A)$ we compute: $$\begin{aligned}
\langle \phi (\varphi) v ,w \rangle & = & L_{{{\mathcal L}}} (\varphi v,w) = -h_{{{\mathcal P}}} (\varphi v , \varphi_{{{\mathcal L}}} w) \quad \mbox{by Lemma \ref{lemma2}, 2)}\\
& = & -h_{{{\mathcal P}}} (v , \hat{\varphi} \varphi_{{{\mathcal L}}} w) \quad \mbox{by Lemma \ref{lemma2}, 3)} \\
& = & -h_{{{\mathcal P}}} (v , \varphi_{{{\mathcal L}}} \varphi' w) = L_{{{\mathcal L}}} (v , \varphi' w) = \langle v , \phi (\varphi') w \rangle \; .
\end{aligned}$$
(of theorem \[theorem1\]): As $A$ is $k$-simple $D$:=End$^0_k(A)$ is a skew field acting on $V=A(k)\otimes{{\mathbb{Q}}}$. So we have $V\simeq D^n$ as left $D$-modules for some $n\geq0$, hence $[D:{{\mathbb{Q}}}]$ divides $r=$dim$_{{\mathbb{Q}}}(V)$. Here we consider $D$ as a left $D$-module by multiplication, as usual. The height pairing corresponds to a ${{\mathbb{Q}}}$-linear map $$\label{D1}
D^n\otimes_{{{\mathbb{Q}}}}D^n\longrightarrow {{\mathbb{R}}}.$$ We consider $D$ also as a [*right*]{} $D$-module by $xy:=y'x$ $(x,y\in D)$, where $'$ is the Rosati involution on $D$. Then the content of lemma \[lemma1\] is that (\[D1\]) factors over a ${{\mathbb{Q}}}$-linear map $$\label{D2}
D^n\otimes_D D^n\longrightarrow{{\mathbb{R}}}.$$ We can identify $$D^n\otimes_D D^n\stackrel{\simeq}{\longrightarrow} M_n(D)\quad , \quad
(x_i)_i\otimes(y_j)_j\mapsto (x_i'y_j)_{ij}.$$ The subspace of $D^n\otimes_D D^n$ spanned by $v\otimes w-w\otimes v$ is then identified with
$$\label{ab}
T:=\{(x_{ij})\in M_n(D) : x_{ij}'=-x_{ji}\}\subset M_n(D).$$
Since the height pairing is symmetric, the map in (\[D2\]) factors over $M_n(D)/T$, hence $$\mbox{dim}_{{{\mathbb{Q}}}}(W)\leq\mbox{dim}_{{{\mathbb{Q}}}}(M_n(D)/T).$$ In the computation of the dimension of $M_n(D)/T$ we write $|\cdot |$ as short-hand for dim$_{{\mathbb{Q}}}(\cdot)$ and put $S:=\{x\in D : x=x'\}$ and $\eta:=|S|/|D|$. Recall that $r=n|D|$.\
From (\[ab\]) we see that $$|T|=(1+...+(n-1))|D|+n(|D|-|S|)=\frac{n(n-1)}{2}|D|+n(|D|-|S|),$$ hence $$\begin{aligned}
|M_n(D)/T|=n^2|D|-(\frac{n(n-1)}{2}|D|+n|D|(1-\eta))\nonumber\\
=\frac{n(n+1)}{2}|D|-n|D|(1-\eta)\nonumber\\
=\frac{r}{2}(n+1-2(1-\eta))=\frac{r}{2}(\frac{r}{|D|}+2\eta-1).\nonumber\\
\nonumber\end{aligned}$$ This proves the theorem with $\alpha:=2\eta-1$. From [@Mu], 21 we know $\eta=1,3/4,1/4,1/2$ for $A$ of type I, II, III or IV. Accordingly $\alpha=1,1/2,-1/2$ or $0$, as claimed.
Recall the notation $$SL(A/k)=\{ {\cal L}\in Pic(A_k) : [-1]^*({\cal L})\simeq {\cal L}\}\otimes{{\mathbb{Q}}}.$$ The map $$\phi_A: SL(A/k)\longrightarrow\{\mbox{quadratic forms:} A(k)\otimes{{\mathbb{Q}}}\rightarrow{{\mathbb{R}}}\}\quad , \quad {\cal L}\mapsto h_{\cal L}$$ is a transformation of contravariant functors on the category of abelian varieties up to isogeny over $k$.\
Now we explain when different line-bundles give rise to the same height. Note that the answer is not immediate because we look at heights restricted to $A(k)$ only and not on all of $A(\bar{k})$.
\[prop1\]
The map $\phi_A$ is injective if and only if every non-trivial isogeny factor of $A$ over $k$ has a $k$-rational point of infinite order.
Assume first that $A$ has a non-trivial factor $B$ with $B(k)\otimes{{\mathbb{Q}}}=0$. There is a surjective homomorphism $$\pi:A\longrightarrow B$$ defined over $k$. Fix ${\cal M}$ a non-trivial symmetric line-bundle on $B$ defined over $k$. Then ${\cal L}:=\pi^*({\cal M})$ is non-trivial but $$\phi_A({\cal L})=h_{\cal L}=h_{\cal M}\circ\pi=0 \quad\mbox{ on}\quad A(k)\otimes{{\mathbb{Q}}},$$ so $\phi_A$ is not injective.\
For the converse assume that every factor of $A$ has a rational point of infinite order and there is a non-trivial ${\cal L}\in SL(A/k)$ with $h_{\cal L}=0$ on $A(k)$. We derive a contradiction as follows: There is a simple sub-variety $i:B\hookrightarrow A$ such that ${\cal M}:=i^*({\cal L})$ is not trivial but $h_{\cal M}=h_{\cal L}\circ
i$ is zero on $B(k)\otimes{{\mathbb{Q}}}\neq 0$. As $B$ is simple, $\varphi_{\cal M}:
B\rightarrow\hat{B}$ is an isogeny inducing an isomorphism $B(k)\otimes{{\mathbb{Q}}}\stackrel{\simeq}{\rightarrow}\hat{B}(k)\otimes{{\mathbb{Q}}}$. But this map has to be zero: For $P,Q\in B(k)$ we compute, using lemma \[lemma2\]: $$0=L_{\cal M}(P,Q)=-h_{\cal P}(P,\varphi_{\cal M}(Q)),$$ hence $\varphi_{\cal M}(Q)\in\hat{B}(k)^{tor}$ and $\varphi_{\cal M}(Q)=0$ in $\hat{B}(k)\otimes{{\mathbb{Q}}}$.
In order to prove theorem \[theorem3\] we want to exploit the relation $h_{\cal L}\circ\alpha=h_{\alpha^*({\cal L})}$. Now, the assignment ${\cal L}\mapsto\alpha^*({\cal L})$ does not give an honest action of End$_k^0(A)$ on $SL(A/k)$ because it is not additive in ${\cal L}$ and to proceed further we identify $SL(A/k)$ with the subspace of symmetric elements $$S:=\{\alpha\in\mbox{\rm End}_k^0(A) : \alpha'=\alpha\}\subset\mbox{\rm End}_k^0(A)$$ as follows:
\[lemma4\] Let $A$ be an abelian variety over the perfect field $k$ and choose an ample line-bundle on $A$, defined over $k$. Denote by $'$ and $\lambda$ the associated involution and polarization, respectively. Then $$\psi : SL(A/k) \longrightarrow {\mathrm{End}\,}^0_k (A) \; , \; {{\mathcal L}}\longmapsto \lambda^{-1} {\mbox{\scriptsize $\,\circ\,$}}\varphi_{{{\mathcal L}}}$$ identifies $SL(A/k)$ with $S$.
Observing that $SL(A/k)\simeq (NS(A_{\bar{k}})\otimes{{\mathbb{Q}}})^{G_k}$ this is standard for $k=\bar{k}$, c.f. [@Mu], p. 190. The general case follows because $\psi$ is $G_k$-linear and $'$ commutes with the action of $G_k$, the absolute Galois group of $k$. This short proof was pointed out to me by the referee.
In terms of this identification the sought for expression of $\alpha^*({\cal L})$ is the following:
\[lemma5\] Assumptions and notations being as in Lemma \[lemma4\], given $\alpha \in {\mathrm{End}\,}^0_k (A)$ and ${{\mathcal L}}\in SL(A/k)$ we have $$\psi (\alpha^* ({{\mathcal L}})) = \alpha' \psi ({{\mathcal L}}) \alpha \quad \mbox{in} \; S \; .$$
$$\begin{aligned}
\psi (\alpha^* ({{\mathcal L}})) = \lambda^{-1} {\mbox{\scriptsize $\,\circ\,$}}\varphi_{\alpha^* ({{\mathcal L}})} & = & \lambda^{-1} {\mbox{\scriptsize $\,\circ\,$}}\hat{\alpha} {\mbox{\scriptsize $\,\circ\,$}}\varphi_{{{\mathcal L}}} {\mbox{\scriptsize $\,\circ\,$}}\alpha = \alpha' {\mbox{\scriptsize $\,\circ\,$}}\lambda^{-1} {\mbox{\scriptsize $\,\circ\,$}}\varphi_{{{\mathcal L}}} {\mbox{\scriptsize $\,\circ\,$}}\alpha \\
& = & \alpha' \psi ({{\mathcal L}}) \alpha \; .
\end{aligned}$$
(of theorem \[theorem3\]) In the notation of the theorem we have
$$h_{{{\mathcal L}}_i} (\varphi (P)) = h_{\varphi^* ({{\mathcal L}}_i)} (P) = h_{\psi^{-1} (\varphi' \psi ({{\mathcal L}}_i) \varphi)} (P) \; ,$$ where the second equality results from lemma \[lemma5\]. So we define maps $\alpha_{ij} : {\mathrm{End}\,}^0_k (A) \to {{\mathbb{Q}}}$, recalling that the $\psi({{\mathcal L}}_i)$ form a basis of $S$, by: $$\label{eq:8}
\varphi' \psi ({{\mathcal L}}_i) \varphi = \sum_j \alpha_{ij} (\varphi) \psi ({{\mathcal L}}_j) \; \; \mbox{ for all } \, \varphi\in {\mathrm{End}\,}_k^0(A)$$ to get $h_{{{\mathcal L}}_i} (\varphi (P)) = h_{\psi^{-1} (\sum_j \alpha_{ij} (\varphi) \psi ({{\mathcal L}}_j))} (P) = h_{\sum_j \alpha_{ij} (\varphi) {{\mathcal L}}_j} (P) = \sum_j \alpha_{ij} (\varphi) h_{{{\mathcal L}}_j} (P)$, as desired.
It is clear from (\[eq:8\]) that the $\alpha_{ij}$ are quadratic forms over ${{\mathbb{Q}}}$. Consider $$N : {\mathrm{End}\,}^0_k (A) \longrightarrow {\mathrm{End}\,}_{{{\mathbb{Q}}}} (S) \; , \; \varphi \longmapsto (s \mapsto \varphi' s \varphi) \; .$$ Then $\det {\mbox{\scriptsize $\,\circ\,$}}N$ is a norm-form on ${\mathrm{End}\,}^0_k (A)$ over ${{\mathbb{Q}}}$. As $\deg$ is another such form and ${\mathrm{End}\,}^0_k (A)$ is simple there is a rational number $k$ such that $\det {\mbox{\scriptsize $\,\circ\,$}}N = \deg^k$ ([@Mu], p. 179). Evaluating this on $n \in {{\mathbb{Z}}}$ gives $$(\det {\mbox{\scriptsize $\,\circ\,$}}N) (n) = \det (n^2) = n^{2s} = \deg (n)^k = n^{2gk} \; ,$$ hence $k = s/g$ and $\det (\alpha_{ij} (\varphi)) = \deg (\varphi)^{s/g}$.
Let ${{\mathcal L}}$ be symmetric. One would like to have a formula $$h_{{{\mathcal L}}} (\varphi P) = f (\varphi) h_{{{\mathcal L}}} (P) \; , \; \mbox{all} \; P \in A (k)$$ for a suitable $f (\varphi) \in {{\mathbb{Q}}}$. The injectivity of $\phi_A$ in proposition \[prop1\] and the above theorem show that this will hold exactly for those $\varphi$ which have $\alpha_{1j} (\varphi) = 0$ for $j \neq 1$ in the notation of the theorem (and ${{\mathcal L}}_1 := {{\mathcal L}}$). These $\varphi$ form the intersection of quadratic hyper-surfaces inside ${\mathrm{End}\,}^0_k (A)$ and the dimension of this intersection most crucially depends on $\dim_{{{\mathbb{Q}}}} (S)$.
For $\dim_{{{\mathbb{Q}}}} (S) = 1$ the above specializes to $$h_{{{\mathcal L}}} (\varphi P) = \deg (\varphi)^{1/g} h_{{{\mathcal L}}} (P) \; .$$ This covers in particular the case of elliptic curves. A glance at the Albert classification reveals that $\dim_{{{\mathbb{Q}}}} (S) = 1$ if and only if ${\mathrm{End}\,}^0_k (A)$ is ${{\mathbb{Q}}}$, an imaginary quadratic field or a definite quaternion algebra over ${{\mathbb{Q}}}$.
Examples {#sec3}
========
Assume $A$ is $k$-simple of dimension $g$ and $K=$End$_k^0(A)$ is a quadratic field of discriminant $D$. For simplicity assume also rk$(A(k))=2$. Then in a suitable basis of $A (k) \otimes {{\mathbb{Q}}}$ the matrix of the height pairing will be given by
$$\left( \begin{array}{cc}
\alpha & \beta \\
\beta & D\alpha \end{array} \right)$$
if $D>0$ and by
$$\left( \begin{array}{cc}
\alpha & 0 \\
0 & -D\alpha \end{array} \right)$$ if $D<0$ (for some $\alpha,\beta\in{{\mathbb{R}}})$. This illustrates theorem \[theorem1\] in this case because $K$ is of type I if $D>0$ and of type IV otherwise. Furthermore, in case $D<0$, we have $$h\circ\varphi=(\deg(\varphi))^{1/g} h$$ for any $\varphi\in K$ as already noted above because the involution is complex conjugation in this case, so dim$_{{\mathbb{Q}}}(S)=1$. If, however, $D>0$ then $S=K$ and for the base $1,\sqrt{D}\in S$ the matrix $(\alpha_{ij}(\varphi))$ of theorem \[theorem3\] becomes
$$\left( \begin{array}{cc}
a^2+Db^2 & 2ab \\
2abD & a^2+Db^2 \end{array} \right)$$ for $\varphi=a+b\sqrt{D}$. So we will have a “transformation formula” $h\circ\varphi=f(\varphi)h$ exactly for those $\varphi$ satisfying $ab=0$. This illustrates theorem \[theorem3\] and the last remark of section \[sec2\].\
Finally, it might be tempting to apply theorem \[theorem1\] to the following question of Serre ([@Se], 3.8.):
What is the transcendence degree of the field generated by the values of B (=height pairing on an elliptic curve $E$ over ${{\mathbb{Q}}}$) ? Can it be $<r(r+1)/2$, where r=rank($E({{\mathbb{Q}}})$) ?
Clearly, theorem \[theorem1\] does not give any improvement over the obvious bound because End$_{{{\mathbb{Q}}}}^0(E)={{\mathbb{Q}}}$ even if $E$ has complex multiplication as we now assume, say End$_{{\overline{{{\mathbb{Q}}}}}}^0(E)=K$. It is known that, for ${{\mathbb{Q}}}\subset L$, we will have End$_{L}^0(E)=K$ if and only if $K\subset L$. So we might try to apply theorem \[theorem1\] to $E/K$, hoping that $E({{\mathbb{Q}}})\subset E(K)$ has small co-rank. For $A:=$Res$^K_{{{\mathbb{Q}}}}(E\otimes K)$ (Weil’s restriction of scalars) we have $E(K)\simeq A({{\mathbb{Q}}})$ and $A$ is isogeneous over ${{\mathbb{Q}}}$ to $E\times E'$, where $E'$ is the quadratic twist of $E$ corresponding to ${{\mathbb{Q}}}\subset K$. Now, $E'$ itself is ${{\mathbb{Q}}}$-isogeneous to $E$ as follows from [@Mi2], Thm. 3, remark 2. So rk($E(K)$)=$2$ rk($E({{\mathbb{Q}}})$) and the “effect” of applying theorem \[theorem1\] to $E/K$ is exactly compensated by this increase of the rank.
It is however immediate that higher dimensional abelian varieties over ${{\mathbb{Q}}}$ can provide examples where the analogue of Serre’s question has a positive answer. We formulate this for surfaces only, i.e. we prove theorem \[theorem2\]:\
Let $A/{{\mathbb{Q}}}$ be an abelian surface with real multiplication, i.e. End$_{{{\mathbb{Q}}}}^0(A)$ is a real quadratic field of discriminant $D$, say. Fix some $\alpha\in$End$_{{{\mathbb{Q}}}}^0(A)$ with $\alpha^2=D$. Then there is a basis $\{P_1,...,P_n,\alpha P_1,...\alpha P_n\}$ of $A({{\mathbb{Q}}})\otimes{{\mathbb{Q}}}$ and as the Rosati involution is trivial on End$_{{{\mathbb{Q}}}}^0(A)$ lemma \[lemma1\] gives $h(\alpha P_i)=<\alpha P_i,\alpha P_i>=<DP_i,P_i>=Dh(P_i)$.\
In [@FLSSSW] there are a number of explicit examples of genus 2 curves over ${{\mathbb{Q}}}$ whose Jacobians meet the assumptions of theorem \[theorem2\] with $n=1$, many of which are even absolutely simple. Of course, the generators given in table $3$ of [@FLSSSW] are not designed to satisfy the conclusion of theorem \[theorem2\].
[999]{} E. Flynn, F. Leprévost, E. Schaefer, W. Stein, M. Stoll, J. Wetherell, Empirical evidence for the Birch and Swinnerton-Dyer conjectures for modular jacobians of genus 2 curves, Math. Comp., [**70**]{}, 2001, no. 236, pp. 1675-1697. S. Lang, Fundamentals of Diophantine Geometry, Springer, New York, 1983. J.S. Milne, On the Arithmetic of Abelian Varieties, Inv. math., [**17**]{}, 1972, pp. 177-190. D. Mumford, Abelian Varieties, Tata Institute of Fundamental Research Studies in Mathematics, No. 5, Oxford University Press, 1974. A. Néron, Quasi-fonctions et Hauteurs sur les variétés abéliennes, Ann. of Math., [**82**]{}, 1965, pp. 249-331. J-P. Serre, Lectures on the Mordell-Weil Theorem, Aspects of Mathematics, E15, Vieweg, Braunschweig, 1989. V. Talamanca, A note on height pairings on polarized abelian varieties, Atti Accad. Naz. Lincei Cl. Sci. Fis. Mat. Natur. Rend. Lincei(9) Math. Appl., [**10**]{}, 1999, no. 1, pp. 57-60.
\
Niko Naumann\
Mathematisches Institut der WWU Münster\
Einsteinstr. 62\
48149 Münster\
Germany\
e-mail: [email protected]
[^1]: MSC2000: 11G10, 14K15
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'We considered $N\times N$ Wishart ensembles in the class $W_\mathbb{C}\left(\Sigma_N,M\right)$ (complex Wishart matrices with $M$ degrees of freedom and covariance matrix $\Sigma_N$) such that $N_0$ eigenvalues of $\Sigma_N$ is 1 and $N_1=N-N_0$ of them are $a$. We studied the limit as $M$, $N$, $N_0$ and $N_1$ all go to infinity such that $\frac{N}{M}\rightarrow c$, $\frac{N_1}{N}\rightarrow\beta$ and $0<c,\beta<1$. In this case, the limiting eigenvalue density can either be supported on 1 or 2 disjoint intervals in $\mathbb{R}_+$. In the previous paper [@Mo], we studied the universality in the case when the limiting eigenvalue density is supported on 2 intervals and in this paper, we continue the analysis and study the case when the support consists of a single interval. By using Riemann-Hilbert analysis, we have shown that under proper rescaling of the eigenvalues, the limiting correlation kernel is given by the sine kernel and the Airy kernel in the bulk and the edge of the spectrum respectively. As a consequence, the behavior of the largest eigenvalue in this model is described by the Tracy-Widom distribution.'
author:
- 'M. Y. Mo'
title: 'Universality in Complex Wishart ensembles: The 1 cut case'
---
Introduction
============
Let $X$ be an $M\times N$ (assuming $M\geq N$) matrix with i.i.d. complex Gaussian entries whose real and imaginary parts have variance $\frac{1}{2}$ and zero mean. Let $\Sigma_N$ be an $N\times
N$ positive definite Hermitian matrix with eigenvalues $a_1,\ldots,a_N$ (not necessarily distinct). In this paper, we will consider the case where $\Sigma_N$ has only 2 distinct eigenvalues, 1 and $a$ such that $N_1$ of its eigenvalues are $a$ and $N-N_1$ of them are $1$. We will assume that $\frac{N}{M}\rightarrow c$ and $\frac{N_1}{N}\rightarrow\beta$ as $N,M\rightarrow\infty$ and that $0<c,\beta<1$. To be precise, we will assume the following $$\label{eq:lim}
cM-N=\tau_1=O(1),\quad N\beta-N_1=\tau_2=O(1),\quad
M,N,N_1\rightarrow\infty.$$ Let $\Sigma_N^{\frac{1}{2}}$ be any Hermitian square root of $\Sigma_N$. Then the columns of the matrix $X\Sigma_N^{\frac{1}{2}}$ are random vectors with variances $\frac{1}{2}\sqrt{a_j}$. Let the matrix $B_N$ be the following $$\label{eq:BN}
B_N=\frac{1}{M}\Sigma_N^{\frac{1}{2}}X^{\dag}X\Sigma_N^{\frac{1}{2}},$$ Then $B_N$ is the sample covariance matrix of the columns of $X\Sigma_N^{\frac{1}{2}}$, while $\Sigma_N$ is the covariance matrix. In particular, $B_N$ is a complex Wishart matrix in the class $W_{\mathbb{C}}\left(\Sigma_N,M\right)$.
The sample covariance matrix is a fundamental tool in the studies of multivariate statistics and its distribution is already known to Wishart at around 1928 (See e.g. [@Muir]) $$\label{eq:wishart}
\mathcal{P}(B_N)=\frac{1}{C}e^{-M{\mathrm{tr}}(\Sigma^{-1}B_N)}\left(\det
S\right)^{M-N},\quad M\geq N,$$ for some normalization constant $C$.
Let $y_1,\ldots,y_N>0$ be the eigenvalues of the sample covariance matrix $B_N$. Then in the case where $N_1$ eigenvalues of $\Sigma_N$ is $a$ and $N-N_1$ is $1$, the joint probability density function (j.p.d.f) for the eigenvalues of $B_N$ is given by $$\label{eq:jpdf1}
\mathcal{P}(y)=\frac{1}{Z_{M,N}}\prod_{i<j}(y_i-y_j)\prod_{j=1}^Ny_{j}^{M-N}\det\left[
y_k^{d^N_j-1}e^{-Ma_j^{-1}y_k}\right]_{1\leq j,k,\leq N},$$ where $Z_{M,N}$ is a normalization constant and $d^N_j$, $a_j$ are given by $$\begin{split}
d^N_j&=j,\quad a_j=1,\quad 1\leq j\leq N-N_1,\\
d^N_j&=j-N+N_1,\quad a_j=a,\quad N-N_1< j\leq N.
\end{split}$$ In this paper we will study the asymptotic limit of the Wishart distribution with $\frac{N}{M}\rightarrow c$ and $\frac{N_1}{N}\rightarrow\beta$ as $M$, $N\rightarrow\infty$ in such a way that $0<\beta,c<1$. In this case, the empirical distribution function (e.d.f) $F_N$ of the eigenvalues will converge weakly to a nonrandom p.d.f. $F$, which will be supported on either 1 or 2 intervals in $\mathbb{R}_+$. By applying the results of [@CS] to our case, we can extract properties of the measure $F$ from the solutions of an algebraic equation (See Section \[se:Stie\] for details) $$\label{eq:curve20}
\begin{split}
za\xi^3&+(A_2z+B_2)\xi^2+(z+B_1)\xi+1=0,\\
A_2&=(1+a),\quad B_2=a(1-c),\\
B_1&=1-c(1-\beta)+a(1-c\beta).
\end{split}$$ The results in [@CS] imply that the real zeros of the function $\frac{d z(\xi)}{d\xi}$ determines the boundary points of the support of $F$. Since the zeros of $\frac{d z(\xi)}{d\xi}$ coincide with the zeros of the following quartic polynomial, $$\label{eq:quartic1}
\begin{split}
a^2(1-c)\xi^4
&+2(a^2(1-c\beta)+a(1-c(1-\beta))\xi^3\\
&+(1-c(1-\beta)+a^2(1-c\beta)+4a)\xi^2 +2(1+a)\xi+1=0,
\end{split}$$ the real roots of (\[eq:quartic1\]) are important in the determination of $\mathrm{Supp}(F)$. In particular, we have the following result. (See Theorem \[thm:cuts\])
\[thm:main1\] Let $\Delta$ be the discriminant of the quartic polynomial (\[eq:quartic1\]). If $\Delta<0$, then the support of $F$ consists of a single intervals.
In our previous paper [@Mo], we have shown that $\mathrm{Supp}(F)$ consists of 2 disjoint intervals if and only if $\Delta>0$ and have obtained the asymptotic eigenvalue statistics in that case. In this paper, we consider the case when $\Delta<0$ and together with [@Mo], we have proven the universality in this class of complex Wishart ensemble for all $\Delta\neq 0$. When $\Delta=0$, a phase transition takes place and the support of the eigenvalues splits into 2 disjoint intervals.
When $\Delta<0$, we also have the following expression for the density function of $F$ (See Theorem \[thm:density\]).
\[thm:side1\] Let $\Delta$ be the discriminant of the quartic polynomial (\[eq:quartic1\]). Suppose $\Delta<0$ and let $\gamma_1<\gamma_2$ be the 2 real roots to (\[eq:quartic1\]) and $\gamma_3$, $\gamma_4$ be the 2 complex roots. Let $\lambda_k$, $k=1,\ldots,4$ be the following $$\lambda_k=-\frac{1}{\gamma_k}+c\frac{1-\beta}{1+\gamma_k}+c\frac{a\beta}{1+a\gamma_k},\quad
k=1,\ldots,4.$$ Then all the $\lambda_k$ are distinct and the p.d.f $F$ is supported on $[\lambda_1,\lambda_2]$ with the following density $d
F(z)=\rho(z)dz$ $$\label{eq:rho}
\begin{split}
\rho(z)=\frac{3}{2\pi}\left|\left(\frac{r(z)+\sqrt{-\frac{1}{27a^4z^4}D_3(z)}}{2}\right)^{\frac{1}{3}}-\left(\frac{r(z)-\sqrt{-\frac{1}{27a^4z^4}D_3(z)}}{2}\right)^{\frac{1}{3}}\right|,
\end{split}$$ where $D_3(z)$ and $r(z)$ are given by $$\begin{split}
D_3(z)&=(1-a)^2\prod_{j=1}^4(z-\lambda_j),\\
r(z)&=\frac{1}{27}\Bigg(-\frac{2B_2^3}{a^3}z^{-3}+\left(\frac{9B_1B_2}{a^2}-\frac{6A_2B_2^2}{a^3}\right)z^{-2}+\left(\frac{9B_2}{a^2}+\frac{9B_1A_2}{a^2}-\frac{27}{a}-\frac{6A_2^2B_2}{a^3}\right)z^{-1}\\
&+\left(\frac{9A_2}{a^2}-\frac{2A_2^3}{a^3}\right)\Bigg).
\end{split}$$ The constants $A_1$, $B_1$ and $B_2$ in the above equation are defined by $$A_2=(1+a),\quad B_2=a(1-c),\quad B_1=1-c(1-\beta)+a(1-c\beta).$$ The cube root in (\[eq:density\]) is chosen such that $\sqrt[3]{A}\in\mathbb{R}$ for $A\in\mathbb{R}$ and the square root is chosen such that $\sqrt{A}>0$ for $A>0$.
\[re:sqrt\] Since $D_3(z)$ can be written as $$\frac{D_3(z)}{a^4z^4}=-27\left(r(z)\right)^2-4\left(p(z)\right)^3,$$ for some polynomial $p(z)$ in $z^{-1}$. We see that if $r(z)$ vanishes at any of the $\lambda_k$, then $D_3(z)$ will have at least a double root at these points, hence $r(\lambda_k)\neq0$. From this and (\[eq:rho\]), we see that the density $\rho(z)$ vanishes like a square root at the points $\lambda_k$, $k=1,2$. $$\label{eq:rhok}
\rho(z)=\frac{\rho_k}{\pi}|z-\lambda_k|^{\frac{1}{2}}+O\left((z-\lambda_k)\right),\quad
z\rightarrow\lambda_k.$$
An open problem in the studies of Wishart ensembles is the universality and the distribution of the largest eigenvalue. Although the Wishart distribution is known for a long time, results in the universality and the largest eigenvalue distribution were only obtained recently and only for spiked models [@J] whose covariance matrices are finite perturbations of the identity matrix [@BaikD], [@Baik95], [@Baikspike], [@DF], [@El03], [@Fo93], [@J], [@Jo], [@W1], [@W2]. The result in this paper is one of the few results obtained for models with covariance matrices that is not a finite perturbation of the identity matrix. (See also [@El], in which the largest eigenvalue distribution was also derived for ensembles whose covariance matrix is not a finite perturbation of the identity matrix. However, in [@El], the parameters $c=\frac{N}{M}$, $\beta=\frac{N_1}{N}$ and the eigenvalues of the covariance matrix have to satisfy a condition which is not true in our case.)
In this paper, we use an important result by Baik, Ben-Arous and Péché [@Baik95] which shows that the correlation functions of the eigenvalues can be expressed in terms of a Fredholm determinant with kernel $K_{M,N}(x,y)$. In [@BK1] and [@DF], the authors have expressed this kernel in terms of multiple orthogonal polynomials (See Section \[se:MOP\] for details) and have shown that the $m$-point correlation function for the Wishart distribution (\[eq:wishart\]) is given by $$\label{eq:mpoint}
\mathcal{R}_{m}^{(M,N)}(y_1,\ldots,y_m)=\det\left(K_{M,N}(y_j,y_k)\right)_{1\leq
j,k\leq m}$$ where $\mathcal{R}_{m}^{(M,N)}(y_1,\ldots,y_m)$ is the $m$-point correlation function $$\label{eq:corre}
\mathcal{R}_m^{(M,N)}(y_1,\ldots,y_m)=\frac{N!}{(N-m)!}\int_{\mathbb{R}_+}\cdots\int_{\mathbb{R}_+}
\mathcal{P}(y)dy_{m+1}\ldots dy_N.$$ By computing the asymptotics of the correlation kernel in (\[eq:mpoint\]) through the asymptotics of multiple Laguerre polynomials, we have proven the universality of the correlation function when $M$, $N$ and $N_1\rightarrow\infty$.
\[thm:main2\] Suppose $\Delta$ in Theorem \[thm:main1\] is negative. Let $\rho(z)$ be the density function of $F$ in Theorem \[thm:side1\]. Then for any $x_0\in(\lambda_1,\lambda_2)$ and $m\in\mathbb{N}$, we have $$\label{eq:bulk}
\begin{split}
\lim_{N,M\rightarrow\infty}&\left(\frac{1}{M\rho(x_0)}\right)^m
\mathcal{R}_m^{(M,N)}\left(x_0+\frac{u_1}{M\rho(x_0)},\ldots,x_0+\frac{u_m}{M\rho(x_0)}\right)\\
&=\det\left(\frac{\sin
\pi(u_i-u_j)}{\pi(u_i-u_j)}\right)_{i,j=1}^{m}.
\end{split}$$ uniformly for any $(u_1,\ldots,u_m)$ in compact subsets of $\mathbb{R}^m$.
On the other hand, let $x_0=\lambda_k$, $k=1,2$, then for any $m\in\mathbb{N}$, we have $$\label{eq:edge}
\begin{split}
\lim_{N,M\rightarrow\infty}&\left(\frac{1}{\left(M\rho_k\right)^{\frac{2}{3}}}\right)^m
\mathcal{R}_m^{(M,N)}\left(\lambda_k+(-1)^k\frac{u_1}{\left(M\rho_k\right)^{\frac{2}{3}}},\ldots,
\lambda_k+(-1)^k\frac{u_m}{\left(M\rho_k\right)^{\frac{2}{3}}}\right)\\
&=\det\left(\frac{\mathrm{Ai}(u_i)\mathrm{Ai}^{\prime}(u_j)
-\mathrm{Ai}^{\prime}(u_i)\mathrm{Ai}(u_j)}{u_i-u_j}\right)_{i,j=1}^m,
\end{split}$$ uniformly for any $(u_1,\ldots,u_m)$ in compact subsets of $\mathbb{R}^m$, where $\mathrm{Ai}(z)$ is the Airy function and $\rho_k$, $k=1,2$ are the constants in (\[eq:rhok\]).
Recall that the Airy function is the unique solution to the differential equation $v^{\prime\prime}=zv$ that has the following asymptotic behavior as $z\rightarrow\infty$ in the sector $-\pi+\epsilon\leq \arg(z)\leq \pi-\epsilon$, for any $\epsilon>0$. $$\label{eq:asymairy}
\mathrm{Ai}(z)=\frac{1}{2\sqrt{\pi}z^{\frac{1}{4}}}e^{-\frac{2}{3}z^{\frac{3}{2}}}\left(1+O(z^{-\frac{3}{2}})\right)
,\quad -\pi+\epsilon\leq \arg(z)\leq \pi-\epsilon,\quad
z\rightarrow\infty.$$ where the branch cut of $z^\frac{3}{2}$ in the above is chosen to be the negative real axis.
Since the limiting kernel takes the form of the Airy kernel (\[eq:edge\]), by a well-known result of Tracy and Widom [@TW1], we have the following
\[thm:TW\] Let $y_1$ be the largest eigenvalue of $B_N$, then we have $$\lim_{M,N\rightarrow\infty}
\mathbb{P}\left(\left(y_1-\lambda_2\right)\left(M\rho_2\right)^{\frac{2}{3}}<s\right)
=TW(s),$$ where $TW(s)$ is the Tracy-Widom distribution $$\label{eq:TW}
TW(s)=\exp\left(-\int_{s}^{\infty}(t-s)q^2(t)dt\right),$$ and $q(s)$ is the solution of Painlevé II equation $$q^{\prime\prime}(s)=sq(s)+2q^3(s),$$ with the following asymptotic behavior as $s\rightarrow\infty$. $$q(s)\sim-\mathrm{Ai}(s),\quad s\rightarrow +\infty.$$
The results obtained in this paper are obtained through the Riemann-Hilbert analysis. As in [@BKext2] and [@Lysov], a Riemann surface of the form (\[eq:curve20\]), together with the zero set of a real function $h(x)$ related to this Riemann surface are essential to the implementation of the Riemann-Hilbert analysis. This function $h(x)$ is given as follows. If we express the solutions $\xi$ in (\[eq:curve20\]) as analytic functions of $z$, then the three solutions to (\[eq:curve20\]) behave as follows when $z\rightarrow\infty$. $$\label{eq:xiinfty}
\begin{split}
\xi_1(z)&=-\frac{1}{z}+O(z^{-2}), \quad z\rightarrow\infty,\\
\xi_2(z)&=-1+\frac{c(1-\beta)}{z}+O(z^{-2}), \quad z\rightarrow\infty,\\
\xi_3(z)&=-\frac{1}{a}+\frac{c\beta}{z}+O(z^{-2}), \quad
z\rightarrow\infty.
\end{split}$$ Then the function $h(x)$ is defined by $$\label{eq:hx}
h(x)=\mathrm{Re}\left(\int_{\lambda_3}^x\xi_2(z)-\xi_3(z)dz\right)$$ In order to implement the Riemann-Hilbert analysis, we must determine the sheet structure of the Riemann surface (\[eq:curve20\]) and the topology of the zero set $\frak{H}$ of $h(x)$. Since our model depends on three parameters $c$, $a$ and $\beta$, while the models in [@BKext2] and [@Lysov] depend only on one parameter $a$, the determination of both the sheet structure of the Riemann surface and the topology of $\frak{H}$ are considerably more difficult in our case and a large part of this paper is devoted to resolve these difficulties so that Riemann-Hilbert analysis like those in [@BKext2] and [@Lysov] can be applied.
To determine the sheet structure of (\[eq:curve20\]), note that although we assume the discriminant $\Delta$ in Theorem \[thm:main1\] is negative, which means that the Riemann surface (\[eq:curve20\]) has 2 real and 2 complex branch points, it is unclear which Riemann sheet do these branch points belong to and these different situations will result in different sheet structures of the Riemann surface as indicated in Figure \[fig:struc\].
\[\]\[\]\[1\]\[0.0\][$\xi_1$]{} \[\]\[\]\[1\]\[0.0\][$\xi_2$]{} \[\]\[\]\[1\]\[0.0\][$\xi_3$]{} ![Possible sheet structures of the Riemann surface. For the implementation of the Riemann-Hilbert analysis, we need to show that the Riemann surface has the sheet structure shown on the right hand side.[]{data-label="fig:struc"}](struc2 "fig:")
In order to determine the sheet structure of the Riemann surface, we need to analyze the analyticity of the solutions $\xi_j$ in the vicinity of the points $\lambda_k$ in Theorem \[thm:side1\]. This requires the type of analysis used in [@Mc], which is very difficult to carry out in our case. As in [@Mo], we overcome these difficulties by showing that the Stieltjes transform of the limiting eigenvalue distribution satisfies (\[eq:curve20\]). Then by using properties of the Stieltjes transform obtained in [@BS95], [@BS98], [@BS99], [@CS], [@S95], we were able to determine the sheet structure of the Riemann surface (\[eq:curve20\]).
The determination of the topology of the set $\frak{H}$ in this case is also much more complicated and a thorough analysis of this set making use of properties of harmonic functions is carried out in Section \[se:geo\].
For theoretical reasons, the model studied in this paper is crucial in understanding of the phase transition behavior that occurs in Wishart ensembles. (See [@Baik95]). When the 2 intervals in the support of $F$ closes up, a phase transition takes place and the correlation kernel will demonstrate a different behavior at the point where the support closes up. With the Riemann-Hilbert technique used in this paper, such behavior can be studied rigorously as in [@BKdou] and the eigenvalue correlation function near the critical point will be given by the Pearcey kernel. For practical reasons, many covariance matrices appearing in fields of science are not finite perturbations of the identity matrix. In fact, covariance matrices that have groups of distinct eigenvalues are accepted models in various areas such as the correlation of genes in microarray analysis and the correlation of the returns of stocks in finance.
Acknowledgement {#acknowledgement .unnumbered}
---------------
The author acknowledges A. Kuijlaars for pointing out reference [@Lysov] to me and EPSRC for the financial support provided by the grant EP/D505534/1.
Multiple Laguerre polynomials and the correlation kernel {#se:MOP}
========================================================
The main tool in our analysis involves the use of multiple orthogonal polynomials and the Riemann-Hilbert problem associated with them. In this section we shall recall the results in [@BK1] and [@DF] and express the correlation kernel $K_{M,N}(x,y)$ in (\[eq:mpoint\]) in terms of multiple Laguerre polynomials. In Section \[se:RHP\], we will apply Riemann-Hilbert analysis to obtain the asymptotics of these multiple Laguerre polynomials and use them to prove Theorem \[thm:main2\].
We shall not define the multiple Laguerre polynomials in the most general setting, but only define the ones that are relevant to our set up. Readers who are interested in the theory of multiple orthogonal polynomials can consult the papers [@Ap1], [@Ap2], [@BK1], [@vanGerKuij]. Let $L_{n_1,n_2}(x)$ be the monic polynomial such that $$\label{eq:multiop}
\begin{split}
&\int_{0}^{\infty}L_{n_1,n_2}(x)x^{i+M-N}e^{-Mx}dx=0,\quad i=0,\ldots,n_1-1,\\
&\int_0^{\infty}L_{n_1,n_2}(x)x^{i+M-N}e^{-Ma^{-1}x}dx=0,\quad
i=0,\ldots, n_2-1.
\end{split}$$ and let $Q_{n_1,n_2}(x)$ be a function of the form $$\label{eq:qform}
Q_{n_1,n_2}(x)=A^1_{n_1,n_2}(x)e^{-Mx}+A^a_{n_1,n_2}(x)e^{-Ma^{-1}x},$$ where $A^1_{n_1,n_2}(x)$ and $A^a_{n_1,n_2}(x)$ are polynomials of degrees $n_1-1$ and $n_2-1$ respectively, and that $Q_{n_1,n_2}(x)$ satisfies the following $$\label{eq:qorth}
\int_0^{\infty}x^iQ_{n_1,n_2}(x)x^{M-N}dx=\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
0, & \hbox{$i=0,\ldots,n_1+n_2-2$;} \\
1, & \hbox{$i=n_1+n_2-1$.}
\end{array}
\right.$$ The polynomial $L_{n_1,n_2}(x)$ is called the multiple Laguerre polynomial of type II and the polynomials $A^1_{n_1,n_2}(x)$ and $A^a_{n_1,n_2}(x)$ are called multiple Laguerre polynomials of type I (with respect to the weights $x^{M-N}e^{-Mx}$ and $x^{M-N}e^{-Ma^{-1}x}$) [@Ap1], [@Ap2]. These polynomials exist and are unique. Moreover, they admit integral expressions [@BK1].
Let us define the constants $h^{(1)}_{n_1,n_2}$ and $h^{(2)}_{n_1,n_2}$ to be $$\label{eq:normalize}
\begin{split}
h^{(1)}_{n_1,n_2}&=\int_{0}^{\infty}L_{n_1,n_2}(x)x^{n_1+M-N}e^{-Mx}dx,\\
h^{(2)}_{n_1,n_2}&=\int_{0}^{\infty}L_{n_1,n_2}(x)x^{n_2+M-N}e^{-Ma^{-1}x}dx.
\end{split}$$
Then the following result in [@BK1] and [@DF] allows us to express the correlation kernel in (\[eq:mpoint\]) in terms of a finite sum of the multiple Laguerre polynomials.
\[pro:CD\] The correlation kernel in $K_{M,N}(x,y)$ (\[eq:mpoint\]) can be expressed in terms of multiple Laguerre polynomials as follows $$\label{eq:ker}
\begin{split}
\left(xy\right)^{\frac{N-M}{2}}(x-y)K_{M,N}(x,y)&=L_{N_0,N_1}(x)Q_{N_0,N_1}(x)\\
&-\frac{h^{(1)}_{N_0,N_1}}{h^{(1)}_{N_0-1,N_1}}L_{N_0-1,N_1}(x)Q_{N_0+1,N_1}(x)\\
&-\frac{h^{(2)}_{N_0,N_1}}{h^{(2)}_{N_0,N_1-1}}L_{N_0,N_1-1}(x)Q_{N_0,N_1+1}(x)
\end{split}$$ where $N_0=N-N_1$.
This result allows us to compute the limiting kernel once we obtain the asymptotics for the multiple Laguerre polynomials.
Stieltjes transform of the eigenvalue distribution {#se:Stie}
==================================================
In order to study the asymptotics of the correlation kernel, we would need to know the asymptotic eigenvalue distribution of the Wishart ensemble (\[eq:wishart\]). Let $F_N(x)$ be the empirical distribution function (e.d.f) of the eigenvalues of $B_N$ (\[eq:BN\]). The asymptotic properties of $F_N(x)$ can be found by studying its Stieltjes transform.
The Stieltjes transform of a probability distribution function (p.d.f) $G(x)$ is defined by $$\label{eq:stie}
m_G(z)=\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}\frac{1}{\lambda-z}dG(x), \quad
z\in\mathbb{C}^+=\left\{z\in\mathbb{C}:\mathrm{Im}(z)>0\right\}.$$ Given the Stieljes transform, the p.d.f can be found by the inversion formula $$\label{eq:inver}
G([a,b])=\frac{1}{\pi}\lim_{\epsilon\rightarrow
0^+}\int_{a}^b\mathrm{Im} \left(m_G(s+i\epsilon)\right)ds.$$ The properties of the Stieltjes transform of $F_N(x)$ has been studied by Bai, Silverstein and Choi in the papers [@CS], [@BS95], [@BS98], [@BS99], [@S95]. We will now summarize the results that we need from these papers.
First let us denote the e.d.f of the eigenvalues of $\Sigma_N$ by $H_N$, that is, we have $$dH_N(x)=\frac{1}{N}\sum_{j=1}^N\delta_{a_j}.$$ Furthermore, we assume that as $N\rightarrow\infty$, the distribution $H_N$ weakly converges to a distribution function $H$. Then as $N\rightarrow\infty$, the e.d.f $F_N(x)$ converges weakly to a nonrandom p.d.f $F$, and that the Stieltjes transform $m_F$ of $F(x)$ satisfies the following equation [@CS], [@S95] $$\label{eq:algeq}
m_F(z)=\int_{\mathbb{R}}\frac{1}{t(1-c-czm_F)-z}dH(t).$$ Let us now consider the closely related matrix $\underline{B}_N$ $$\label{eq:BNline}
\underline{B}_N=\frac{1}{N}X\Sigma_NX^{\dag}.$$ The matrix $\underline{B}_N$ has the same eigenvalues as $B_N$ together with an addition $M-N$ zero eigenvalues. Therefore the e.d.f $\underline{F}_N$ of the eigenvalues of $\underline{B}_N$ are related to $F_N$ by $$\label{eq:FNline}
\underline{F}_N=(1-c_N)I_{[0,\infty)}+c_NF_N,\quad c_N=\frac{N}{M}.$$ where $I_{[0,\infty)}$ is the step function that is $0$ on $\mathbb{R}_-$ and $1$ on $\mathbb{R}_+$. In particular, as $N\rightarrow\infty$, the distribution $\underline{F}_N$ converges weakly to a p.d.f $\underline{F}$ that is related to $F$ by $$\label{eq:Fline}
\underline{F}=(1-c)I_{[0,\infty)}+cF$$ and their Stieltjes transforms are related by $$\label{eq:stielim}
m_{\underline{F}}(z)=-\frac{1-c}{z}+cm_F(z).$$ Then from (\[eq:algeq\]), we see that the Stieltjes transform $m_{\underline{F}}(z)$ satisfies the following equation $$\label{eq:meq}
m_{\underline{F}}(z)=-\left(z-c\int_{\mathbb{R}}\frac{tdH(t)}{1+tm_{\underline{F}}}\right)^{-1}.$$ This equation has an inverse [@BS98], [@BS99] $$\label{eq:zeq}
z(m_{\underline{F}})=-\frac{1}{m_{\underline{F}}}+c\int_{\mathbb{R}}\frac{t}{1+tm_{\underline{F}}}dH(t).$$ The points where $\frac{d z(\xi)}{d\xi}=0$ are of significant interest to us as they are potential end points of the support of $\underline{F}$, due to the following result by Choi and Silverstein.
\[le:CS\]$\cite{CS}$ If $z\notin\mathrm{supp}(\underline{F})$, then $m=m_{\underline{F}}(z)$ satisfies the following.
1. $m\in\mathbb{R}\setminus\{0\}$;
2. $-\frac{1}{m}\notin\mathrm{supp}(H)$;
3. Let $z$ be defined by (\[eq:zeq\]), then $z^{\prime}(m)>0$, where the prime denotes the derivative with respect to $m_{\underline{F}}$ in (\[eq:zeq\]).
Conversely, if $m$ satisfies 1-3, then $z=z(m)\notin\mathrm{supp}(\underline{F})$.
This lemma allows us to identify the complement of $\mathrm{supp}(\underline{F})$ by studying the real points $m$ such that $z^{\prime}(m)>0$.
\[re:baik\] As pointed out in [@Baikspike], Lemma \[le:CS\] applies to any distribution $G$ whose Stieltjes transform $m_{G}(z)$ (\[eq:stie\]) satisfies an equation of the form $$z(m_{G})=-\frac{1}{m_{G}}+c_G\int_{\mathbb{R}}\frac{t}{1+tm_{G}}dH_G(t).$$ for some constant $c_G$ and distribution $H_G(t)$.
Riemann surface and the Stieltjes transform
-------------------------------------------
We will now restrict ourselves to the case when the matrix $\Sigma_N$ has 2 distinct eigenvalues only. Without lost of generality, we will assume that one of these values is 1 and the other one is $a>0$. Let $0<\beta<1$, we will assume that as $N\rightarrow\infty$, $N_1$ of the eigenvalues take the value $a$ and $N_0=N-N_1$ of the eigenvalues are 1 and that $\frac{N_1}{N}\rightarrow\beta$. That is, as $N\rightarrow\infty$, the e.d.f $H_N(x)$ converges to the following $$\label{eq:limedf}
dH_N(x)\rightarrow dH(x)=(1-\beta)\delta_1+\beta\delta_{a}.$$ By substituting this back into (\[eq:zeq\]), we see that the Stieltjes transform $\xi(z)=m_{\underline{F}}(z)$ is a solution to the following algebraic equation $$\label{eq:curve1}
z=-\frac{1}{\xi}+c\frac{1-\beta}{1+\xi}+c\frac{a\beta}{1+a\xi}.$$ Rearranging the terms, we see that $\xi=m_{\underline{F}}$ solves the following $$\label{eq:curve2}
\begin{split}
za\xi^3&+(A_2z+B_2)\xi^2+(z+B_1)\xi+1=0,\\
A_2&=(1+a),\quad B_2=a(1-c),\\
B_1&=1-c(1-\beta)+a(1-c\beta).
\end{split}$$ This defines a Riemann surface ${\mathcal{L}}$ as a 3-folded cover of the complex plane.
By solving the cubic equation (\[eq:curve2\]) or by analyzing the asymptotic behavior of the equation as $z\rightarrow\infty$, we see that these solutions have the behavior given by (\[eq:xiinfty\]) as $z\rightarrow\infty$. On the other hand, as $z\rightarrow 0$, the 3 branches of $\xi(z)$ behave as follows $$\label{eq:zeroasym}
\begin{split}
\xi_{\alpha}(z)&=-\frac{1-c}{z}+O(1),\quad z\rightarrow 0,\\
\xi_{\beta}(z)&=R_1+O(z),\quad z\rightarrow 0,\\
\xi_{\gamma}(z)&=R_2+O(z),\quad z\rightarrow 0.
\end{split}$$ where the order of the indices $\alpha$, $\beta$ and $\gamma$ does not necessarily coincide with the ones in (\[eq:xiinfty\]) (i.e. we do not necessarily have $\alpha=1$, $\beta=2$ and $\gamma=3$). The constants $R_1$ and $R_2$ are the two roots of the quadratic equation $$\label{eq:quad}
a(1-c)x^2+(1-c(1-\beta)+a(1-c\beta))x+1=0.$$ The functions $\xi_j(z)$ will not be analytic at the branch points of ${\mathcal{L}}$ and they will be discontinuous across the branch cuts joining these branch points. Moreover, from (\[eq:zeroasym\]), one of the functions $\xi_j(z)$ will have a simple pole at $z=0$. Apart from these singularities, however, the functions $\xi_j(z)$ are analytic.
Sheet structure of the Riemann surface
--------------------------------------
As explained in the introduction, the determination of the sheet structure of the Riemann surface (\[eq:curve20\]) involves difficult analysis of the behavior of the $\xi_j(z)$ at the points $\lambda_k$. In order to implement Riemann-Hilbert analysis to obtain the asymptotics of the kernel in (\[eq:mpoint\]), we must show that $\xi_1(z)$ is not analytic at the real branch points $\lambda_k$, $k=1,2$. This will be achieved by making use of the properties of the Stieltjes transform.
In this section we will study the sheet structure of the Riemann surface ${\mathcal{L}}$. As we shall see, the branch $\xi_1(z)$ turns out to be the Stieljes transform $m_{\underline{F}}(z)$ and its branch cut will be the support of $\underline{F}$.
By Lemma \[le:CS\], the real points at which $\frac{d z}{d\xi}>0$ characterize the end points of $\mathrm{Supp}(\underline{F})$. The determine the support, let us differentiate (\[eq:curve1\]) to obtain an expression of $\frac{d z}{d\xi}$ in terms of $\xi$. $$\label{eq:zprime}
\begin{split}
\frac{d
z}{d\xi}&=\frac{1}{\xi^2(1+\xi)^2(1+a\xi)^2}\Bigg(a^2(1-c)\xi^4
+2(a^2(1-c\beta)+a(1-c(1-\beta))\xi^3\\
&+(1-c(1-\beta)+a^2(1-c\beta)+4a)\xi^2 +2(1+a)\xi+1\Bigg).
\end{split}$$ In particular, the values of $\xi$ at $\frac{d z}{d\xi}=0$ correspond to the roots of the quartic equation $$\label{eq:quart}
\begin{split}
a^2(1-c)\xi^4
&+2(a^2(1-c\beta)+a(1-c(1-\beta))\xi^3\\
&+(1-c(1-\beta)+a^2(1-c\beta)+4a)\xi^2 +2(1+a)\xi+1=0
\end{split}$$ Let $\Delta$ be the discriminant of this quartic polynomial, then when $\Delta<0$, the equation (\[eq:quart\]) has 2 distinct real roots $\gamma_1<\gamma_2$ and 2 complex roots $\gamma_3$ and $\gamma_4=\overline{\gamma}_3$. One can check that the coefficients of (\[eq:quart\]) are all positive and hence $\gamma_1<\gamma_2<0$.
Let $\lambda_k$ be the corresponding points in the $z$-plane $$\label{eq:lambda}
\begin{split}
\lambda_k&=-\frac{1}{\gamma_k}+c\frac{1-\beta}{1+\gamma_k}+c\frac{a\beta}{1+a\gamma_k},\quad
k=1,\ldots,4.
\end{split}$$ Then we have the following
\[le:lambdadis\] The points $\lambda_k$, $k=1,\ldots,4$ are all distinct.
The derivative $\frac{d z(\xi)}{d\xi}$ has simple zeros at the points $(\lambda_{k},\gamma_{k})$, $k=1,\ldots,4$, on the Riemann surface defined by (\[eq:curve2\]). Therefore, as a function of $z$, 2 branches of the function $\xi(z)$ behaves as $$\xi(z)=\gamma_{k}\pm
C_{k}(z-\lambda_{k})^{\frac{1}{2}}+O(z-\lambda_{k}),\quad
z\rightarrow\lambda_{k},$$ near the points $\lambda_{k}$. Let $i\neq j$, then Since $\gamma_i\neq\gamma_j$, if $\lambda_i=\lambda_j$, there will be 4 distinct solutions $\xi(z)$ to the equation (\[eq:curve2\]) in a neighborhood of the point $\lambda_{i}=\lambda_j$, which is not possible. Therefore $\lambda_{i}$ and $\lambda_j$ are distinct.
In particular, the points $\lambda_{3}$ and $\lambda_4$ are complex.
\[le:lambdapm\] The points $\lambda_{3}$ and $\lambda_4$ are not real.
Since $\gamma_3=\overline{\gamma}_4$, we see that $\lambda_3=\overline{\lambda}_4$. If $\lambda_{3}$ and $\lambda_4$ are real, then we will have $\lambda_3=\lambda_4$. This contradicts Lemma \[le:lambdadis\] and hence the points $\lambda_{3}$ and $\lambda_4$ are not real.
We will label the points $\gamma_3$ and $\gamma_4$ such that $\mathrm{Im}(\lambda_3)>0$.
Note that, from the behavior of $z(\xi)$ in (\[eq:curve1\]), we see that near the points $-1$ and $-\frac{1}{a}$, the function $z(\xi)$ behaves as $$\label{eq:zsing}
\begin{split}
z(\xi)&=\frac{c(1-\beta)}{1+\xi}+O(1),\quad \xi\rightarrow -1,\\
z(\xi)&=\frac{ca\beta}{1+a\xi}+O(1),\quad \xi\rightarrow
-\frac{1}{a}.
\end{split}$$ and hence $z^{\prime}(\xi)$ is negative near these points. From this and (\[eq:zprime\]), we see that $z^{\prime}(\xi)>0$ on the intervals $(-\infty,\gamma_1)$, $(\gamma_2,0)$ and $(0,\infty)$ and none of the points $-1$ or $-\frac{1}{a}$ belongs to these intervals. On $(\gamma_1,\gamma_2)$, $z^{\prime}(\xi)$ is negative.
The images of these intervals under the map (\[eq:curve1\]) then give us the complement of $\mathrm{supp}(\underline{F})$ in the $z$-plane. Let us study these images
\[le:image\] The intervals $(-\infty,\gamma_1)$, $(\gamma_2,0)$ and $(0,\infty)$ are mapped by $z(\xi)$ to $(0,\lambda_1)$, $(\lambda_2,\infty)$ and $(-\infty,0)$ respectively.
Since none of the points $-1$, $-\frac{1}{a}$ and $0$ belongs to these intervals both $z(\xi)$ and $z^{\prime}(\xi)$ are continuous on these intervals. Moreover, $z(\xi)$ is strictly increasing on these intervals. Therefore the images of these intervals are given by $$\begin{split}
z\left((-\infty,\gamma_1)\right)&=(z(-\infty),z(\gamma_1))=(0,\lambda_1)\\
z\left((\gamma_2,0)\right)&=(z(\gamma_2),z(0^-))=(\lambda_2,\infty)\\
z\left((0,\infty)\right)&=(z(0^+),z(\infty))=(-\infty,0).
\end{split}$$ where the $\pm$ superscripts in the above indicates that the function is evaluated at $\pm\epsilon$ for $\epsilon\rightarrow 0$.
Therefore the complement of $\mathrm{supp}(\underline{F})$ is given by (recall that $\underline{F}$ has a point mass at $0$) $$\label{eq:suppc}
\mathrm{supp}(\underline{F})^c=(-\infty,0)\cup(0,\lambda_1)\cup(\lambda_2,\infty).$$ Let us now show that $\lambda_1<\lambda_2$. This would imply the support of $\underline{F}$ is non-empty and consists of one interval.
\[le:1cut\] Let $\lambda_1$ and $\lambda_2$ be the points defined by (\[eq:lambda\]), then $\lambda_1<\lambda_2$ and hence the support of $\underline{F}$ consists of a single interval.
Suppose $\lambda_1>\lambda_2$. Let $z_0\in(\lambda_2,\lambda_1)$. Since both the points $-1$ and $-\frac{1}{a}$ belongs to $(\gamma_1,\gamma_2)$, the function $z(\xi)$ is continuous in $(-\infty,\gamma_1)$ and $(\gamma_2,0)$. By Lemma \[le:image\], these two intervals are mapped onto $(0,\lambda_1)$ and $(\lambda_2,\infty)$ by the map $z(\xi)$. Hence there is at least one point in each of the intervals $(-\infty,\gamma_1)$ and $(\gamma_2,0)$ that is being mapped onto $z_0$. On the other hand, let $s_1$ and $s_2$ be the points in $\{-1,-\frac{1}{a}\}$ that is closer to $\gamma_1$ and $\gamma_2$ respectively, then $z(\xi)$ is continuous in $(\gamma_1,s_1)$ and $(s_2,\gamma_2)$. Since these intervals are mapped onto $(-\infty,\lambda_1,)$ and $(\lambda_2,\infty)$ respectively by $z(\xi)$, there is at least one point in each of these intervals that is mapped onto $z_0$. This would result in 4 distinct points being mapped onto $z_0$ by the map $z(\xi)$, which is not possible. Therefore we have $\lambda_1<\lambda_2$.
Therefore we have the following
\[thm:cuts\] Let $\Delta$ be the discriminant of the quartic polynomial $$\label{eq:quartic}
\begin{split}
a^2(1-c)\xi^4
&+2(a^2(1-c\beta)+a(1-c(1-\beta))\xi^3\\
&+(1-c(1-\beta)+a^2(1-c\beta)+4a)\xi^2 +2(1+a)\xi+1=0.
\end{split}$$ then if $\Delta<0$, the support of $\underline{F}$ consists of a single interval.
We can treat (\[eq:curve2\]) as a polynomial in $\xi$ then $\lambda_k$, $k=1,\ldots,4$ are the zeroes of its discriminant $D_3(z)=(az)^4\prod_{i<j}(\xi_i-\xi_j)^2$. $$\label{eq:D3}
\begin{split}
D_3(z)&=(1-a)^2z^4+(2A_2^2B_1+2A_2B_2-4A_2^3-12aB_1+18aA_2)z^3\\
&+(B_2^2+A_2^2B_1^2+4A_2B_1B_2-12A_2^2B_2-12aB_1^2+18aB_2+18aA_2B_1-27a^2)z^2\\
&+(2B_1B_2^2+2A_2B_2B_1^2-12A_2B_2^2-4B_1^3a+18aB_1B_2)z+B_1^2B_2^2-4B_2^3.
\end{split}$$ The zeros of (\[eq:D3\]) then correspond to the branch points of the Riemann surface ${\mathcal{L}}$. These branch points are given on ${\mathcal{L}}$ by $(\lambda_k,\gamma_k)$, for $k=1,\ldots,4$.
Since the leading coefficient of $D_3(z)$ is $(1-a)^2>0$, we see that the sign of $D_3(z)$ and hence the 3 roots of the cubic polynomial (\[eq:curve2\]) behave as follows for $z\in\mathbb{R}$. $$\label{eq:realim}
\begin{split}
&1. \quad z\in\mathbb{R}\setminus [\lambda_1,\lambda_2],\quad
D_3(z)>0\Rightarrow
\textrm{$\xi$ has 3 distinct real roots} \\
&2. \quad z\in (\lambda_1,\lambda_2),\quad
D_3(z)<0\Rightarrow\textrm{$\xi$ has 1 real and 2 complex roots}.
\end{split}$$ In particular, since the roots coincide at the branch points, the $\gamma_k$, $k=1,\ldots,4$ is the values of the double root of the cubic (\[eq:curve2\]) when $z=\lambda_k$.
We can now compute the probability density $\underline{F}$.
\[thm:density\] Suppose $\Delta<0$. Then the p.d.f $\underline{F}$ is supported on $[\lambda_1,\lambda_2]$ with the following density $d\underline{F}(z)=\rho(z)dz$ $$\label{eq:density}
\frac{3}{2\pi}\left|\left(\frac{r(z)+\sqrt{-\frac{1}{27a^4z^4}D_3(z)}}{2}\right)^{\frac{1}{3}}-\left(\frac{r(z)-\sqrt{-\frac{1}{27a^4z^4}D_3(z)}}{2}\right)^{\frac{1}{3}}\right|,$$ where $D_3(z)$ is given by (\[eq:D3\]) and $r(z)$ is given by $$\begin{split}
r(z)&=\frac{1}{27}\Bigg(-\frac{2B_2^3}{a^3}z^{-3}+\left(\frac{9B_1B_2}{a^2}-\frac{6A_2B_2^2}{a^3}\right)z^{-2}+\left(\frac{9B_2}{a^2}+\frac{9B_1A_2}{a^2}-\frac{27}{a}-\frac{6A_2^2B_2}{a^3}\right)z^{-1}\\
&+\left(\frac{9A_2}{a^2}-\frac{2A_2^3}{a^3}\right)\Bigg).
\end{split}$$ The cube root in (\[eq:density\]) is chosen such that $\sqrt[3]{A}\in\mathbb{R}$ for $A\in\mathbb{R}$ and the square root is chosen such that $\sqrt{A}>0$ for $A>0$.
The proof of this theorem is the same as Theorem 6 in [@Mo].
Let us now show that the function $\xi_1(z)$ is in fact the Stieltjes transform $m_{\underline{F}}(z)$. From the asymptotic behavior of the $\xi_j(z)$ (\[eq:xiinfty\]) and the fact that the Stieltjes transform $m_{\underline{F}}(z)$ is the unique solution of (\[eq:curve2\]) that vanishes as $z\rightarrow\infty$, we see that $$\label{eq:stiexi}
m_{\underline{F}}(z)=\xi_1(z).$$ For $c<1$, it was shown in [@CS] that $F$ has a continuous density and hence the Stieltjes transform $m_F(z)$ does not have any poles. Therefore, by (\[eq:stielim\]), we see that $m_{\underline{F}}(z)$, and hence $\xi_1(z)$, has the following singularity at $z=0$. $$\label{eq:xizero}
\xi_1(z)=-\frac{1-c}{z}+O(1),\quad z\rightarrow 0.$$ Since $m_{\underline{F}}(z)$ is the Stieltjes transform of a measure supported on the real axis, it is analytic away from the real axis and hence by (\[eq:stiexi\]), $\xi_1(z)$ is analytic at the points $\lambda_3$ and $\lambda_4$ with a branch cut on $[\lambda_1,\lambda_2]$. Since $\lambda_3$, $\lambda_4$ are not branch points of the function $\xi_1(z)$, they must be branch points of the functions $\xi_2(z)$ and $\xi_3(z)$. This determines the branch structure of the Riemann surface ${\mathcal{L}}$. The branch cut of $\xi_2(z)$ and $\xi_3(z)$ will eventually be chosen to be a contour that goes from $\lambda_4$ to $\lambda_3$ intersecting the real axis at a point in $(\lambda_1,\lambda_2)$, but in the next section it will be chosen in a few different ways according to the situation.
### Geometry of the problem {#se:geo}
As explained in the introduction, the determination of the zero set of $h(x)$ in (\[eq:hx\]) is considerably more difficult than it is in [@BKext2] and [@Lysov]. In this section we will carry out a thorough analysis of this set and determine its topology.
For the implementation of the Riemann-Hilbert analysis, it is more convenient to consider a measure $\hat{F}_{N}$ instead of the measure $\underline{F}$.
Let $c_N=\frac{N}{M}$ and $H_N(t)$ be the e.d.f $$dH_N(t)=(1-\beta_N)\delta_1+\beta_N\delta_a.$$ where $\beta_N=\frac{N_1}{N}$.
Then $\hat{F}_N$ is the measure whose Stieltjes transform $m_N(z)=m_{\hat{F}_N}(z)$ is the unique solution of $$\label{eq:mN}
z(m_N)=-\frac{1}{m_N}+c_N\int_{\mathbb{R}}\frac{t}{1+tm_N}dH_N(t),$$ in $\mathbb{C}^+$ that behaves like $-\frac{1}{z}$ as $z\rightarrow\infty$. Note that, as pointed out in [@Baikspike], the measure $\hat{F}_N$ is not the eigenvalue distribution for finite $N$, instead, it is only defined through the equation (\[eq:mN\]). From (\[eq:mN\]), we see that $m_N(z)$ is the solution of the algebraic equation $$\label{eq:curveN}
\begin{split}
za\xi^3&+(A_2z+B_2^N)\xi^2+(z+B_1^N)\xi+1=0, \\
B_2^N&=a(1-c_N),\quad B_1^N=1-c_N(1-\beta_N)+a(1-c_N\beta_N).
\end{split}$$ that behaves as $-\frac{1}{z}$ as $z\rightarrow\infty$. If we denote by $\xi_j^N(z)$ the solutions of (\[eq:curveN\]) with asymptotic behavior (\[eq:xiinfty\]), but with $c$ and $\beta$ replaced by $c_N$ and $\beta_N$, then we have $\xi_1^N(z)=m_N(z)$. In [@CS], it was shown that the measure $\hat{F}_N$ has a continuous density on $\mathbb{R}_+$ and a point mass of size $1-c_N$ at $0$ and hence $\xi_1^N(z)$ also have the asymptotic behavior (\[eq:xizero\]) near $z=0$ with $c$ replaced by $c_N$. By Remark \[re:baik\], all the results in the previous section will remain valid for (\[eq:curveN\]) and $\xi_j^N(z)$, with $\beta$ and $c$ replaced by $\beta_N$ and $c_N$. We will denote the Riemann surface defined by (\[eq:curveN\]) ${\mathcal{L}}_N$.
Let $\Delta_N$ be the determinant of the quartic polynomial (\[eq:quart\]) $$\label{eq:quartN}
\begin{split}
a^2(1-c_N)\xi^4
&+2(a^2(1-c_N\beta_N)+a(1-c_N(1-\beta_N))\xi^3\\
&+(1-c_N(1-\beta_N)+a^2(1-c_N\beta_N)+4a)\xi^2 +2(1+a)\xi+1=0
\end{split}$$ Since the determinant $\Delta$ of the quartic polynomial (\[eq:quart\]) is continuous in the parameters $a$, $\beta$ and $c$, for large enough $N$, $M$ and $N_1$, we can assume that the determinant $\Delta_N<0$. Then let $\gamma_1^N<\gamma_2^N$ be the real roots of (\[eq:quartN\]) and $\gamma_{3}^N$ and $\gamma_4^N$ be the complex conjugate roots of (\[eq:quartN\]) and let $\lambda_1^N<\lambda_2^N$ and $\lambda_{3}^N$, $\lambda_4^N$ be their images under the map $z(\xi)$ given in (\[eq:mN\]).
For the time being, we will choose the branch cut of $\xi_1^N(z)$ to be the interval $[\lambda_1^N,\lambda_2^N]$, and the branch cut between $\lambda_{3}^N$ and $\lambda_4^N$ to be a simple contour $\mathcal{C}$ that is symmetric with respect to the real axis and oriented upwards. Across $\mathcal{C}$, the two branches $\xi_2^N(z)$ and $\xi_3^N(z)$ change into each other. The branch cut $\mathcal{C}$ will be chosen such that it intersects the real axis at exactly one point $x^{\ast}$ that is not equal to $\lambda_1^N$ or $\lambda_2^N$.
We will now define the functions $\theta_j^N(z)$ to be the the integrals of $\xi_j^N(z)$. $$\label{eq:theta}
\begin{split}
\theta_1^N(z)&=\int_{\lambda_l^N}^z\xi_1^N(x)dx,\quad
\theta_2^N(z)=\int_{\lambda_{3}^N}^z\xi_2^N(x)dx,\quad
\theta_3^N(z)=\int_{\lambda_{3}^N}^z\xi_3^N(x)dx,\\
\textrm{if }x^{\ast}&<\lambda_2^N,\quad l=2;\quad \textrm{if
$x^{\ast}>\lambda_2^N,\quad l=1.$}
\end{split}$$ The integration paths of the above integrals are chosen as follows. If $x^{\ast}<\lambda_2^N$, then the integration path will not intersect the set $\mathcal{C}\cup(-\infty,\lambda_2^N)$ and if $x^{\ast}>\lambda_2^N$, then the integration path will not intersect the set $\mathcal{C}\cup(\lambda_1^N,\infty)$.
Then from (\[eq:xiinfty\]), (\[eq:zeroasym\]) and (\[eq:xizero\]), we see that the integrals (\[eq:theta\]) have the following behavior at $z=\infty$ and $z=0$. $$\label{eq:asymtheta}
\begin{split}
\theta_1^N(z)&=-\log z+l_1^N+O\left(z^{-1}\right),\quad
z\rightarrow\infty,\\
\theta_1^N(z)&=-(1-c_N)\log z+O\left(1\right),\quad
z\rightarrow 0,\\
\theta_2^N(z)&=-z+c_N(1-\beta_N)\log
z+l_2^N+O\left(z^{-1}\right),\quad
z\rightarrow\infty,\\
\theta_2^N(z)&=O\left(1\right),\quad
z\rightarrow 0,\\
\theta_3^N(z)&=-\frac{z}{a}+c_N\beta_N\log
z+l_3^N+O\left(z^{-1}\right),\quad
z\rightarrow\infty,\\
\theta_3^N(z)&=O\left(1\right),\quad z\rightarrow 0.
\end{split}$$ for some constants $l_1^N$, $l_2^N$ and $l_3^N$.
Then the set $\mathfrak{H}$ defined by $$\label{eq:frakH}
\mathfrak{H}=\left\{z\in\mathbb{C}|\quad
\mathrm{Re}\left(\theta_2^N(z)-\theta_3^N(z)\right)=0\right\}$$ is important to the Riemann-Hilbert analysis. Let us now study its properties. First note that it is symmetric across the real axis.
\[le:symm\] Let the branch cut $\mathcal{C}$ between $\lambda_{3}^N$ and $\lambda_4^N$ be a simple contour that is symmetric with respect to the real axis. Then the set $\mathfrak{H}$ in (\[eq:frakH\]) is symmetric with respect to the real axis.
Let us consider the transformation $z\mapsto\overline{z}$ and $\xi(z)\mapsto\overline{\xi}(\overline{z})$ in (\[eq:curveN\]). This gives $$\label{eq:curveNcon}
\begin{split}
\overline{z}a\overline{\xi}(\overline{z})^3&+(A_2\overline{z}+B_2^N)\overline{\xi}(\overline{z})^2+(\overline{z}+B_1^N)\overline{\xi}(\overline{z})+1=0.
\end{split}$$ This means that if $\xi(z)$ is a solution to (\[eq:curveN\]), then so is $\overline{\xi}(\overline{z})$. Since the functions $\overline{\xi}_j^N(\overline{z})$ is analytic away from $\mathcal{C}\cup[\lambda_1^N,\lambda_2^N]$, it must equal either of the functions $\xi_1^N(z)$, $\xi_2^N(z)$ or $\xi_3^N(z)$. By considering the behavior of $\overline{\xi}_j^N(\overline{z})$ near $z=\infty$ using (\[eq:xiinfty\]), we see that $\overline{\xi}_j^N(\overline{z})=\xi_j^N(z)$ for $j=1,2,3$. Let $z_0\in\mathfrak{H}$, then we have $$\label{eq:zoH}
\mathrm{Re}\left(\int_{\lambda^N_3}^{z_0}(\xi_2^N(x)-\xi_3^N(x))dx\right)=0.$$ By taking the complex conjugation of (\[eq:zoH\]) and making use of the fact that $\overline{\xi}_j^N(\overline{z})=\xi_j^N(z)$ for $j=2,3$, we obtain $$\mathrm{Re}\left(\int_{\lambda^N_4}^{\overline{z}_0}(\xi_2^N(x)-\xi_3^N(x))dx\right)=0.$$ Let us now show that $\mathrm{Re}\left(\theta_2^N(\lambda_4^N)-\theta_3^N(\lambda_4^N)\right)=0$. Consider an integration contour $\Gamma$ from $\lambda^N_3$ to $\lambda_4^N$ that is symmetric with respect to $\mathbb{R}$. Then we have $$\begin{split}
\overline{\mathrm{Re}\left(\int_{\lambda_3^N}^{\lambda_4^N}\left(\xi_2^N(x)-\xi_3^N(x)\right)dx\right)}&=
\mathrm{Re}\left(\int_{\lambda_4^N}^{\lambda_3^N}\left(\xi_2^N(x)-\xi_3^N(x)\right)dx\right)\\
&=-\mathrm{Re}\left(\int_{\lambda_3^N}^{\lambda_4^N}\left(\xi_2^N(x)-\xi_3^N(x)\right)dx\right),
\end{split}$$ where we have used $\lambda_3^N=\overline{\lambda}_4^N$ in the above. Hence we have $\mathrm{Re}\left(\theta_2^N(\lambda_4^N)-\theta_3^N(\lambda_4^N)\right)=0$. This implies the following $$\mathrm{Re}\left(\int_{\lambda_4^N}^{\overline{z}_0}(\xi_2^N(x)-\xi_3^N(x))dx\right)=
\mathrm{Re}\left(\int_{\lambda_3^N}^{\overline{z}_0}(\xi_2^N(x)-\xi_3^N(x))dx\right)=0.$$ Therefore if $z_0\in\mathfrak{H}$, then $\overline{z}_0$ is also in $\mathfrak{H}$ and hence $\mathfrak{H}$ is symmetric with respect to the real axis.
We will now show that the set $\mathfrak{H}$ is independent on the choice of the branch cut $\mathcal{C}$.
\[le:indep\] Let the branch cut $\mathcal{C}$ be symmetric with respect to the real axis. Then the set $\mathfrak{H}$ is independent on the choice of the branch cut $\mathcal{C}$.
Let us consider the boundary values of $\theta_2^N(z)$ and $\theta_3^N(z)$ along the branch cut $\mathcal{C}$. Let $\xi_{2,\pm}^N(z)$ and $\xi_{3,\pm}^N(z)$ be the boundary values of $\xi_2^N(z)$ and $\xi_3^N(z)$ on the left and right hand sides of $\mathcal{C}$, then we have $\xi_{2,\pm}^N(z)=\xi_{3,\mp}^N(z)$ for $z\in\mathcal{C}$. Therefore, for $z$ in the upper half plane, we have the following $$\int_{\lambda_3^N}^{z}(\xi_{2,+}^N(x)-\xi_{3,+}^N(x))dx=-\int_{\lambda_3^N}^{z}(\xi_{2,-}^N(x)-\xi_{3,-}^N(x))dx$$ where the integration is performed along $\mathcal{C}$. Therefore in the upper half plane, the function $\theta_2^N(z)-\theta_3^N(z)$ changes sign across the branch cut $\mathcal{C}$. Hence in the upper half plane, the zero set of $\mathrm{Re}\left(\theta_2^N(z)-\theta_3^N(z)\right)$ is independent on the choice of $\mathcal{C}$. Now by Lemma \[le:symm\] the set $\mathfrak{H}$ is symmetric with respect to the real axis for any choice of symmetric branch cut $\mathcal{C}$. Therefore the set $\mathfrak{H}$ in the lower half plane is just the reflection of $\mathfrak{H}$ in the upper half plane which must also be independent on the choice of $\mathcal{C}$.
We will now show that the real parts of $\xi_2^N(z)$ and $\xi_3^N(z)$ will coincide exactly once on the real axis.
\[le:real23\] Let $x^{\ast}$ be the intersection between $\mathcal{C}$ and $\mathbb{R}$, then the real function $\mathrm{Re}\left(\xi_2^N(z)-\xi_3^N(z)\right)$ is continuous on $(-\infty,x^{\ast})$ and $(x^{\ast},\infty)$ and it vanishes exactly once at a point $\iota\in\mathbb{R}\setminus\{x^{\ast}\}$.
The location of $x^{\ast}$ is immaterial as the function $\mathrm{Re}\left(\xi_2^N(z)-\xi_3^N(z)\right)$ only changes sign across the point $x^{\ast}$ and hence its zeros on $\mathbb{R}$ are independent on the location of $x^{\ast}$. For definiteness, let us assume that $x^{\ast}<\lambda_1^N$.
Let $l_1=2$, $l_2=3$ for $a>1$ and $l_1=3$, $l_2=2$ for $a<1$. From the behavior (\[eq:xiinfty\]) of $\xi_j^N(z)$ near $z=\pm\infty$, we see that there exists $R>0$ such that $\xi_1^N(\pm
R)>\xi_{l_2}^N(\pm R)>\xi_{l_1}^N(\pm R)$. Note that $\xi_{l_1}^N(z)$ and $\xi_{l_2}^N(z)$ are continuous on $(-\infty,x^{\ast})\cup(\lambda_2^N,\infty)$. Since these intervals do not contain any branch point of (\[eq:curveN\]) and both $\xi_{l_1}^N(z)$ and $\xi_{l_2}^N(z)$ are real on them, $\mathrm{Re}\left(\xi_{l_1}^N(z)\right)$ and $\mathrm{Re}\left(\xi_{l_2}^N(z)\right)$ cannot coincide on these intervals. In particular, the order $\xi_{l_2}^N(z)>\xi_{l_1}^N(z)$ must be preserved in $(-\infty,x^{\ast})\cup(\lambda_2^N,\infty)$. Since $\xi_{l_1}^N(z)$ and $\xi_{l_2}^N(z)$ interchange across the branch cut $\mathcal{C}$, we must have $\xi_{l_1}^N(z)>\xi_{l_2}^N(z)$ in the interval $(x^{\ast},\lambda_1^N)$. This means that $\xi_{l_1}^N(z)>\xi_{l_2}^N(z)$ on the left hand side of $[\lambda_1^N,\lambda_2^N]$, while $\xi_{l_1}^N(z)<\xi_{l_2}^N(z)$ on the right hand side of $[\lambda_1^N,\lambda_2^N]$ and hence $\mathrm{Re}\left(\xi_2^N(z)\right)$ and $\mathrm{Re}\left(\xi_3^N(z)\right)$ must coincide at least once in $[\lambda_1^N,\lambda_2^N]$. We will show that they can only coincide once within $[\lambda_1^N,\lambda_2^N]$.
Inside $[\lambda_1^N,\lambda_2^N]$, the function $\xi_1^N(z)$ and one other root $\xi_I^N(z)$ becomes complex and are conjugate to each other, while another root $\xi_R^N(z)$ remains real. Note that, since $\xi_{I,\pm}^N(z)=\xi_{1,\mp}^N(z)$ on the branch cut $[\lambda_1^N,\lambda_2^N]$, we see that the real part of $\xi_I^N(z)$ and $\xi_1^N(z)$ is continuous across $[\lambda_1^N,\lambda_2^N]$, while $\xi_R^N(z)$ has no jump discontinuity across $[\lambda_1^N,\lambda_2^N]$. Since neither $\xi_I^N(z)$ or $\xi_R^N(z)$ are equal to the branch $\xi_1^N(z)$ in $(\lambda_1^N,\lambda_2^N)$, the real function $\mathrm{Re}\left(
\xi_I^N(z)-\xi_R^N(z)\right)$ must equal either of $\pm\mathrm{Re}\left( \xi_2^N(z)-\xi_3^N(z)\right)$ and hence the real function $\mathrm{Re}\left( \xi_2^N(z)-\xi_3^N(z)\right)$ does not have jump discontinuity on $[\lambda_1^N,\lambda_2^N]$. Therefore for $z\in\mathbb{R}$, this real function can only have jump discontinuity at the point $x^{\ast}$.
From the coefficient of $\xi^2$ in (\[eq:curveN\]), we see that $$\label{eq:coef}
2\mathrm{Re}\left(\xi_I^N(z)\right)+\xi_R^N(z)=-\frac{1}{a}\left(A_2+\frac{B_2^N}{z}\right).$$ Taking the derivative with respect to $z$, we obtain $$2\frac{d}{dz}\mathrm{Re}\left(
\xi_I^N(z)-\xi_R^N(z)\right)+3\frac{d\xi_R^N(z)}{dz}=\frac{1}{a}\frac{B_2^N}{z^2}.$$ This implies $$3\frac{d\xi_R^N(z)}{dz}=\frac{1}{a}\frac{B_2^N}{z^2}-2\frac{d}{dz}\mathrm{Re}\left(
\xi_I^N(z)-\xi_R(z)\right).$$ From (\[eq:curveN\]), it is easy to see that $B_2^N>0$ as $c_N<1$. Hence if the derivative of $\mathrm{Re}\left(
\xi_I^N(z)-\xi_R(z)\right)$ is non-positive at a point $z_0\in[\lambda_1^N,\lambda_2^N]$, then we will have $\frac{d\xi_R(z_0)}{dz}>0$. Since $\xi_R(z)$ is real, this would imply the derivative $\frac{d z(\xi)}{d\xi}$ of the function $z$ defined by (\[eq:mN\]) is positive at the real point $m=\xi_R(z_0)$. By Lemma \[le:CS\], the point $z_0=z(m)$ cannot belong to $\mathrm{Supp}\left(\hat{F}_N\right)=[\lambda_1^N,\lambda_2^N]$. This leads to a contradiction and hence we must have $$\label{eq:posde}
\frac{d}{dz}\mathrm{Re}\left( \xi_I^N(z)-\xi_R^N(z)\right)>0,\quad
z\in[\lambda_1^N,\lambda_2^N].$$ In particular, if the function $\mathrm{Re}\left(
\xi_I^N(z)-\xi_R^N(z)\right)$ has more than one zero inside of $[\lambda_1^N,\lambda_2^N]$, then at one of the zeros, the derivative in (\[eq:posde\]) must be smaller than or equal to zero. This is a contradiction and hence the function $\mathrm{Re}\left( \xi_I^N(z)-\xi_R^N(z)\right)$ can vanish at most once inside $[\lambda_1^N,\lambda_2^N]$. This means that the function $\mathrm{Re}\left( \xi_2^N(z)-\xi_3^N(z)\right)$ will also vanish at most once inside $[\lambda_1^N,\lambda_2^N]$. Since we have already shown that $\mathrm{Re}\left(
\xi_2^N(z)-\xi_3^N(z)\right)$ vanishes at least once inside this interval, it must then vanish exactly once inside $[\lambda_1^N,\lambda_2^N]$. This concludes the proof of the lemma.
We can now determine the number of intersection points between $\mathfrak{H}$ and $\mathbb{R}$.
\[le:inter\] The set $\mathfrak{H}$ intersects $\mathbb{R}$ at most twice.
By Lemma \[le:real23\], there exists exactly one point $\iota\in[\lambda_1^N,\lambda_2^N]$ such that $\mathrm{Re}\left(\xi_2^N(\iota)-\xi_3^N(\iota)\right)=0$. Let us assume that $\mathfrak{H}$ and $\mathbb{R}$ intersects at a point $s_0<\iota$. The case when $s_0>\iota$ can be treated similarly. Let us also choose $\mathcal{C}$ such that $\mathcal{C}$ intersects $\mathbb{R}$ at $x^{\ast}<s_0$. As both $\mathfrak{H}$ and $\iota$ are independent on the choice of $\mathcal{C}$, a different choice will not affect the intersection between $\mathfrak{H}$ and $\mathbb{R}$. Since $x^{\ast}<s_0$, the function $\mathrm{Re}\left(\xi_2^N-\xi_3^N\right)$ is continuous and has different signs on $(s_0,\iota)$ and $(\iota,\infty)$. However, within these two intervals, the sign of $\mathrm{Re}\left(\xi_2^N-\xi_3^N\right)$ remains unchanged. Hence there is at most one point $z\in(s_0,\infty)$ such that $\mathrm{Re}\left(\int_{s_0}^{z}\xi_{2}^N-\xi_{3}^Ndx\right)=0$, where the integration path is taken along $\mathbb{R}$. Since $\mathrm{Re}\left(\int_{\lambda_3^N}^{s_0}\xi_{2}^N-\xi_{3}^Ndx\right)=0$ and that $\mathfrak{H}$ is symmetric with respect to the real axis, we see that there is at most one point on $(s_0,\infty)$ that belongs to $\mathfrak{H}$.
Let us now consider the possible intersection points on $(-\infty,s_0)$. As the choice of the branch cut $\mathcal{C}$ does not affect the set $\mathfrak{H}$ and its intersection with the real axis, let us choose $\mathcal{C}$ so that it intersects $\mathbb{R}$ at a point $\tilde{x}_0>s_0$ instead. Then $\mathrm{Re}\left(\xi_2^N-\xi_3^N\right)$ is continuous on $(-\infty,s_0)$. Moreover, it does not change sign in $(-\infty,s_0)$. Therefore the function $\mathrm{Re}\left(\int_{\lambda_3^N}^{z}\xi_{2}^N-\xi_{3}^Ndx\right)$ does not vanish in $(-\infty,s_0)$ and hence $\mathfrak{H}$ does not intersect $(-\infty,s_0)$. This shows that if $\mathfrak{H}$ intersects $\mathbb{R}$ at a point $s_0<\iota$, then there can at most be 2 intersection points between $\mathfrak{H}$ and $\mathbb{R}$. By using similar argument, one can show the same for the case when $s_0>\iota$.
Let us now consider the case when $s_0=\iota$. If $s_0=\iota$, then by choosing $\mathcal{C}$ such that $x^{\ast}<\iota$ ($x^{\ast}>\iota$), we see that $\mathrm{Re}\left(\xi_2^N-\xi_3^N\right)$ does not change sign in $(s_0,\infty)$ ($(-\infty,s_0)$) and hence $\mathrm{Re}\left(\int_{\lambda_3^N}^{z}\xi_{2}^N-\xi_{3}^Ndx\right)$ does not vanish in either of these intervals. Therefore $\mathfrak{H}$ can only intersect $\mathbb{R}$ at the point $s_0=\iota$. In any case, the set $\mathfrak{H}$ can intersect $\mathbb{R}$ at 2 points at most.
We can now determine the shape of the set $\mathfrak{H}$.
\[pro:shapeH\] The set $\mathfrak{H}$ consists of 4 simple curves, $\mathfrak{H}_{\infty}^{\pm}$, $\mathfrak{H}_L$ and $\mathfrak{H}_R$. The curve $\mathfrak{H}_{\infty}^{+}$ ($\mathfrak{H}_{\infty}^-$) is an open smooth curve that go from $\lambda_{3}^N$ ($\lambda_4^N$) to infinity. They approach infinity in a direction parallel to the imaginary axis and do not intersect the real axis. The curves $\mathfrak{H}_L$ and $\mathfrak{H}_R$ are simple curves joining $\lambda_3^N$ and $\lambda_4^N$. The curve $\mathfrak{H}_L$ is in the left hand side of $\mathfrak{H}_R$ in the complex plane and each of these curves intersects the real axis once. These two curves are smooth except at their intersections with real axis. Let $x_L$ and $x_R$ be the intersection points of $\mathfrak{H}_L$ and $\mathfrak{H}_R$ with $\mathbb{R}$, then $(x_L,x_R)\cap[\lambda_1^N,\lambda_2^N]\neq\emptyset$.
Let the sets $\mathfrak{H}_+$ and $\mathfrak{H}_-$ be the intersections of $\mathfrak{H}$ with the upper and lower half planes respectively. Then these 2 sets are reflections of each other with respect to the real axis. Within the set $\mathfrak{H}_+$, there are 3 curves $\mathfrak{H}_0^+$, $\mathfrak{H}_1^+$ and $\mathfrak{H}_2^+$ coming out of the point $\lambda_3^N$. Let us show that these curves are smooth except at $\lambda_3^N$. Suppose there is a point $z_0$ on $\mathfrak{H}_j^+$ that is not smooth. This means that the function $\theta_2^N-\theta_3^N$ is not conformal at $z_0$. Since $\mathfrak{H}$ is independent on the choice of the branch cut $\mathcal{C}$, by changing the branch cut if necessary, we can assume that both $\theta_2^N(z)$ and $\theta_3^N(z)$ are analytic at $z_0$ and therefore the derivative of $\theta_2^N-\theta_3^N$ must be zero at $z_0$ as the function is not conformal at $z_0$. This would imply $\xi_2^N(z_0)=\xi_3^N(z_0)$, which is impossible as the only points where this happens are the points $\lambda_k^N$. Therefore the curves $\mathfrak{H}_j^+$, $j=0,1,2$ are smooth except at the point $\lambda_3^N$.
We will now show that the curves $\mathfrak{H}_j^+$ cannot be connected with one another except at the point $\lambda_3^N$. Suppose the curves $\mathfrak{H}_j^+$ is connected to $\mathfrak{H}_k^+$ at a point $z_0\neq \lambda_3^N$. Since both curves $\mathfrak{H}_j^+$ and $\mathfrak{H}_k^+$ are smooth, the curve $\mathfrak{H}_j^+\cup\mathfrak{H}_k^+$ forms a close loop in the upper half plane. Let $V$ be the region bounded by this close loop. Then by changing the choice of $\mathcal{C}$ if necessary, we can assume that the functions $\theta_2^N(z)$ and $\theta_3^N(z)$ are analytic in the interior of $V$. Then the function $\mathrm{Re}\left(\theta_2^N-\theta_3^N\right)$ is a harmonic function in the interior of $V$ and has constant value at the boundary of $V$. Therefore, by the maximum modulus principle this function must be a constant in $V$. This is not possible and hence the curves $\mathfrak{H}_j^+$ cannot be connected to each other.
By inspecting the behavior of $\theta_2^N-\theta_3^N$ at $z=\infty$, we see that one of these curves must be an open curve that approaches infinity at a direction parallel to the imaginary axis. We will call this curve $\mathfrak{H}_{\infty}^+$ and its reflection with respect to the real axis $\mathfrak{H}_{\infty}^-$. Since the other 2 curves cannot intersect each other, and they cannot go to infinity either, they must end at the real axis and be connected to the curves in $\mathfrak{H}^-$. We will call the curve on the left hand side $\mathfrak{H}_L^+$ and the one on the right hand side $\mathfrak{H}_R^+$. These two curves must end at different points on the real axis as they cannot intersect. Let us denote the curves $\mathfrak{H}_L$ and $\mathfrak{H}_R$ by $$\label{eq:HLR}
\begin{split}
\mathfrak{H}_L&=\mathfrak{H}^+_L\cup\mathfrak{H}^-_L\cup\{x_L\},\\
\mathfrak{H}_R&=\mathfrak{H}^+_R\cup\mathfrak{H}^-_R\cup\{x_R\}.
\end{split}$$ where $\mathfrak{H}_L^{-}$ and $\mathfrak{H}_R^-$ are the reflections of $\mathfrak{H}_L^{+}$ and $\mathfrak{H}_R^+$ with respect to the real axis and $x_L$, $x_R$ are their accumulation points on the real axis.
\[\]\[\]\[1\]\[0.0\][$\lambda_{1}^N$]{} \[\]\[\]\[1\]\[0.0\][$\lambda_{3}^N$]{} \[\]\[\]\[1\]\[0.0\][$\lambda_{4}^N$]{} \[\]\[\]\[1\]\[0.0\][$\lambda_{2}^N$]{} \[\]\[\]\[1\]\[0.0\][$\mathfrak{H}_{\infty}^+$]{} \[\]\[\]\[1\]\[0.0\][$\mathfrak{H}_{\infty}^-$]{} \[\]\[\]\[1\]\[0.0\][$\mathfrak{H}_{L}$]{} \[\]\[\]\[1\]\[0.0\][$\mathfrak{H}_{R}$]{} \[\]\[\]\[1\]\[0.0\][$\mathcal{C}$]{} \[\]\[\]\[1\]\[0.0\][$x^{\ast}$]{} \[\]\[\]\[1\]\[0.0\][$\Omega_R$]{} \[\]\[\]\[1\]\[0.0\][$\Omega_L$]{} \[\]\[\]\[1\]\[0.0\][$\Omega_2$]{} \[\]\[\]\[1\]\[0.0\][$\Omega_1$]{} ![The set $\mathfrak{H}$ for $a=0.9$, $\beta_N=0.7$ and $c_N=0.4$. The branch points are given by $\lambda_1^N\approx
0.12518$, $\lambda_2^N\approx 2.48841$, $\lambda_{3}^N\approx
2.40520+3.2516i$ and $\lambda_4^N\approx 2.40520-3.2516i$. The point $\iota$ in Lemma \[le:real23\] is given by $\iota\approx0.602$. For $a<1$, the function $\mathrm{Re}\left(\theta_2^N(z)-\theta_3^N(z)\right)$ is negative in the open region $\Omega_L$ on the left of $\mathfrak{H}_L$ and positive in the region $\Omega_R$ on the right hand side of $\mathfrak{H}_R$.[]{data-label="fig:zeroset"}](zeroset "fig:")
Let us now show that $$\label{eq:H+}
\mathfrak{H}^+=\mathfrak{H}^+_{\infty}\cup\mathfrak{H}_L^+\cup\mathfrak{H}_R^+.$$ Suppose there is a point $z_1\in\mathfrak{H}^+$ that does not belong to any of the curves in the right hand side of (\[eq:H+\]). Then $z_1$ must belong to a curve $\mathfrak{H}_4^+\in\mathfrak{H}^+$. By changing the definition of $\mathcal{C}$ again if necessary, we see that $\mathfrak{H}_4^+$ must be smooth. This curve cannot end on the real axis because by Lemma \[le:inter\], the set $\mathfrak{H}$ can at most intersect the real axis at 2 points and $\mathfrak{H}$ has already intersected the real axis at the 2 points $x_L$ and $x_R$ in (\[eq:HLR\]). The curve $\mathfrak{H}_4^+$ cannot approach infinity or intersect any other curves in $\mathfrak{H}^+$ either and therefore it must be a close loop in the upper half plane. As $\mathfrak{H}_4^+$ cannot intersect the curves in the right hand side of (\[eq:H+\]), the point $\lambda_3^N$ must lie outside of the region $\tilde{V}$ bounded by $\mathfrak{H}_4^+$. This would then imply that the harmonic function $\mathrm{Re}\left(\theta_2^N-\theta_3^N\right)$ is constant inside the region $\tilde{V}$, which is not possible and hence we have $$\mathfrak{H}=\mathfrak{H}^+_{\infty}\cup\mathfrak{H}^-_{\infty}\cup\mathfrak{H}_L\cup\mathfrak{H}_R.$$ Finally, if $(x_L,x_R)\cap[\lambda_1^N,\lambda_2^N]=\emptyset$, then the function $\mathrm{Re}\left(\theta_2^N-\theta_3^N\right)$ is harmonic inside the region bounded by $\mathfrak{H}_L$ and $\mathfrak{H}_R$, which is not possible as it would imply that it is a constant function in this region. This concludes the proof of the proposition.
The shape of the set $\mathfrak{H}$ is indicated in Figure \[fig:zeroset\]. The Octave generated figure shows the set for $a=0.9$, $\beta_N=0.7$ and $c_N=0.4$.
### Jump discontinuities of the functions
From now on, we will choose the branch cut $\mathcal{C}$ to be a simple curve joining $\lambda_3^N$ and $\lambda_4^N$ that is symmetric with respect to the real axis. We also require $\mathcal{C}$ to lie between the curves $\mathfrak{H}_L$ and $\mathfrak{H}_R$ in Proposition \[pro:shapeH\] and that it intersects $\mathbb{R}$ at a point $\lambda_1^N<x^{\ast}<\lambda_2^N$. The integration contours for the functions $\theta_j^N(z)$ in (\[eq:theta\]) are chosen such that they do not intersect the set $(-\infty,\lambda_2^N)\cup\mathcal{C}$ and the point $\lambda_l^N$ in (\[eq:theta\]) is chosen to be $\lambda_2^N$.
\[pro:sheet\] If $a>1$, then $\lambda_2^N$ is a branch point of $\xi_3^N(z)$ and $\lambda_1^N$ is a branch point of $\xi_2^N(z)$. On the other hand, if $a<1$, then $\lambda_1^N$ is a branch point of $\xi_3^N(z)$ while $\lambda_2^N$ is a branch point of $\xi_2^N(z)$.
Let $l_1=2$, $l_2=3$ for $a>1$ and $l_1=3$, $l_2=2$ for $a<1$. Then for large enough $z_0>\lambda_2^N$, all the functions $\xi_j^N$ are real and we have $\xi_1^N(z_0)>\xi_{l_2}^N(z_0)>\xi_{l_1}^N(z_0)$ by (\[eq:xiinfty\]). This ordering must preserve at $\lambda_2^N$ as the roots cannot coincide between $z_0$ and $\lambda_2^N$. At $\lambda_2^N$, one of the roots must coincide with $\xi_1^N$ and from the ordering $\xi_1^N(z_0)>\xi_{l_2}^N(z_0)>\xi_{l_1}^N(z_0)$, we must have $\xi_1^N(\lambda_2^N)=\xi_{l_2}^N(\lambda_2^N)=\gamma_2^N$. On the other hand, for small enough $0<\epsilon<\lambda_1^N$, all three $\xi_j^N$ will be real. From the asymptotic behavior of $\xi_1^N(z)$ at $0$ (\[eq:xizero\]), we see that for small enough $\epsilon$, $\xi_1^N(\epsilon)$ will be smaller than both $\xi_2^N(\epsilon)$ and $\xi_3^N(\epsilon)$. From the asymptotic behavior of $\xi_2^N$ and $\xi_3^N$ at $z=-\infty$ (\[eq:xiinfty\]) and the fact that these 2 functions has no singularity and cannot coincide in $(-\infty, \lambda_1^N)$, we see that at $z=\epsilon$, we must have $\xi_{l_2}^N(\epsilon)>\xi_{l_1}^N(\epsilon)$. Therefore we have $\xi_{l_2}^N(\epsilon)>\xi_{l_1}^N(\epsilon)>\xi_1^N(\epsilon)$. This ordering must again be preserved at $\lambda_1^N$. Therefore we must have $\xi_1^N(\lambda_1^N)=\xi_{l_1}^N(\lambda_1^N)=\gamma_1^N$. This shows that $\lambda_2^N$ is a branch point of $\xi_{l_2}^N$ while $\lambda_1^N$ is a branch point of $\xi_{l_1}^N$.
We can now determine the jump discontinuities of $\xi_j^N$ on the branch cuts $$\label{eq:bound}
\begin{split}
\xi_{1,\pm}^N(z)&=
\xi_{2,\mp}^N(z), \quad z\in\mathfrak{B}_{k_2},
\quad \xi_{1,\pm}^N(z)=
\xi_{3,\mp}^N(z), \quad z\in\mathfrak{B}_{k_3}, \\
\xi_{2,\pm}^N(z)&=\xi_{3,\mp}^N(z),\quad z\in\mathcal{C}.
\end{split}$$ where $k_2=1$, $k_3=2$ for $a>1$ and $k_2=2$, $k_3=1$ for $a<1$ and $\mathfrak{B}_j$ are defined by $$\label{eq:frakB}
\mathfrak{B}_1=[\lambda_1^N,x^{\ast}),\quad
\mathfrak{B}_2=(x^{\ast},\lambda_2^N].$$ The branch cut structure of the Riemann surface ${\mathcal{L}}_N$ is indicated in Figure \[fig:sheets2\].
\[\]\[\]\[1\]\[0.0\][$\xi_1^N$]{} \[\]\[\]\[1\]\[0.0\][$\xi_2^N$]{} \[\]\[\]\[1\]\[0.0\][$\xi_3^N$]{} ![The branch cut structure of the Riemann surface ${\mathcal{L}}_N$ when $a>1$.[]{data-label="fig:sheets2"}](sheets2 "fig:")
Let us define $\tilde{\theta}_j^N(z)$ to be constant shifts of the $\theta_j^N(z)$. $$\label{eq:thetatilde}
\begin{split}
\tilde{\theta}_1^N(z)&=\theta_1^N(z);\\
\tilde{\theta}_2^N(z)&=\left\{\begin{array}{ll}
\theta_2^N(z)-\theta_{2,+}^N(\lambda_1^N)+\theta_{1,-}^N(\lambda^N_{1}), & \hbox{$a>1$;} \\
\theta_2^N(z)-\theta_{2,+}^N(\lambda_2^N), & \hbox{$a<1$.}
\end{array}
\right.\\
\tilde{\theta}_3^N(z)&=\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
\theta_3^N(z)-\theta_{3,+}^N(\lambda^N_{2}), & \hbox{$a>1$;} \\
\theta_3^N(z)-\theta_{3,+}^N(\lambda_1^N)+\theta_{1,-}^N(\lambda^N_{1}), & \hbox{$a<1$.}
\end{array}
\right.
\end{split}$$ Note that the difference between $\theta_2^N(z)$ and $\theta_3^N(z)$ are the same as the difference between $\tilde{\theta}_2^N(z)$ and $\tilde{\theta}_3^N(z)$.
\[le:diff23\] Let $\tilde{\theta}_j^N(z)$ be defined as in (\[eq:thetatilde\]), then we have $\theta_2^N(z)-\theta_3^N(z)=\tilde{\theta}_2^N(z)-\tilde{\theta}_3^N(z)$. If $z\in(-\infty,\lambda_2^N)\cup\mathcal{C}$, then we also have $$\label{eq:diff23}
\begin{split}
\theta_{2,\pm}^N(z)-\theta_{3,\pm}^N(z)&-\left(\tilde{\theta}_{2,\pm}^N(z)-\tilde{\theta}_{3,\pm}^N(z)\right)=0,\\
\theta_{2,\pm}^N(z)-\theta_{3,\mp}^N(z)&-\left(\tilde{\theta}_{2,\pm}^N(z)-\tilde{\theta}_{3,\mp}^N(z)\right)=0
\end{split}$$ where the ‘$+$’ and ‘$-$’ subscripts indicates the boundary values on the left and right hand sides of $(-\infty,\lambda_2^N)\cup\mathcal{C}$.
Let $l_1=2$, $l_2=3$ when $a>1$ and $l_1=3$, $l_2=2$ when $a<1$. Then from (\[eq:thetatilde\]), we have $$\label{eq:diffcon}
\tilde{\theta}_2^N(z)-\tilde{\theta}_3^N(z)-\left(\theta_2^N(z)-\theta_3^N(z)\right)=(-1)^{l_1+1}\left(\theta_{l_1,+}^N(\lambda_{1}^N)
-\theta_{l_2,+}^N(\lambda_{2}^N)-\theta_{1,-}^N(\lambda_1^N)\right).$$ From (\[eq:thetatilde\]), it is clear that if $z\in(-\infty,\lambda_2^N)\cup\mathcal{C}$, then the differences in (\[eq:diff23\]) are also given by the constant on the right hand side of (\[eq:diffcon\]).
Let us consider the difference $\theta_{l_1,+}^N(\lambda_{1}^N)
-\theta_{l_2,+}^N(\lambda_{2}^N)$. We will compute $\theta_{l_1,+}^N(\lambda_{1}^N)$ ($\theta_{l_2,+}^N(\lambda_{2}^N)$) with an integration path that consists of 2 parts. The first part goes along the left (right) hand side of $\mathcal{C}$ from $\lambda_3^N$ to $x^{\ast}$. The second part goes along the positive side of the real axis from $x^{\ast}$ to $\lambda_1^N$ ($\lambda_2^N$). We then have $$\label{eq:theconst}
\begin{split}
\theta_{l_1,+}^N(\lambda_1^N)&=\int_{\lambda_3^N}^{x^{\ast}}\xi_{l_1,+}^N(x)dx+\int_{x^{\ast}}^{\lambda_1^N}\xi_{l_1,+}^N(x)dx,\\
\theta_{l_2,+}^N(\lambda_2^N)&=\int_{\lambda_3^N}^{x^{\ast}}\xi_{l_2,-}^N(x)dx+\int_{x^{\ast}}^{\lambda_2^N}\xi_{l_2,+}^N(x)dx
\end{split}$$ From (\[eq:bound\]), we see that $\xi_{l_1,+}^N=\xi_{l_2,-}^N$ along $\mathcal{C}$ and $\xi_{l_1,+}^N(x)=\xi_{1,-}^N(x)$ along $(x^{\ast},\lambda_1^N)$, while $\xi_{l_2,+}^N(x)=\xi_{1,-}^N(x)$ along $(x^{\ast},\lambda_2^N)$. From this and (\[eq:theconst\]), we obtain $$\label{eq:diff1}
\begin{split}
\theta_{l_1,+}^N(\lambda_1^N)-\theta_{l_2,+}^N(\lambda_2^N)=\int_{\lambda_2^N}^{\lambda_1^N}\xi_{1,-}^N(x)dx=\theta_{1,-}^N(\lambda_1^N),
\end{split}$$ where the last inequality follows from the fact that $\xi_1^N(z)$ is analytic across $\mathcal{C}$ and hence we can choose the integration path for $\theta_1^N(\lambda_1^N)$ to be along the real axis.
From (\[eq:diff1\]), we see that $\theta_{l_1,+}^N(\lambda_{1}^N)
-\theta_{l_2,+}^N(\lambda_{2}^N)-\theta_{1,-}^N(\lambda_1^N)=0$ and hence $\theta_2^N(z)-\theta_3^N(z)=\tilde{\theta}_2^N(z)-\tilde{\theta}_3^N(z)$.
From the behavior of $\xi_j^N(z)$ on the cuts, we have the following analyticity properties of the $\tilde{\theta}_j^N(z)$.
\[le:cuttheta\] The function $\tilde{\theta}_1^N(z)$ is analytic on $\mathbb{C}\setminus(-\infty,\lambda_2^N]$. The function $\tilde{\theta}_2^N(z)$ ($\tilde{\theta}_3^N(z)$) is analytic on $\mathbb{C}\setminus\left((-\infty,x^{\ast}]\cup\mathcal{C}\right)$ when $a>1$ ($a<1$) and it is analytic on $\mathbb{C}\setminus\left((-\infty,\lambda_2^N]\cup\mathcal{C}\right)$ when $a<1$ ($a>1$). Let $k_2=1$, $k_3=2$ for $a>1$ and $k_2=2$, $k_3=1$ for $a<1$. Let $\mathcal{C}_{\pm}$ are the intersections of $\mathcal{C}$ with the upper/lower half planes. Then the integrals $\tilde{\theta}_j^N(z)$ have the following jump discontinuities. $$\label{eq:cuttheta}
\begin{split}
\tilde{\theta}_{1,\pm}^N(z)&=\tilde{\theta}_{j,\mp}^N(z)+\upsilon_{\pm},
,\quad z\in \mathfrak{B}_{k_j},\quad j=2,3,\\
\tilde{\theta}_{2,\pm}^N(z)&=\tilde{\theta}_{3,\mp}^N(z),\quad z\in\mathcal{C}_+,\\
\tilde{\theta}_{2,\pm}^N(z)&=\tilde{\theta}_{3,\mp}^N(z)+2c_N\beta_N\pi i,\quad a>1,\quad z\in\mathcal{C}_-,\\
\tilde{\theta}_{2,\pm}^N(z)&=\tilde{\theta}_{3,\mp}^N(z)-2c_N(1-\beta_N)\pi i,\quad a<1,\quad z\in\mathcal{C}_-,\\
\tilde{\theta}_{1,+}^N(z)&=\tilde{\theta}_{1,-}^N(z)-2c_N\pi i,\quad
z\in (0,\lambda_1^N],\\
\tilde{\theta}_{1,+}^N(z)&=\tilde{\theta}_{1,-}^N(z)-2\pi i,\quad
z\in (-\infty,0),\\
\tilde{\theta}_{2,+}^N(z)&=\tilde{\theta}_{2,-}^N(z)+2c_N(1-\beta_N)\pi
i,\quad z\in
(-\infty,\lambda_{1}^N],\\
\tilde{\theta}_{2,+}^N(z)&=\tilde{\theta}_{2,-}^N(z)+2c_N(1-\beta_N)\pi
i,\quad z\in \mathfrak{B}_1,\quad a<1,\\
\tilde{\theta}_{3,+}^N(z)&=\tilde{\theta}_{3,-}^N(z)+2c_N\beta_N\pi
i,\quad z\in (-\infty,\lambda_{1}^N],\\
\tilde{\theta}_{3,+}^N(z)&=\tilde{\theta}_{3,-}^N(z)+2c_N\beta_N\pi
i,\quad z\in \mathfrak{B}_1,\quad a>1.
\end{split}$$ where $\upsilon_{\pm}$ is the constant $$\label{eq:up}
\upsilon_{\pm}=\theta_{j,+}\left(\lambda_{k_j}^N\right)
-\theta_{j,\mp}\left(\lambda_{k_j}^N\right)+\theta_{1,\pm}\left(\lambda_{k_j}^N\right)-
\theta_{1,-}\left(\lambda_{k_j}^N\right).$$ and $\mathfrak{B}_j$ is defined in (\[eq:frakB\]). In particular, by the jump discontinuities of the $\tilde{\theta}_j^N(z)$ at the points $\lambda_k^N$, and the fact that $\theta_j^N(z)$ and $\tilde{\theta}_j^N(z)$ differs by a constant shift only, we see that the constant $\upsilon_{\pm}$ is either $-2c_N\beta_N\pi i$, $-2c_N\left(1-\beta_N\right)\pi i$ or 0.
From the jump discontinuities of $\xi_j^N(z)$ in (\[eq:bound\]), we see that $$\begin{split}
\left(\int_{\lambda_{k_j}^N}^z\xi_{1}^N(x)dx\right)_{\pm}&=\left(\int_{\lambda_{k_j}^N}^z\xi_{j}^N(x)dx\right)_{\mp},\quad z\in \mathfrak{B}_{k_j},\quad j=2,3\\
\left(\int_{\lambda_{3}^N}^z\xi_{2}^N(x)dx\right)_{\pm}&=\left(\int_{\lambda_{3}^N}^z\xi_{3}^N(x)dx\right)_{\mp},\quad
z\in\mathcal{C}_+,\\
\left(\int_{\lambda_{4}^N}^z\xi_{2}^N(x)dx\right)_{\pm}&=\left(\int_{\lambda_{4}^N}^z\xi_{3}^N(x)dx\right)_{\mp},\quad
z\in \mathcal{C}_-.
\end{split}$$ The path of integration in the first equation is taken along the real axis and the integration paths in the last 2 equations are taken along $\mathcal{C}$. By comparing this with (\[eq:theta\]) and (\[eq:thetatilde\]) and making use of Lemma \[le:diff23\], we obtain the first two equations in (\[eq:cuttheta\]), together with $$\label{eq:cutc-}
\tilde{\theta}_{2,\pm}^N(z)=\tilde{\theta}_{3,\mp}^N(z)+\theta_2^N(\lambda_4^N)-\theta_3^N(\lambda_4^N),\quad
z\in\mathcal{C}_-.$$ Let us now compute the constant $\theta_2^N(\lambda_4^N)-\theta_3^N(\lambda_4^N)$. Let $l_1=2$, $l_2=3$ when $a>1$ and $l_1=3$, $l_2=2$ when $a<1$. Then $\xi_{l_1}^N$ will be analytic on $(x^{\ast},\lambda_2^N]$ and hence we can compute $\theta_{l_1}^N(\lambda_4^N)$ using a contour that goes along the right hand side of $\mathcal{C}$. That is, we have $$\label{eq:thetal1}
\theta_{l_1}^N(\lambda_4^N)=\int_{\lambda_3^N}^{\lambda_4^N}\xi_{l_1,-}^N(x)dx.$$ where the integration is performed along $\mathcal{C}$. To compute $\theta_{l_2}^N(\lambda_4^N)$, let us choose an integration contour as follows. The integration contour consists of three parts. The first part goes from $\lambda_3^N$ to $x^{\ast}$ on the left hand side of $\mathcal{C}$. The second part is a closed loop $\mathcal{S}$ that goes from $x^{\ast}$ to $x^{\ast}$ with the branch cut $\mathfrak{B}_2\cup\mathcal{C}$ of $\xi_{l_2}^N$ inside it. The last part goes from $x^{\ast}$ to $\lambda_4^N$ along the left hand side of $\mathcal{C}$. That is, we have $$\theta_{l_2}^N(\lambda_4^N)=\int_{\lambda_3^N}^{x^{\ast}}\xi_{l_2,+}^N(x)dx+\oint_{\mathcal{S}}\xi_{l_2}^N(x)dx
+\int_{x^{\ast}}^{\lambda_4^N}\xi_{l_2,+}^N(x)dx.$$ From the jump discontinuities of $\xi_j^N(x)$ on $\mathcal{C}$, we obtain $$\theta_{l_2}^N(\lambda_4^N)=\int_{\lambda_3^N}^{\lambda_4^N}\xi_{l_1,-}^N(x)dx+\oint_{\mathcal{S}}\xi_{l_2}^N(x)dx.$$ Since branch cuts of $\xi_{l_2}^N$ are inside the loop $\mathcal{S}$, this loop can be deformed into a loop around $z=\infty$. By computing the integral using residue theorem, we obtain $$\begin{split}
\theta_{2}^N(\lambda_4^N)&-\theta_{3}^N(\lambda_4^N)=-2\pi
ic_N(1-\beta_N),\quad a<1,\\
\theta_{2}^N(\lambda_4^N)&-\theta_{3}^N(\lambda_4^N)=2\pi
ic_N\beta_N,\quad a>1.
\end{split}$$ This, together with (\[eq:cutc-\]) gives the third and fourth equations in (\[eq:cuttheta\]).
Let us now show that $$\label{eq:theta2}
\tilde{\theta}_{2,+}^N(z)=\tilde{\theta}_{2,-}^N(z)+2c_N(1-\beta_N)\pi
i,\quad z\in (-\infty,\lambda_{1}^N].$$ The corresponding equation for $\tilde{\theta}_1^N(z)$ and $\tilde{\theta}_3^N(z)$ can be proven in a similar way.
\[\]\[\]\[1\]\[0.0\][$\lambda_1^N$]{} \[\]\[\]\[1\]\[0.0\][$\lambda_2^N$]{} \[\]\[\]\[1\]\[0.0\][$\lambda_3^N$]{} \[\]\[\]\[1\]\[0.0\][$\lambda_4^N$]{} \[\]\[\]\[1\]\[0.0\][$\Gamma_+$]{} \[\]\[\]\[1\]\[0.0\][$\Gamma_-$]{} \[\]\[\]\[1\]\[0.0\][$z$]{} ![The contours $\Gamma_+$ and $\Gamma_-$.[]{data-label="fig:Gammapm"}](gammapm "fig:")
Let $z\in(-\infty,\lambda_{1}^N]$ and let $\Gamma_{\pm}$ be contours from $\lambda_{3}^N$ to $z$ indicated as in Figure \[fig:Gammapm\]. Then we have $$\theta_{2,\pm}^N(z)=\int_{\Gamma_{\pm}}\xi_2^N(x)dx.$$ Let $\Gamma$ be the close loop on $\mathbb{C}$ such that $\Gamma=\Gamma_+-\Gamma_-$, then we have $$\theta_{2,+}^N(z)=\theta_{2,-}^N(z)+\oint_{\Gamma}\xi_2^N(x)dx,\quad
z\in (-\infty,\lambda_{1}^N].$$ By Cauchy’s theorem, we can deform the loop $\Gamma$ such that $\Gamma$ becomes a loop around $z=\infty$. By computing the residue, we obtain $$\label{eq:theta20}
\theta_{2,+}^N(z)=\theta_{2,-}^N(z)+2c_N(1-\beta_N)\pi i,\quad z\in
(-\infty,\lambda_{1}^N].$$ Since $\tilde{\theta}_2^N(z)$ is a constant shift of $\theta_2^N(z)$, (\[eq:theta20\]) implies (\[eq:theta2\]).
By using similar argument, we can obtain the rest of the jump discontinuities.
We will conclude this section with the following results on the relative sizes of the $\mathrm{Re}\left(\tilde{\theta}_j^N(z)\right)$, which are essential in the implementation of the Riemann-Hilbert method.
\[le:size\] The real parts of $\tilde{\theta}_j^N(z)$ in (\[eq:thetatilde\]) are continuous in $\mathbb{R}_+\setminus[\lambda_{1},\lambda_{2}]$ and we have the followings.
1. Let $x_L<x_R$ be the points where $\mathfrak{H}$ intersects the real axis, then we have $$\label{eq:size}
\begin{split}
&\mathrm{Re}\left(\tilde{\theta}_1^N(z)-\tilde{\theta}_{j}^N(z)\right)>0,\quad
z\in\mathbb{R}_+\setminus[x_L,x_R] ,\quad j=1,2,\\
&\mathrm{Re}\left(\tilde{\theta}_1^N(z)-\tilde{\theta}_{l_1}^N(z)\right)>0,\quad
z\in(0,\lambda_1^N),\\
&\mathrm{Re}\left(\tilde{\theta}_1^N(z)-\tilde{\theta}_{l_2}^N(z)\right)>0,\quad
z\in(\lambda_2^N,\infty).
\end{split}$$ where $l_1=2$, $l_2=3$ for $a>1$ and $l_1=3$, $l_2=2$ for $a<1$.
2. Let $x^{\ast}$ be the intersection point between $\mathcal{C}$ and $\mathbb{R}$. Then in a neighborhood $D_{x^{\ast}}$ of $x^{\ast}$, we have $$\label{eq:sizex}
\begin{split}
\mathrm{Re}\left(\tilde{\theta}_1^N(z)-\tilde{\theta}_{l_1,-}^N(z)\right)<0,\quad
z\in D_{x^{\ast}}\cap\mathcal{C}.
\end{split}$$ where the ‘$+$’ and ‘$-$’ subscripts denote the boundary values at the left and right hand sides of $\mathcal{C}$.
3. On $\mathcal{C}$, we have $$\label{eq:sizeC}
\begin{split}
\mathrm{Re}\left(\tilde{\theta}_{l_1,+}^N(z)-\tilde{\theta}_{l_1,-}^N(z)\right)<0,\quad
z\in \mathcal{C}.
\end{split}$$ where the ‘$+$’ and ‘$-$’ subscripts denote the boundary values at the left and right hand sides of $\mathcal{C}$.
From (\[eq:cuttheta\]), we see that the real parts of $\tilde{\theta}_j^N(z)$ are continuous in $\mathbb{R}_+\setminus[\lambda_{1}^N,\lambda_{2}^N]$. Now from the proof of Proposition \[pro:sheet\], we have, for $j=2,3$, $$\label{eq:ineq0}
\begin{split}
\mathrm{Re}\left(\xi_1^N(z)-\xi_j^N(z)\right)&>0,\quad
z\in(\lambda_{2}^N,\infty),\\
\mathrm{Re}\left(\xi_1^N(z)-\xi_j^N(z)\right)&<0,\quad
z\in(0,\lambda_{1}^N).
\end{split}$$ From the definitions of $\theta_j^N(z)$ (\[eq:theta\]) and $\tilde{\theta}_j^N(z)$ (\[eq:thetatilde\]), we obtain the second and the third equations in (\[eq:size\]). To prove the first equation in (\[eq:size\]), note that if $z\in(x_R,\infty)$, then $z$ is in the region $\Omega_R$ in Figure \[fig:zeroset\]. Similarly, if $z\in(0,x_L)$, then $z\in\Omega_L$. By considering the behavior of $\theta_2^N(z)$ and $\theta_3^N(z)$ at $z=\infty$, we see that $$\label{eq:outside}
\begin{split}
&\mathrm{Re}\left(\theta_{l_2}^N(z)-\theta_{l_1}^N(z)\right)>0,\quad
z\in(x_R,\infty),\\
&\mathrm{Re}\left(\theta_{l_1}^N(z)-\theta_{l_2}^N(z)\right)>0,\quad
z\in(0,x_L).
\end{split}$$ From Proposition \[pro:shapeH\], we have $(x_L,x_R)\cap[\lambda_1^N,\lambda_2^N]\neq\emptyset$. This implies $x_L<x^{\ast}<\lambda_2^N$ and $x_R>x^{\ast}>\lambda_1^N$. Therefore, by the second, third equations in (\[eq:size\]), Lemma \[le:diff23\], (\[eq:outside\]) and the fact that $\xi_1^N(z)-\xi_{l_j}^N(z)$ is purely imaginary on $\mathfrak{B}_{j}$, we obtain $$\begin{split}
&\mathrm{Re}\left(\tilde{\theta}_{1}^N(z)-\tilde{\theta}_{l_1}^N(z)\right)>
\mathrm{Re}\left(\tilde{\theta}_{1}^N(z)-\tilde{\theta}_{l_2}^N(z)\right)\geq
0,\quad
z\in(x_R,\infty),\\
&\mathrm{Re}\left(\tilde{\theta}_{1}^N(z)-\tilde{\theta}_{l_2}^N(z)\right)>
\mathrm{Re}\left(\tilde{\theta}_{1}^N(z)-\tilde{\theta}_{l_1}^N(z)\right)\geq
0,\quad z\in(0,x_L).
\end{split}$$ This, together with the second and the third equations in (\[eq:size\]), give the first equation in (\[eq:size\]).
We will now prove (\[eq:sizex\]). Let us consider the left hand sides of (\[eq:sizex\]) at the point $x^{\ast}$. Since $\xi_1^N(z)-\xi_{l_j}^N(z)$ is purely imaginary on $\mathfrak{B}_{j}$, we have $$\label{eq:ima}
\begin{split}
\int_{x^{\ast}}^{\lambda_{j}^N}\mathrm{Re}\left(\xi_1^N(x)-\xi_{l_j}^N(x)\right)dx=0.
\end{split}$$ where the integration is performed along the real axis. Therefore we have $$\label{eq:realx0}
\begin{split}
\mathrm{Re}\left(\tilde{\theta}_{l_1,+}^N(x^{\ast})\right)=\mathrm{Re}\left(\tilde{\theta}_{l_2,-}^N(x^{\ast})\right)
=\mathrm{Re}\left(\tilde{\theta}_1^N(x^{\ast})\right)
\end{split}$$ where the ‘$+$’ and ‘$-$’ subscripts indicate the boundary values on the left and right hand sides of $\mathcal{C}$. Now note that $\tilde{\theta}_{l_1,+}^N(x^{\ast})$ is evaluated in the region $\Omega_1$ of Figure \[fig:zeroset\] and $\tilde{\theta}_{l_2,-}^N(x^{\ast})$ is evaluated in the region $\Omega_2$. Again, by considering the behavior of $\tilde{\theta}_2^N(z)$ and $\tilde{\theta}_3^N(z)$ at $z=\infty$ and using the fact that $\mathrm{Re}\left(\tilde{\theta}_2^N-\tilde{\theta}_3^N\right)$ can only change signs across the sets $\mathfrak{H}$ and $\mathcal{C}$, we obtain $$\label{eq:outside1}
\begin{split}
\pm\mathrm{Re}\left(\tilde{\theta}_{l_2,\pm}^N(x^{\ast})-\tilde{\theta}_{l_1,\pm}^N(x^{\ast})\right)>0.
\end{split}$$ Then from (\[eq:realx0\]) and (\[eq:outside1\]), we obtain (\[eq:sizex\]) at $z=x^{\ast}$. The statement for $z\in
D_{x^{\ast}}\cap\mathcal{C}$ now follows from the continuities of the functions in (\[eq:sizex\]) along $\mathcal{C}$.
Finally, note that inside the set $\Omega_2$ between $\mathcal{C}$ and $\Xi_R$, (See Figure \[fig:zeroset\]) we have the following inequalities. $$\label{eq:O2}
\begin{split}
\mathrm{Re}\left(\tilde{\theta}_{l_1}^N(z)-\tilde{\theta}_{l_2}^N(z)\right)>0,\quad
z\in \Omega_2,
\end{split}$$ by considering $z\in\Omega_2$ on the right hand side of $\mathcal{C}$ in (\[eq:O2\]) and making use of the jump conditions between $\tilde{\theta}_2^N$ and $\tilde{\theta}_3^N$ in (\[eq:cuttheta\]), we obtain (\[eq:sizeC\]).
The final result in this section deals with the behavior of these real parts in a neighborhood of the interval $[\lambda_1^N,\lambda_2^N]$.
\[le:lens\] The open intervals $(\lambda_{1}^N,x^{\ast})$ and $(x^{\ast},\lambda_2^N)$ each has a neighborhood $U_1$ and $U_2$ in the complex plane such that $$\label{eq:lens}
\mathrm{Re}\left(\tilde{\theta}_{j}^N(z)-\tilde{\theta}_1^N(z)\right)>0,\quad
z\in U_{k_j},\quad j=2,3.$$ where $k_2=1$, $k_3=2$ for $a>1$ and $k_2=2$, $k_3=1$ for $a<1$ and $\tilde{\theta}_j^N(z)$ are defined in (\[eq:thetatilde\]).
Since $\xi_1^N(z)-\xi_{j}^N(z)$ is purely imaginary in $\mathfrak{B}_{k_j}$, we have $$\label{eq:boundvalue}
\begin{split}
\int_{\lambda_{k_j}^N}^{z}\mathrm{Re}\left(\xi_1^N(x)-\xi_{j}(x)\right)dx=0,\quad
z\in \mathfrak{B}_{k_j},\quad j=1,2,
\end{split}$$ where $\mathfrak{B}_{k_j}$ is defined in (\[eq:frakB\]).
Let $\mathfrak{B}_{k_j}^0=\mathfrak{B}_{k_j}\setminus\{\lambda_{k_j}^N\}$. Then on the positive and negative sides of $\mathfrak{B}_{k_j}^0$, the derivatives of the functions $\tilde{\theta}_{1,\pm}^N(z)-\tilde{\theta}_{j,\pm}^N(z)$ are given by $\xi_{1,\pm}^N(z)-\xi_{j,\pm}^N(z)$ and are purely imaginary. In fact, since $\xi_{1,+}(z)=m_{\hat{F}_N}$, we see that $\xi_{1,+}^N(z)-\xi_{j,+}^N(z)=2\pi i\rho_N(z)$ where $\rho_N(z)>0$ is the density function of $\hat{F}_N$. On the other hand, by the jump discontinuities (\[eq:bound\]), we see that $\xi_{1,-}^N(z)-\xi_{j,-}^N(z)=-2\pi i\rho_N(z)$. Hence by the Cauchy Riemann equation, the real part of $\tilde{\theta}_1^N(z)-\tilde{\theta}_{j}^N(z)$ is decreasing as we move from $\mathfrak{B}_{k_j}^0$ into the upper half plane. From (\[eq:boundvalue\]) and (\[eq:thetatilde\]), we see that $\mathrm{Re}\left(\tilde{\theta}_1^N(z)-\tilde{\theta}_{j}^N(z)\right)<0$ for $z$ in the upper half plane near $\mathfrak{B}_{k_j}^0$. Similarly, we also have $\mathrm{Re}\left(\tilde{\theta}_1^N(z)-\tilde{\theta}_{j}^N(z)\right)<0$ for $z$ in the lower half plane near $\mathfrak{B}_{k_j}^0$. This implies (\[eq:lens\]) is true in a neighborhood $U_{k_j}$ of $\mathfrak{B}_{k_j}^0$.
Riemann-Hilbert analysis {#se:RHP}
========================
We can now implement the Riemann-Hilbert method to obtain the strong asymptotics for the multiple Laguerre polynomials introduced in Section \[se:MOP\] and use it to prove Theorem \[thm:main2\]. The analysis is very similar to those in [@BKext2] (See also [@Lysov]).
Let $C(f)$ be the Cauchy transform of the function $f(z)\in
L^2(\mathbb{R}_+)$ in $\mathbb{R}_+$ $$\label{eq:cauchy}
C(f)(z)=\frac{1}{2\pi i}\int_{\mathbb{R}_+}\frac{f(s)}{s-z}ds,$$ and let $w_1(z)$ and $w_2(z)$ be the weights of the multiple Laguerre polynomials. $$\label{eq:weight}
w_1(z)=z^{M-N}e^{-Mz},\quad w_2(z)=z^{M-N}e^{-Ma^{-1}z},$$ Denote by $\kappa_1$ and $\kappa_2$ the constants $$\kappa_1=-2\pi
i\left(h^{(1)}_{N_0-1,N_1}\right)^{-1},\quad\kappa_2=-2\pi
i\left(h^{(2)}_{N_0,N_1-1}\right)^{-1}.$$ Then due to the orthogonality condition (\[eq:multiop\]), the following matrix $$\label{eq:Ymatr}
Y(z)=\begin{pmatrix}P_{N_0,N_1}(z)&C(P_{N_0,N_1}w_1)(z)&C(P_{N_0,N_1}w_2)(z)\\
\kappa_1P_{N_0-1,N_1}(z)&\kappa_1C(P_{N_0-1,N_1}w_1)(z)&\kappa_1C(P_{N_0-1,N_1}w_2)(z)\\
\kappa_2P_{N_0,N_1-1}(z)&\kappa_2C(P_{N_0,N_1-1}w_1)(z)&\kappa_2C(P_{N_0,N_1-1}w_2)(z)
\end{pmatrix}$$ is the unique solution of the following Riemann-Hilbert problem. $$\label{eq:RHPY}
\begin{split}
1.\quad &\text{$Y(z)$ is analytic in
$\mathbb{C}\setminus\mathbb{R}_+$},\\
2.\quad &Y_+(z)=Y_-(z)\begin{pmatrix}1&w_1(z)&w_2(z)\\
0&1&0\\
0&0&1
\end{pmatrix},\quad z\in\mathbb{R}_+\\
3.\quad &Y(z)=\left(I+O(z^{-1})\right)\begin{pmatrix}z^{N}&0&0\\
0&z^{-N_0}&0\\
0&0&z^{-N_1}
\end{pmatrix},\quad z\rightarrow\infty,\\
4.\quad &Y(z)=O(1),\quad z\rightarrow 0.
\end{split}$$ By a similar computation as the one in [@BKMOP] and [@BK1], we can express the kernel (\[eq:ker\]) in terms of the solution of the Riemann-Hilbert problem $Y(z)$. $$\label{eq:kerRHP}
\begin{split}
K_{M,N}(x,y)&=\frac{(xy)^{\frac{M-N}{2}}\left(e^{-My}\left[Y^{-1}_+(y)Y_+(x)\right]_{21}
+e^{-Ma^{-1}y}\left[Y^{-1}_+(y)Y_+(x)\right]_{31}\right)}{2\pi
i(x-y)},\\
&=\frac{(xy)^{\frac{M-N}{2}}}{2\pi i(x-y)}\left(0\quad e^{-My}\quad
e^{-Ma^{-1}y}\right)Y_+^{-1}(y)Y_+(x)\begin{pmatrix} 1 \\ 0\\0
\end{pmatrix}
\end{split}$$ where $A_{21}$ and $A_{31}$ are the $21^{th}$ and $31^{th}$ entries of $A$.
First transformation of the Riemann-Hilbert problem
---------------------------------------------------
We should now use the functions $\tilde{\theta}_j^N(z)$ in (\[eq:thetatilde\]) to deform the Riemann-Hilbert problem (\[eq:RHPY\]). Our goal is to deform the Riemann-Hilbert problem so that it can be approximated by a Riemann-Hilbert problem that is explicitly solvable. As in [@BKext2] and [@Lysov], the set $\mathfrak{H}$ in (\[eq:frakH\]) will be important to the construction.
We will now start deforming the Riemann-Hilbert problem (\[eq:RHPY\]). First let us define the functions $g_j^N(z)$ to be $$\label{eq:g}
\begin{split}
g_1^N(z)&=\tilde{\theta}_1^N(z)+(1-c_N)\log z,\quad
g_2^N(z)=\tilde{\theta}_2^N(z)+z,
\\
g_3^N(z)&=\tilde{\theta}_3^N(z)+\frac{z}{a}.
\end{split}$$ where $\tilde{\theta}_j^N(z)$ is defined in (\[eq:thetatilde\]) and the branch cut of $\log z$ in $g_1^N(z)$ is chosen to be the negative real axis.
We then define $T(z)$ to be $$\label{eq:Tz}
T(z)=diag\left(e^{-Ml_1^N},e^{-M\tilde{l}_2^N},e^{-M\tilde{l}_3^N}\right)Y(z)
diag\left(e^{Mg_1^N(z)},e^{Mg_2^N(z)},e^{Mg_3^N(z)}\right),$$ where $\tilde{l}_2^N$ and $\tilde{l}_3^N$ are given by $$\begin{split}
\tilde{l}_2^N&=\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
l_2^N-\theta_{2,+}^N(\lambda_1^N)+\theta_{1,-}^N(\lambda^N_{1}), & \hbox{$a>1$;} \\
l_2^N-\theta_{2,+}^N(\lambda_2^N), & \hbox{$a<1$.}
\end{array}
\right.\\
\tilde{l}_3^N&=\left\{\begin{array}{ll}
l_3^N(z)-\theta_{3,+}^N(\lambda^N_{2}), & \hbox{$a>1$;} \\
l_3^N(z)-\theta_{3,+}^N(\lambda_1^N)+\theta_{1,-}^N(\lambda^N_{1}), & \hbox{$a<1$.}
\end{array}
\right.
\end{split}$$
The matrix $T(z)$ will satisfy the following Riemann-Hilbert problem. $$\label{eq:RHPT}
\begin{split}
1.\quad &\text{$T(z)$ is analytic in
$\mathbb{C}\setminus\left(\mathbb{R}\cup\mathcal{C}\right)$},\\
2.\quad &T_+(z)=T_-(z)J_T(z),\quad z\in\mathbb{R}\cup\mathcal{C},\\
3.\quad &T(z)=I+O(z^{-1}),\quad z\rightarrow\infty,\\
4.\quad & T(z)=O(1),\quad z\rightarrow 0.
\end{split}$$ where $J_T(z)$ is the following matrix $$\label{eq:JT}
\begin{split}
J_T(z)=\begin{pmatrix}e^{M\left(\tilde{\theta}_{1,+}^N(z)-\tilde{\theta}_{1,-}^N(z)\right)}&
e^{M\left(\tilde{\theta}_{2,+}^N(z)-\tilde{\theta}_{1,-}^N(z)\right)}&
e^{M\left(\tilde{\theta}_{3,+}^N(z)-\tilde{\theta}_{1,-}^N(z)\right)}\\
0&e^{M\left(\tilde{\theta}_{2,+}^N(z)-\tilde{\theta}_{2,-}^N(z)\right)}&0\\
0&0&e^{M\left(\tilde{\theta}_{3,+}^N(z)-\tilde{\theta}_{3,-}^N(z)\right)}
\end{pmatrix},
\end{split}$$ By applying Lemma \[le:cuttheta\] to the $\tilde{\theta}_j^N(z)$, we can simplify the jump matrix $J_T(z)$. In particular, on $\mathfrak{B}_{k_2}$ in (\[eq:frakB\]), we have $$\label{eq:JTk2}
\begin{split}
J_T(z)&=\begin{pmatrix}e^{M\left(\tilde{\theta}_1^N(z)-\tilde{\theta}_2^N(z)\right)_+}&
1&
e^{M\left(\tilde{\theta}_{3,+}^N(z)-\tilde{\theta}_{1,-}^N(z)\right)}\\
0&e^{M\left(\tilde{\theta}_1^N(z)-\tilde{\theta}_2^N(z)\right)_-}&0\\
0&0&1
\end{pmatrix},
\end{split}$$ while on $\mathfrak{B}_{k_3}$, we have $$\label{eq:JTk3}
\begin{split}
J_T(z)&=\begin{pmatrix}e^{M\left(\tilde{\theta}_1^N(z)-\tilde{\theta}_3^N(z)\right)_+}&
e^{M\left(\tilde{\theta}_{2,+}^N(z)-\tilde{\theta}_{1,-}^N(z)\right)}&
1\\
0&1&0\\
0&0&e^{M\left(\tilde{\theta}_1^N(z)-\tilde{\theta}_3^N(z)\right)_-}
\end{pmatrix},
\end{split}$$ On the rest of the positive real axis, the jump matrix becomes $$\label{eq:JTrest}
\begin{split}
J_T(z)&=\begin{pmatrix}1&
e^{M\left(\tilde{\theta}_{2,+}^N(z)-\tilde{\theta}_{1,-}^N(z)\right)}&
e^{M\left(\tilde{\theta}_{3,+}^N(z)-\tilde{\theta}_{1,-}^N(z)\right)}\\
0&1&0\\
0&0&1
\end{pmatrix}.
\end{split}$$ This is because $Mc_N\beta_N=N_1$, $Mc_N(1-\beta_N)=N_0$ and $Mc_N=N$ are all integers. And on the negative real axis, the matrix $T(z)$ has no jump for the same reason. Note that the jump matrix $J_T(z)$ is continuous at $z=0$ as the off-diagonal entries of (\[eq:JTrest\]) contain the factor $e^{-M\theta_{1,-}^N(z)}$ which vanishes at the origin.
The jump matrix on $\mathcal{C}$ is given by $$\label{eq:JTC}
\begin{split}
J_T(z)&=\begin{pmatrix}1& 0&0\\
0&e^{M\left(\tilde{\theta}_{2,+}^N(z)-\tilde{\theta}_{2,-}^N(z)\right)}&0\\
0&0&e^{M\left(\tilde{\theta}_{3,+}^N(z)-\tilde{\theta}_{3,-}^N(z)\right)}
\end{pmatrix}.
\end{split}$$ The Riemann-Hilbert problem for $T(z)$ now takes same form as the one in [@BKext2] (See also [@Lysov]) and the techniques developed there can now be applied to our problem.
Lens opening and approximation of the Riemann-Hilbert problem
-------------------------------------------------------------
We will now apply the global lens opening technique developed in [@BKext2]. We will have to use the properties of the set $\mathfrak{H}$ in (\[eq:frakH\]) to define the global lens contour.
By Proposition \[pro:shapeH\], the set union of the set $\mathfrak{H}$ and $\mathcal{C}$ divides the complex plane into 4 regions $\Omega_L$, $\Omega_R$, $\Omega_1$ and $\Omega_2$. The region $\Omega_L$ ($\Omega_R$) is an open region that lies on the left (right) hand side of the contours $\mathfrak{H}_{\pm}^{\infty}$ and $\mathfrak{H}_L$. ($\mathfrak{H}_R$) The region $\Omega_1$ ($\Omega_2$) is the region bounded by $\mathfrak{H}_L$ ($\mathfrak{H}_R$) and $\mathcal{C}$. (See Figure \[fig:zeroset\])
By considering the behavior of $\theta_2^N(z)-\theta_3^N(z)$ near $z=\infty$ in (\[eq:asymtheta\]), we see that for $a<1$ ($a>1$), $\mathrm{Re}\left(\theta_2^N(z)-\theta_3^N(z)\right)$ is negative (positive) in $\Omega_L$ and positive (negative) in $\Omega_R$. Let us define the contour $\Xi_L$ ($\Xi_R$) to be a contour from $\lambda_{4}^N$ to $\lambda_3^N$ in $\Omega_L$ ($\Omega_R$) such that $\Xi_L$ intersects $\mathbb{R}$ at a point $x_1<0$ and $\Xi_R$ intersects $\mathbb{R}$ at a point $x_2>\lambda_2^N$. (See Figure \[fig:sigma\])
\[\]\[\]\[1\]\[0.0\][$\lambda_{1}^N$]{} \[\]\[\]\[1\]\[0.0\][$\lambda_{2}^N$]{} \[\]\[\]\[1\]\[0.0\][$\lambda_3^N$]{} \[\]\[\]\[1\]\[0.0\][$\lambda_4^N$]{} \[\]\[\]\[1\]\[0.0\][$x^{\ast}$]{} \[\]\[\]\[1\]\[0.0\][$\Xi_L$]{} \[\]\[\]\[1\]\[0.0\][$\Xi_R$]{} ![The contours $\Xi_L$ and $\Xi_R$.[]{data-label="fig:sigma"}](sigma "fig:")
Let us define the lens contours $\Xi_{\pm}^{j}$, $j=1,2$ around the branch cut $[\lambda^N_{1},\lambda^N_{2}]$ as follows. The contours $\Xi_{\pm}^j$ are contours in the neighborhoods $U_j$ in Lemma \[le:lens\] joining $\lambda_j^N$ and $\mathcal{C}$ in the upper/lower half plane. Together with the contours $\Xi_L$ and $\Xi_R$, the lens contours are depicted in Figure \[fig:lens2\].
\[\]\[\]\[1\]\[0.0\][$\lambda_{1}^N$]{} \[\]\[\]\[1\]\[0.0\][$\lambda_{2}^N$]{} \[\]\[\]\[1\]\[0.0\][$\lambda_3^N$]{} \[\]\[\]\[1\]\[0.0\][$\lambda_4^N$]{} \[\]\[\]\[1\]\[0.0\][$\Xi_+^1$]{} \[\]\[\]\[1\]\[0.0\][$\Xi_-^1$]{} \[\]\[\]\[1\]\[0.0\][$\Xi_+^2$]{} \[\]\[\]\[1\]\[0.0\][$\Xi_-^2$]{} \[\]\[\]\[1\]\[0.0\][$\Xi_L$]{} \[\]\[\]\[1\]\[0.0\][$\Xi_R$]{} \[\]\[\]\[1\]\[0.0\][$x_1$]{} \[\]\[\]\[1\]\[0.0\][$x_2$]{} \[\]\[\]\[1\]\[0.0\][$x^{\ast}$]{} \[\]\[\]\[1\]\[0.0\][$L_+^1$]{} \[\]\[\]\[1\]\[0.0\][$L_+^2$]{} \[\]\[\]\[1\]\[0.0\][$L_-^1$]{} \[\]\[\]\[1\]\[0.0\][$L_-^2$]{} \[\]\[\]\[1\]\[0.0\][$\mathbb{D}_1$]{} \[\]\[\]\[1\]\[0.0\][$\mathbb{D}_2$]{} ![The lens contours.[]{data-label="fig:lens2"}](lens2 "fig:")
Let the matrices $\mathcal{G}_1$, $\mathcal{G}_2$, $\mathcal{G}_3$, $\mathcal{G}_4$ be the followings $$\label{eq:Kj}
\begin{split}
\mathcal{G}_1&=\begin{pmatrix}1&0&0\\
0&1&-e^{M\left(\tilde{\theta}_3^N(z)-\tilde{\theta}_2^N(z)\right)}\\
0&0&1
\end{pmatrix},\quad
\mathcal{G}_2=\begin{pmatrix}1&0&0\\
0&1&0\\
0&-e^{M\left(\tilde{\theta}_2^N(z)-\tilde{\theta}_3^N(z)\right)}&1
\end{pmatrix},\\
\mathcal{G}_3&=\begin{pmatrix}1&0&0\\
-e^{M\left(\tilde{\theta}_1^N(z)-\tilde{\theta}_2^N(z)\right)}&1&0\\
0&0&1
\end{pmatrix},\quad
\mathcal{G}_4=\begin{pmatrix}1&0&0\\
0&1&0\\
-e^{M\left(\tilde{\theta}_1^N(z)-\tilde{\theta}_3^N(z)\right)}&0&1
\end{pmatrix}.
\end{split}$$ We will now define the matrix $S(z)$ to be $S(z)=T(z)$ outside of the lens region. Inside the lens region, we define $S(z)$ to be $$\label{eq:S1}
\begin{split}
\textrm{For $a<1$},\quad S(z)&=T(z)\mathcal{G}_2,\quad z\in
\mathbb{D}_1,\quad
S(z)=T(z)\mathcal{G}_1,\quad z\in \mathbb{D}_2,\\
S(z)&=T(z)\mathcal{G}_2\mathcal{G}_4^{\pm 1},\quad z\in
L^1_{\pm},\quad S(z)=T(z)\mathcal{G}_1\mathcal{G}_3^{\pm 1},\quad
z\in L^2_{\pm}.\\
\textrm{For $a>1$},\quad S(z)&=T(z)\mathcal{G}_1,\quad z\in
\mathbb{D}_1,\quad
S(z)=T(z)\mathcal{G}_2,\quad z\in \mathbb{D}_2,\\
S(z)&=T(z)\mathcal{G}_1\mathcal{G}_3^{\pm 1},\quad z\in
L^1_{\pm},\quad S(z)=T(z)\mathcal{G}_2\mathcal{G}_4^{\pm 1},\quad
z\in L^2_{\pm}.
\end{split}$$ Let $\Xi$ be the union of the lens contours. $$\Xi=\Xi_L\cup\Xi_R\cup\left(\cup_{j=1}^2\Xi_j^{+}\cup\Xi_j^-\right).$$ Then by using Lemma \[le:cuttheta\], it is easy to check that $S(z)$ satisfies the following Riemann-Hilbert problem. $$\label{eq:RHPS}
\begin{split}
1.\quad &\text{$S(z)$ is analytic in
$\mathbb{C}\setminus\left(\mathbb{R}_+\cup\Xi\cup\mathcal{C}\right)$},\\
2.\quad &S_+(z)=S_-(z)J_S(z),\quad z\in\left(\mathbb{R}_+\cup\Xi\cup\mathcal{C}\right),\\
3.\quad &S(z)=I+O(z^{-1}),\quad z\rightarrow\infty,\\
4.\quad & S(z)=O(1),\quad z\rightarrow 0.
\end{split}$$ where the matrix $J_S(z)$ is given by the following. Let $\mathcal{C}=\cup_{j=0}^2\mathcal{C}_j$ where $\mathcal{C}_0$ is the boundary between $\mathbb{D}_1$ and $\mathbb{D}_2$, $\mathcal{C}_1$ is the boundary between $L^1_-$ and $L^2_-$ and $\mathcal{C}_2$ is the boundary between $L^1_+$ and $L^2_+$. Then on $\mathcal{C}$, the jump matrix $J_S(z)$ is given by $$\label{eq:JSC}
\begin{split}
\textrm{For $a<1$},\quad J_S(z)&=\begin{pmatrix}1&0&0\\
0&0&1\\
0&-1&e^{M\left(\tilde{\theta}_{3,+}^N(z)-\tilde{\theta}_{3,-}^N(z)\right)}
\end{pmatrix},\quad z\in\mathcal{C}_0,\\
J_S(z)&=\begin{pmatrix}1&0&0\\
0&0&1\\
(-1)^{l-1}e^{M\left(\tilde{\theta}_{1}^N(z)-\tilde{\theta}_{3,-}^N(z)\right)}
&-1&e^{M\left(\tilde{\theta}_{3,+}^N(z)-\tilde{\theta}_{3,-}^N(z)\right)}
\end{pmatrix},\\ z&\in\mathcal{C}_l,\quad l=1,2.\\
\textrm{For $a>1$},\quad J_S(z)&=\begin{pmatrix}1&0&0\\
0&e^{M\left(\tilde{\theta}_{2,+}^N(z)-\tilde{\theta}_{2,-}^N(z)\right)}&-1\\
0&1&0
\end{pmatrix},\quad z\in\mathcal{C}_0,\\
J_S(z)&=\begin{pmatrix}1&0&0\\
(-1)^{l-1}e^{M\left(\tilde{\theta}_{1}^N(z)-\tilde{\theta}_{2,-}^N(z)\right)}
&e^{M\left(\tilde{\theta}_{2,+}^N(z)-\tilde{\theta}_{2,-}^N(z)\right)}&-1\\
0 &1&0
\end{pmatrix},\\ z&\in\mathcal{C}_l,\quad l=1,2.
\end{split}$$ On the lens contour $\Xi$, the jump $J_S(z)$ is given by $$\label{eq:JSX}
\begin{split}
\textrm{For $a<1$},\quad J_S(z)&=\mathcal{G}_2^{-1},\quad
z\in\Xi_L,\quad J_S(z)=\mathcal{G}_1,\quad z\in\Xi_R,\\
J_S(z)&=\mathcal{G}_4^{-1},\quad z\in\Xi_{1}^{\pm},\quad
J_S(z)=\mathcal{G}_3^{-1},\quad z\in\Xi_{2}^{\pm},\\
\textrm{For $a>1$},\quad J_S(z)&=\mathcal{G}_1^{-1},\quad
z\in\Xi_L,\quad J_S(z)=\mathcal{G}_2,\quad z\in\Xi_R,\\
J_S(z)&=\mathcal{G}_3^{-1},\quad z\in\Xi_{1}^{\pm},\quad
J_S(z)=\mathcal{G}_4^{-1},\quad z\in\Xi_{2}^{\pm}.
\end{split}$$ Finally, let $\mathbb{R}_{j}$ be the following. $$\label{eq:Rj}
\mathbb{R}_{1}=(0,\lambda_1^N),\quad\mathbb{R}_2=(\lambda_2^N,x_2).$$ Then on the real axis, the jumps of $S(z)$ are given by $$\label{eq:JSreal}
\begin{split}
J_S(z)&=\begin{pmatrix}1&e^{M\left(\tilde{\theta}_{2,+}^N(z)-\tilde{\theta}_{1,-}^N(z)\right)}&0\\
0&1&0\\
0&0&1\end{pmatrix},\quad z\in\mathbb{R}_{k_2},\\
J_S(z)&=\begin{pmatrix}1&0&e^{M\left(\tilde{\theta}_{3,+}^N(z)-\tilde{\theta}_{1,-}^N(z)\right)}\\
0&1&0\\
0&0&1\end{pmatrix},\quad z\in\mathbb{R}_{k_3},\\
J_S(z)&=\begin{pmatrix}0&1&0\\
-1&0&0\\
0&0&1\end{pmatrix},\quad z\in\mathfrak{B}_{k_2},\quad
J_S(z)=\begin{pmatrix}0&0&1\\
0&1&0\\
-1&0&0\end{pmatrix},\quad z\in\mathfrak{B}_{k_3}.
\end{split}$$ where $k_2=1$, $k_3=2$ for $a>1$ and $k_2=2$, $k_3=1$ for $a<1$. On the rest of the positive real axis, the jump is given by (\[eq:JTrest\]).
By considering the behavior of $\theta_2^N(z)-\theta_3^N(z)$ near $z=\infty$ in (\[eq:asymtheta\]) and by making use of Lemma \[le:diff23\], we see that for $a<1$ ($a>1$), $\mathrm{Re}\left(\tilde{\theta}_2^N(z)-\tilde{\theta}_3^N(z)\right)$ is negative (positive) in $\Xi_L$ and positive (negative) in $\Xi_R$. Hence, from (\[eq:JSX\]), we see that the off-diagonal entries in $J_S(z)$ become exponentially small on $\Xi_L$ and $\Xi_R$ as $M\rightarrow\infty$ outside of some small neighborhoods $D_{k}$ around the points $\lambda_{k}^N$. By Lemma \[le:lens\], we see that, away from the points $\lambda_k^N$, the jump matrices on the lens contours $\Xi_1^{\pm}$ and $\Xi_2^{\pm}$ are all exponentially close to the identity matrix as $M\rightarrow\infty$. By (\[eq:size\]) and the fact that $x_2>x_R$, it follows that $J_S(z)$ are also exponentially close to the identity matrix on $\mathbb{R}_+\setminus\left([\lambda_1^N,\lambda_2^N]\cup D_1\cup
D_2\right)$ as $M\rightarrow\infty$. Now by (\[eq:sizex\]), we see that the for $a<1$, the $31^{th}$ entry of $J_S(z)$ in $\mathcal{C}_1\cup\mathcal{C}_2$ (\[eq:JSC\]) is exponentially small in $M$, while for $a>1$, the $21^{th}$ entry of $J_S(z)$ in $\mathcal{C}_1\cup\mathcal{C}_2$ is exponentially small in $M$. Finally, by (\[eq:sizeC\]), we see that for $a<1$, the $33^{th}$ entry of $J_S(z)$ in $\mathcal{C}$ is also exponentially small in $M$, while for $a>1$, the $22^{th}$ entry of $J_S(z)$ in $\mathcal{C}$ is exponentially small in $M$. This suggests the following approximation to the Riemann-Hilbert problem (\[eq:RHPS\]). $$\label{eq:RHPSinf}
\begin{split}
1.\quad &\text{$S^{\infty}(z)$ is analytic in
$\mathbb{C}\setminus\left([\lambda_{1}^N,\lambda_{2}^N]\cup\mathcal{C}\right)$},\\
2.\quad &S_+^{\infty}(z)=S_-^{\infty}(z)J_{\infty}(z),\quad z\in[\lambda_{1}^N,\lambda_{2}^N]\cup\mathcal{C},\\
3.\quad &S^{\infty}(z)=I+O(z^{-1}),\quad z\rightarrow\infty,\\
4.\quad
&S^{\infty}(z)=O\left((z-\lambda_j^N)^{-\frac{1}{4}}\right),\quad
z\rightarrow\lambda_j^N, \quad j=1,\ldots, 4.
\end{split}$$ where the matrix $J_{\infty}(z)$ is the same as $J_S(z)$ on $[\lambda_{1}^N,\lambda_{2}^N]$ and on $\mathcal{C}$, it is given by $$\label{eq:Jinfty}
\begin{split}
\textrm{For $a<1$},\quad J_{\infty}(z)&=\begin{pmatrix}1&0&0\\
0&0&1\\
0&-1&0
\end{pmatrix},\quad z\in\mathcal{C},\\
\textrm{For $a>1$},\quad J_{\infty}(z)&=\begin{pmatrix}1&0&0\\
0&0&-1\\
0&1&0
\end{pmatrix},\quad z\in\mathcal{C}.
\end{split}$$ In the next section we will give an explicit solution to this Riemann-Hilbert problem and we will eventually show that $S^{\infty}(z)$ is a good approximation of $S(z)$ when $z$ is outside of the small neighborhood $D_k$ of the branch point $\lambda_k^N$.
Outer parametrix {#se:outer}
----------------
Let ${\mathcal{L}}_N$ be the Riemann surface defined by (\[eq:curveN\]) and let $\Gamma_j$ be the images of $\mathfrak{B}_j$ on ${\mathcal{L}}_N$ under the map $\xi_{1,+}^N(z)$. That is $$\label{eq:Gammaj}
\Gamma_j=\left\{(z,\xi)\in{\mathcal{L}}_N|\quad \xi=\xi_{1,+}^N(z),\quad
z\in\mathfrak{B}_j.\right\},\quad j=1,2.$$ Similarly, we define $\Gamma_c$ to be the image of $\mathcal{C}$. $$\label{eq:Gammac}
\begin{split}
\Gamma_c=\left\{(z,\xi)\in{\mathcal{L}}_N|\quad \xi=\xi_{l_2,+}^N(z),\quad
z\in\mathcal{C}.\right\},
\end{split}$$ where $l_1=2$, $l_2=3$ when $a>1$ and $l_1=3$, $l_2=2$ when $a<1$.
Let us now define the functions $S^{\infty}_k(\xi)$, $k=1,2,3$ to be the following functions on ${\mathcal{L}}_N$. $$\label{eq:Sinfk}
\begin{split}
S^{\infty}_1(\xi)&=a\sqrt{\prod_{j=1}^4\gamma_j^N}\frac{(\xi+1)(\xi+a^{-1})}{\sqrt{\prod_{j=1}^4(\xi-\gamma_j^N)}},\\
S^{\infty}_2(\xi)&=\frac{a\sqrt{\prod_{j=1}^4(1+\gamma_j^N)}}{a-1}\frac{\xi(\xi+a^{-1})}{\sqrt{\prod_{j=1}^4(\xi-\gamma_j^N)}},\\
S^{\infty}_3(\xi)&=\frac{\sqrt{\prod_{j=1}^4(1+a\gamma_j^N)}}{1-a}\frac{\xi(\xi+1)}{\sqrt{\prod_{j=1}^4(\xi-\gamma_j^N)}}.
\end{split}$$ where $\gamma_k^N$ are the roots of polynomial (\[eq:quartN\]). The branch cuts of the square root in (\[eq:Sinfk\]) are chosen to be the contours $\Gamma_1$, $\Gamma_2$ (\[eq:Gammaj\]) and $\Gamma_c$ (\[eq:Gammac\]) in ${\mathcal{L}}^N$.
By using the asymptotic behavior of the functions $\xi_m^N(z)$ (\[eq:xiinfty\]) and (\[eq:zeroasym\]), with $c$ and $\beta$ replaced by $c_N$ and $\beta_N$, we see that the all the functions $S^{\infty}_k(\xi)$ are holomorphic near $\xi_m^N(0)$ for $m=1,2,3$. Moreover, at the points $\xi_m^N(\infty)$, these functions satisfy $$\label{eq:sasym}
\begin{split}
S^{\infty}_k(\xi_m^N(\infty))=\delta_{mk},\quad k,m=1,2,3.
\end{split}$$ Let us define $S^{\infty}(z)$ to be the following matrix on $z\in\mathbb{C}$. $$\label{eq:sinf}
\left(S^{\infty}(z)\right)_{im}=S^{\infty}_i(\xi_m^N(z)),\quad 1\leq
i,m\leq 3.$$ Then, since the branch cut of the square root in (\[eq:Sinfk\]) are chosen to be $\Gamma_j$ and $\Gamma_c$, we have, from the jump discontinuities of the $\xi_m^N(z)$ (\[eq:bound\]), the following $$\label{eq:Sjump}
\begin{split}
S^{\infty}_i(\xi_{1,\pm}^N(z))&=\mp
S^{\infty}_i(\xi_{l,\mp}^N(z)),\quad
z\in\mathfrak{B}_{k_l},\quad i=1,2,3,\quad l=2,3,\\
S^{\infty}_i(\xi_{l_2,{\pm}}^N(z))&=\mp
S^{\infty}_i(\xi_{l_1,\mp}^N(z)),\quad z\in\mathcal{C},\quad
i=1,2,3.
\end{split}$$ From this and the asymptotic behavior (\[eq:sasym\]) of the $S^{\infty}_i(\xi)$ at $z=\infty$ and its behavior at the branch points $\lambda_j^N$, we see that the matrix $S^{\infty}(z)$ satisfies the Riemann-Hilbert problem (\[eq:RHPS\]).
\[pro:outer\] The matrix $S^{\infty}(z)$ defined by (\[eq:sinf\]) satisfies the Riemann-Hilbert problem (\[eq:RHPSinf\]).
Local parametrices near the edge points $\lambda_k^N$ {#se:local}
-----------------------------------------------------
Near the edge points $\lambda_k^N$, the approximation of $S(z)$ by $S^{\infty}(z)$ failed and we must solve the Riemann-Hilbert problem exactly near these points and match the solutions to the outer parametrix (\[eq:sinf\]) up to an error term of order $O(M^{-1})$. To be precise, let $\delta>0$ and let $D_k$ be a disc of radius $\delta$ centered at the point $\lambda_k^N$, $k=1,\ldots,4$. We would like to construct local parametrices $S^k(z)$ in $D_k$ such that $$\label{eq:localpara}
\begin{split}
1.\quad &\text{$S^{k}(z)$ is analytic in
$D_k\setminus \left(D_k\cap\left(\mathbb{R}\cup\Xi\cup\mathcal{C}\right)\right)$},\\
2.\quad &S_+^{k}(z)=S_-^{k}(z)J_S(z),\quad z\in D_k\cap\left(\mathbb{R}\cup\Xi\cup\mathcal{C}\right),\\
3.\quad &S^{k}(z)=\left(I+O(M^{-1})\right)S^{\infty}(z),\quad z\in{\partial}D_k.
\end{split}$$ The local parametrices $S^k(z)$ can be constructed by using the Airy function as in [@BKext2] (See also [@Lysov]). Since the construction is identical to that in [@BKext2] and [@Lysov], we shall not repeat the details here and refer the readers to these 2 papers.
Last transformation of the Riemann-Hilbert problem
--------------------------------------------------
Let us now show that the parametrices constructed in Section \[se:outer\] and Section \[se:local\] are indeed good approximation to the solution $S(z)$ of the Riemann-Hilbert problem (\[eq:RHPS\]).
Let us define $R(z)$ to be the following matrix $$\label{eq:Rx}
\begin{split}
R(z)=\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
S(z)\left(S^{k}(z)\right)^{-1}, & \hbox{$z$ inside $D_k$, $k=1,\ldots,4$;} \\
S(z)\left(S^{\infty}(z)\right)^{-1}, & \hbox{$z$ outside of $D_k$, $k=1,\ldots,4$.}
\end{array}
\right.
\end{split}$$ Then the function $R(z)$ has jump discontinuities on the contour $\Gamma_R$ shown in Figure \[fig:gamma\].
![The contour $\Gamma_R$.[]{data-label="fig:gamma"}](error2)
In particular, $R(z)$ satisfies the Riemann-Hilbert problem $$\label{eq:RHR}
\begin{split}
&1. \quad \text{$R(z)$ is analytic in $\mathbb{C}\setminus\Gamma_R$}\\
&2.\quad R_+(z)=R_-(z)J_R(z)\\
&3. \quad R(z)=I+O(z^{-1}),\quad z\rightarrow\infty, \\
&4.\quad R(z)=O(1),\quad z\rightarrow 0.
\end{split}$$ From the definition of $R(z)$ (\[eq:Rx\]), it is easy to see that the jumps $J_R(z)$ has the following order of magnitude. $$\label{eq:Jx}
\begin{split}
J_R(z)=\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
I+O(M^{-1}), & \hbox{$z\in{\partial}D_k$, $k=1,\ldots, 4$ ;} \\
I+O\left(e^{-M\eta}\right), & \hbox{for some fixed $\eta>0$ on
the rest of $\Gamma_R$.}
\end{array}
\right.
\end{split}$$ Then by the standard theory, [@D], [@DKV], [@DKV2], we have $$\label{eq:Rest}
\begin{split}
R(z)=I+O\left(\frac{1}{M(|z|+1)}\right),
\end{split}$$ uniformly in $\mathbb{C}$.
In particular, the solution $S(z)$ of the Riemann-Hilbert problem (\[eq:RHPS\]) can be approximated by $S^{\infty}(z)$ and $S^{k}(z)$ as $$\label{eq:approxS}
\begin{split}
S(z)=\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
\left(I+O\left(M^{-1}\right)\right)S^{k}(z), & \hbox{$z\in D_k$, $k=1,\ldots,4$;} \\
\left(I+O\left(M^{-1}\right)\right)S^{\infty}(z), & \hbox{$z$ outside of
$D_k$, $k=1,\ldots,4$.}
\end{array}
\right.
\end{split}$$
Universality of the correlation kernel
======================================
The the universality result Theorem \[thm:main2\] can now be proven by using the asymptotics of the multiple Laguerre polynomials obtained in the last section. The proof is the same as the ones in Section 9 of [@BKext1], [@BKext2] and [@Mo] and we shall leave the readers to verify the details.
Conclusions
===========
This paper complements the results obtained in our earlier paper [@Mo] on the universality of complex Wishart ensembles 2 with distinct eigenvalues and the number of each eigenvalue becomes large as the size of the ensemble goes to infinity. By using results in the Stieltjes transform of the limiting eigenvalue distribution, we were able to overcome difficulties in determining the sheet structure of the Riemann surface (\[eq:curve20\]). This, together with an analysis of the topology of the zero set of a function $h(x)$ (\[eq:hx\]), enables us to apply the Deift-Zhou steepest descent method to obtain asymptotic formula for the eigenvalue correlation function. Together with [@Mo], we showed that unless the discriminant of the polynomial (\[eq:quartic1\]) is zero, the local eigenvalue statistics are given by the sine-kernel (\[eq:bulk\]) in the bulk and the Airy kernel (\[eq:edge\]) in the edge of the spectrum. We have also shown that the largest eigenvalue is distributed according to the Tracy-Widom distribution (\[eq:TW\]).
When the discriminant $\Delta$ of (\[eq:quartic1\]) becomes zero, the ensemble goes through a phase transition in which the support of the limiting eigenvalue density changes from 1 interval to 2 intervals. This phase transition can be studied by the method developed in [@BKdou] and the eigenvalue correlation function will be given by the Pearcey kernel near the critical point of the spectrum, the point where the support is splitting.
The use of Stieltjes transform to provide a Riemann surface needed for the implementation of the Riemann-Hilbert analysis can be generalized to cases where the covariance matrix has more than 2 distinct eigenvalues. However, when the Riemann surface has more than 2 complex branch points, the determination of the zero set $\frak{H}$ in (\[eq:frakH\]) is very complicated and a full generalization to these cases is still a very challenging open problem.
[10]{}
A. I. Aptekarev. Multiple orthogonal polynomials. [*J. Comput. Appl. Math.*]{}, [**99**]{}, (1998), no. 1-2, 423–447.
A. I. Aptekarev, A. Branquinho and W. Van Assche. Multiple orthogonal polynomials for classical weights. [*Trans. Amer. Math. Soc.* ]{}, [**355**]{}, (2003), no. 10, 3887–3914.
Z. D. Bai and J. Silverstein. On the empirical distribution of eigenvalues of a class of large-dimensional random matrices. [*J. Multivariate Anal.*]{}, [**54**]{}, (1995), no. 2, 175–192.
Z. D. Bai and J. Silverstein. No eigenvalues outside the support of the limiting spectral distribution of large-dimensional sample covariance matrices. [*Ann Probab.*]{}, [**26**]{}, (1998), no. 1, 316–345.
Z. D. Bai and J. Silverstein. Exact separation of eigenvalues of large-dimensional sample covariance matrices. [*Ann Probab.*]{}, [**27**]{}, (1999), no. 3, 1536–1555.
J. Baik. Painlevé formulas of the limiting distributions for nonnull complex sample covariance matrices. [*Duke Math. J.*]{}, [**133**]{}, (2006), no. 2, 205–235.
J. Baik, G. Ben-Arous, S. Péché. Phase transition of the largest eigenvalue for nonnull complex sample covariance matrices. [*Ann. Probab.*]{}, [**33**]{}, (2005), no. 5, 1643–1697.
J. Baik and J. Silverstein. Eigenvalues of large sample covariance matrices of spiked population models. [*J. Multivariate Anal.*]{}, [**97**]{}, (2006), no. 6, 1382–1408.
P. Bleher and A. Its. Semiclassical asymptotics of orthogonal polynomials, Riemann-Hilbert problem, and universality in the matrix model. [*Ann. of Maths. (2)*]{}, [**150**]{} (1999), no. 1, 185–266.
P. Bleher, A. B. J. Kuijlaars. Random matrices with external source and multiple orthogonal polynomials. [*Int. Math. Res. Not.* ]{}, (2004), no. 3, 109–129.
P. Bleher, A. B. J. Kuijlaars. Large $n$ limit of Gaussian random matrices with external source. I. [*Commun. Maths. Phys.*]{}, [**252**]{}, (2005), no. 1-3, 43–76.
A. I. Aptekarev, P. Bleher and A. B. J. Kuijlaars. Large $n$ limit of Gaussian random matrices with external source. II. [*Commun. Maths. Phys.*]{}, [**259**]{}, (2005), 367–389.
P. Bleher, A. B. J. Kuijlaars. Large $n$ limit of Gaussian random matrices with external source. III. Double scaling limit. [*Commun. Maths. Phys.*]{}, [**259**]{}, (2005), no. 2, 481–517.
P. Bleher, A. B. J. Kuijlaars. Integral representations for multiple Hermite and multiple Laguerre polynomials. [*Ann. Inst. Fourier (Grenoble)* ]{}, [**55**]{}, (2005), no. 6, 2001–2014.
S. Choi and J. Silverstein. Analysis of the limiting spectral distribution of large-dimensional random matrices. [*J. Multivariate Anal.*]{}, [**54**]{}, (1995), no. 2, 295–309.
P. Desrosiers and P. J. Forrester. Asymptotic correlations for Gaussian and Wishart matrices with external source. [*Int. Math. Res. Not.*]{}, Art. ID 27395, (2006), 43 pp.
P. Deift. [*Orthogonal polynomials and random matrices: A Riemann-Hilbert approach*]{}. Courant lecture notes 3. New York University. (1999).
P. Deift, T. Kriecherbauer, K. T. R. McLaughlin, S. Venakides and X. Zhou. Strong asymptotics of orthogonal polynomials with respect to exponential weights. [*Comm. Pure Appl. Math.*]{}, [**52**]{} (1999), no. 12, 1491–1552.
P. Deift, T. Kriecherbauer, K. T. R. McLaughlin, S. Venakides and X. Zhou. Uniform asymptotics for polynomials orthogonal with respect to varying exponential weights and applications to universality questions in random matrix theory. [*Comm. Pure Appl. Math.*]{}, [**52**]{} (1999), no. 11, 1335–1425.
N. El Karoui. Tracy-Widom limit for the largest eigenvalue of a large class of complex sample covariance matrices. [*Ann. Probab.* ]{}, [**35**]{}, (2007), no.2, 663–714.
N. El Karoui. On the largest eigenvalue of Wishart matrices with identity covariance when $n$, $p$ and $p/n\rightarrow\infty$. [*arXiv:math.ST/0309355.*]{}
P. J. Forrester. The spectrum edge of random matrix ensembles. [*Nuclear Phys. B*]{}, [**402**]{}, (1993), 709–728.
J. S. Geronimon, A. B. J. Kuijlaars and W. Van Assche. Riemann-Hilbert problems for multiple orthogonal polynomials. pp. 23–59 in: [*Nato ASI special function 2000. Current perspective and future directions.*]{} (J. Bustoz, M. E. H. Ismail and S. K. Suslov eds.), Nato Science series II Vol 30, Kluwer Academic Publishers. (2001)
I. Johnstone. On the distribution of the largest principal component. [*Ann. Statist.*]{}, [**29**]{}, (2001), 295–327.
K. Johansson. Shape fluctuations and random matrices. [*Commun. Math. Phys.*]{}, [**209**]{}, (2000), 437–476.
V. Lysov and F. Wielonsky. Strong asymptotics for multiple Laguerre polynomials. [*Constr. Approx.*]{}, [**28**]{}, (2008), 61–111.
K. T. R. Mclaughlin. Asymptotic analysis of random matrices with external source and a family of algebraic curves. [*nonlinearity*]{}, [**20**]{}, (2007), no. 7, 1547–1571.
M. Y. Mo. Universality in Complex Wishart ensembles: The 2 cut case. [*ArXiv: arXiv:0809.3750*]{}.
R. Muirhead. [*Aspects of multivariate statistical theory.*]{} Wiley series in Probability and Mathematical Statistics, (1982).
J. Silverstein. Strong convergence of the empirical distribution of eigenvalues of large-dimensional random matrices. [*J. Multivariate Anal.*]{}, [**55**]{}, (1995), no. 2, 331–339.
C. Tracy and H. Widom. Level-spacing distribution and the Airy kernel. [*Commun. Math. Phys.*]{}, [**159**]{}, (1994), 151–174.
D. Wang. Spiked Models in Wishart Ensemble. [*arXiv:0804.0889.*]{}
D. Wang. The Largest Sample Eigenvalue Distribution in the rank 1 Quaternionic Spiked Model of Wishart Ensemble. [*arXiv:0711.2722.*]{}
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*School of Mathematics\
University of Bristol\
Bristol BS8 1TW, UK\
Email: [[email protected]]{}*
22 September 2008
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'We analyze the steady-state entanglement between Bose-Einstein condensate trapped inside an optical cavity with a moving end mirror (nanomechanical resonator) driven by a single mode laser. The quantized laser field mediates the interaction between the Bose-Einstein condensate and nanomechanical resonator. In particular, we study the influence of temperature on the entanglement of the coupled system, and note that the steady-state entanglement is fragile with respect to temperature.'
author:
- Muhammad Asjad
- Farhan Saif
title: 'Steady-state entanglement of Bose-Einstein condensate and a nanomechanical resonator'
---
**[Introduction]{}**
====================
Optical nano-mechanical systems that couple optical degree of freedom to the mechanical motion of a cantilever have been subject of increasing investigation [@Kipp]. In these optomechanical systems coupling is obtained via radiation pressure inside a cavity [@Braginsky; @Mancini; @Zhang], or via quantum dots [@Tian] or ions [@Naik]. Recently, it is made possible to couple mechanical resonators with the ensembles of atoms, where, the interaction is mediated by the field inside the cavity which couples the mechanical resonators to the internal degrees of freedom of the atoms [@Ian; @genes], or to motional degrees of the freedom of the atoms [@Meiser] causing effects, (*e.g*, cooling of the mechanical resonator via bath of atoms [@Ritsch]). In quantum meteorology, various targets, such as, measurement of displacement with larger accuracy [@Rugar] and the detection of gravitational waves [@V.; @Braginsky] are set as milestone achievements. Engineering entanglement in nano-mechanical systems is useful in quantum technologies [@Nielsen]. The possibility of entangling the electromagnetic field with motional degree of freedom of mechanical systems have been explored in various approaches [@Vitali; @Paternostro]. In this paper, we consider a hybrid optomechanical system which consists of a Bose-Einstein condensate (BEC) trapped inside a Fabry-Perot cavity with a vibrating end mirror (nano-mechanical resonators) driven by a single mode optical field. The intracavity field mediates the interaction of nanomechanical resonator with collective oscillations of the atomic density. Hence, the motional degrees of the nano-mechanical resonator indirectly couples to motional degrees of the freedom of the Bose-Einstein condensates via optical field inside the cavity. Therefore, intracavity field acts as nonlinear spring between collective atomic density and nano-mechanical resonator. We show that (i) the mechanical vibration of the nanomechanical resonator is entangled to the motional degree of the freedom of the BEC in the steady state. (ii) Furthermore, we analyze the steady-state entanglement as a function of temperature, coupling strength between BEC and field, moving mirror and field, and power of input driving laser field. In section 2, we model the system and explain its interaction with the environment. In section 3, we calculate the quantum Langevin equations for our system and solve the dynamics. In section 3, we quantify the steady-state entanglement between mechanical resonator and Bose-Einstein condensate. Later, in section 5, we explain the possibility to experimentally measure the generating entanglement. Finally, in section 6, we provide concluding remarks.
**[The Model]{}**
=================
We consider a Fabry-Perot cavity with a moving end mirror driven by a single-mode optical field of frequency $\omega_{\mathrm{P}}$, and BEC of $N$-two level atoms are trapped inside the Fabry-Perot cavity [@Esteve; @Ritter]. The condensate atoms placed in the cavity observe one-dimensional optical lattice, formed by the oppositely propagated electromagnetic field inside the cavity. We consider that the atom-field detuning $\Delta_{\mathrm{a}}$ is very large, spontaneous emission is negligible, and, as a consequence we adiabatically eliminate the internal excited state dynamics of the atoms. In addition, we also consider that the atomic densities are low enough that one can neglect the two-body interactions. In a weakly interacting regime, the recent experiment [@Ritter] suggests that only the first two symmetric momentum side modes are excited with momentum $\pm \,2 \mathrm{\hbar}$k, where k is the wave number of the field. Moreover, we assume that the vibrating end mirror of the optical cavity of length $L$ is performing harmonic oscillations with frequency $\omega_{\mathrm{m}}$ along the cavity axis (x-axis).
#### {#section .unnumbered}
The Hamiltonian of the hybrid optomechanical system formed by the BEC, the intracavity field, and the vibrating end mirror of the cavity (nanomechanical resonator) in the rotating frame at the laser frequency $\omega_{\mathrm{p}}$ is given by [@Nagy; @cklaw] $$\hat{\mathrm{H}}=\sum_{\mathrm{i=\,a,\,b\,c}} \hat{\mathrm{H}}_{\mathrm{i}} +\hat{\mathrm H}_{\mathrm{ac}}+\hat{\mathrm H}_{\mathrm{mc}}\,, \label{ham}$$ where, $\hat{\mathrm{H}}_{\mathrm{a}}=\mathrm{\hbar}\, \omega_{\mathrm a}\, \hat{\mathrm{a}}^\dag\hat{\mathrm{a}}$, $\hat{\mathrm{H}}_{\mathrm{b}}=\mathrm{\hbar}\, \omega_{\mathrm{m}}\, \hat{\mathrm{b}}^\dag\hat{\mathrm{b}}$ and $\hat{\mathrm{H}}_{\mathrm{c}}=\mathrm{\hbar}\, \Delta\, \hat{\mathrm{c}}^\dag\hat{\mathrm{c}}-i\,\mathrm{\hbar}\,\mathrm{E}\,(\hat{\mathrm c}-\hat{\mathrm c}^\dag)$. Here $\hat{\mathrm c}\,(\hat{\mathrm c}^\dag$) is the annihilation (creation) operator of the single-mode optical field, $\Delta= \omega_{\mathrm c}-\omega_{\mathrm p}+\mathrm{N} \mathrm{U}_{\mathrm{o}}/2$, where $\mathrm{U}_{\mathrm{o}}$ is the optical lattice barrier depth per photon and represents the atomic back action on the field [@Maschler], and $-i\,\mathrm{\hbar}\,\mathrm{E}\,(\hat{\mathrm c}-\hat{\mathrm c}^\dag)$ shows the driving of the cavity field with amplitude $\mathrm{E}$ related to the laser power $\mathrm{P}$ by $|\mathrm E|=\sqrt{2\,\mathrm{P}\, \kappa/\mathrm{\hbar}\, \omega_{\mathrm{p}}}$, where $\kappa$ is the decay rate of the photons in to the associated outgoing modes. Moreover, $\hat{\mathrm{a}}\, (\hat{\mathrm{a}}^\dag)$ is the annihilation (creation) operator of the BEC mode with frequency $\omega_{\mathrm a}=4 \omega_{\mathrm r}$, where $\omega_{\mathrm r}$ is the recoiled frequency. In addition, $\omega_{\mathrm m}$ and $\hat{\mathrm{b}}\,(\hat{\mathrm{b}}^\dag)$ are frequency and annihilation (creation) operator of the nano-mechanical resonator, respectively. We assume that the frequency of the nanomechanical resonator is less than the free spectral range, (*i.e*, $\omega_{\mathrm{m}}<<\mathrm{v}/2\,\mathrm L\,$ (v is the speed of light). Therefore, scattering of photons into others modes, except the driven mode, is neglected [@cklaw]. Here, $\hat{\mathrm H}_{\mathrm{mc}}$ accounts for the interaction between nano-mechanical resonator and intracavity field and is given by $$\hat{\mathrm{H}}_{\mathrm{mc}}=-i\mathrm{\hbar}\, \dfrac{\mathrm{g}_{\mathrm{mc}}}{\sqrt{2}}\,\hat{\mathrm{c}}^\dag\hat{\mathrm{c}} \,(\hat{\mathrm b}+\hat{\mathrm b}^\dag)\,. \label{hmc}$$ Here, the coupling strength between nano-mechanical resonator and light radiation pressure is defined by $\mathrm{g}_{\mathrm{mc}}=\sqrt{2}(\omega_{\mathrm p}/\mathrm L)\,\mathrm{x}_{\mathrm o}$, where $\mathrm{x}_{\mathrm o}=\sqrt{\mathrm{\hbar}/2\,\mathrm{m}\,\omega_{\mathrm{m}}}$ is the zero-point motion of the mechanical mode of mass $\mathrm{m}$. Moreover, the interaction of the BEC with intracavity mode is described by the Hamiltonian $\hat{\mathrm H}_{\mathrm{ac}}$ given by $$\hat{\mathrm{H}}_{\mathrm{ac}}=i\mathrm{\hbar}\, \dfrac{\mathrm{g}_{\mathrm{ac}}}{\sqrt{2}}\,\hat{\mathrm{c}}^\dag\hat{\mathrm{c}} \,(\hat{\mathrm a}+\hat{\mathrm a}^\dag)\,, \label{hac}$$ where, $\mathrm{g}_{\mathrm{ac}}=(\mathrm{U}_{\mathrm{o}}\sqrt{\mathrm {N}})/2$ is described the strength of interaction between BEC mode and intracavity field.
#### {#section-1 .unnumbered}
In order to describe the complete dynamics of the system we include the dissipation effects. In addition to the dynamics described by the Hamiltonian in Eq.(\[ham\]), the system is exposed to the random noise forces due to quantum fluctuations of the radiation field and fluctuation of the phononic heat bath associated to the mechanical resonator. We neglect the thermal effects of the atomic cloud and assume that the vacuum noise associated with the cavity field is Markovian in nature with decay rate $\kappa$ and noise operator $\hat{\mathrm{c}}_{\mathrm{in}}(t)$ of the input field which obeys the following correlation functions, $$\begin{aligned}
\left < \hat{\mathrm{c}}_{\mathrm{in}}^\dag(t)\,\hat{\mathrm{c}}_{\mathrm{in}}(t')\right >&=& \mathrm{n}_{\mathrm{c}}\, \delta\left(t-t'\right)\,,\nonumber\\
\left < \hat{\mathrm{c}}_{\mathrm{in}}(t)\,\hat{\mathrm{c}}_{\mathrm{in}}^\dag(t')\right >&=& \left(\mathrm{n}_{\mathrm{c}}+1\right)\, \delta\left(t-t'\right). \label{fn}\end{aligned}$$ Here, $\mathrm{n}_{\mathrm{c}}=\left[\mathrm{exp}\{\mathrm\hbar \,\omega_{\mathrm c}/K_{\mathrm{B}}\,\mathrm{T}\}-1 \right]^{-1}$ is the equilibrium occupation number of the optical oscillator. For optical frequency $\omega_{\mathrm{c}}$ we consider $\mathrm\hbar \,\omega_{\mathrm c}/K_{\mathrm{B}}\,\mathrm{T}>>1$ and set $\mathrm{n}_{\mathrm c}=0$.
#### {#section-2 .unnumbered}
The motion of the nano-mechanical resonator is affected due to thermal bath is Brownian and non-Morkovian in nature [@genes]. The quantum effects on mechanical resonator are only observed in the limit of very high mechanical quality factor $\mathrm Q=\omega_{\mathrm{m}}/\gamma>>1$, the Brownian noise operator can be modeled as Markovian with the decay rate of the mechanical mode is $\gamma$. Therefore, the noise operator $\hat{\mathrm{b}}_{\mathrm{in}}(t)$ can be characterized as $$\left < \hat{\mathrm{b}}^\dag_{\mathrm{in}}(t)\,\hat{\mathrm{b}}_{\mathrm{in}}(t')\right >= \mathrm{n}_{\mathrm{th}}\, \delta\left(t-t'\right)\,, \label{mn}$$ where, $\mathrm{n}_{\mathrm {th}}= \left[\mathrm{exp}\{\mathrm\hbar \,\omega_{\mathrm m}/K_{\mathrm{B}}\,\mathrm{T}\}-1 \right]^{-1}$ is the equilibrium thermal occupation number of the mechanical resonator.
**[Heisenberg-Langevin equations]{}**
=====================================
In order to describe the complete dynamics of the subsystems involved in this problem, an adequate choice is to use the formalism of the quantum Langevin equations. Therefore, the Heisenberg-Langevin equation of motion for the intracavity mode, mechanical mode and bosonic field operator can be written as $$\begin{aligned}
\dot{\mathrm{a}}&=& -i\,\omega_{\mathrm{a}}\,\mathrm{a}-i\,\dfrac{\mathrm{g}_{\mathrm{ac}}}{\sqrt{2}}\,\mathrm{c}^\dag \mathrm{c} \,, \nonumber \\
\dot{\mathrm{b}}&=& -i\omega_{\mathrm{m}}\,\mathrm{b}+i\,\dfrac{\mathrm{g}_{\mathrm{mc}}}{\sqrt{2}}\,\mathrm{c}^\dag \mathrm{c} -\gamma\,\mathrm{b}+\,\sqrt{2\,\gamma}\,\mathrm{b}_{\mathrm{in}}\,,\nonumber \\
\dot{\mathrm{c}}&=& \left(-i\Delta_{\mathrm{o}} +i\,\dfrac{\mathrm{g} _{\mathrm{mc}}}{\sqrt{2}}\,(\mathrm{b}+\mathrm{b}^\dag)-i\,\dfrac{\mathrm{g} _{\mathrm{ac}}}{\sqrt{2}}\,(\mathrm{a}+\mathrm{a}^\dag)-\kappa\right)\,\mathrm{c} \nonumber \\
&& + E + \sqrt{2\kappa}\,\mathrm{c}_{\mathrm{in}}\,,\label{langeq} \end{aligned}$$ where *dot* denotes the time derivatives and for simplicity we omit the *hat* symbol from the operators. These are the nonlinear quantum Langevin equations and dynamics is complicated. In the following we linearized the operators around the steady state values, $\mathrm{a}=\left< \mathrm{a}\right>_{\mathrm{ss}}+\partial \mathrm{a}$, $\mathrm{b}=\left< \mathrm{b}\right>_{\mathrm{ss}}+\partial \mathrm{b}$, $\mathrm{c}=\left< \mathrm{c}\right>_{\mathrm{ss}}+\partial \mathrm{c}$. Here, we assume that the fluctuation operators $\partial \mathrm{a}$, $\partial \mathrm{b}$ and $\partial \mathrm{c}$ have zero mean. The steady state value of the intracavity mode is $\left<\mathrm{c}\right>_{\mathrm{ss}}=\mathrm{E}/(\kappa+i\,\Delta)$, where the total effective detuning is $$\Delta=\Delta_{\mathrm o}-\dfrac{\,\omega_{\mathrm{m}}\,\mathrm{g}^2_{\mathrm{mc}}}{\gamma^2+\omega^2_{\mathrm{m}}}\left<\mathrm{c^\dag c}\,\right>_{\mathrm{ss}}-\dfrac{\,\mathrm{g}^2_{\mathrm{ac}}}{\omega_{\mathrm{a}}}\,\left< \mathrm{c^\dag c}\right>_{\mathrm{ss}}. \label{detuning}$$ For the sake of simplicity we assume that the field is real positive and this can be achieved by adjusting the phase of the laser field. Similarly, the steady state value of the BEC and mechanical resonator modes are $\left<\mathrm{a}\,\right>_{\mathrm{ss}}=[-\mathrm{g}_{\mathrm{ac}}/\sqrt{2}\,\omega_{\mathrm{a}}]\left<\mathrm{c^\dag c}\,\right>_{\mathrm{ss}}$ and $\left< \mathrm{b}\right>_{\mathrm{ss}}=\left[i\,\mathrm{g}_{\mathrm{mc}}/\sqrt{2}(\gamma+i\,\omega_{\mathrm m})\right]\left<\mathrm{c^\dag c}\,\right>_{\mathrm{ss}}$ respectively.
#### {#section-3 .unnumbered}
We linearize the Langevin equations of motion given in Eq.(\[langeq\]), and assume that pump field is intense and keep terms only up to first order in the fluctuation operators. We rewrite each Heisenberg operator in Eq.(\[langeq\]) as a sum of steady state value and fluctuation operator with zero mean value. Therefore, the linear set of equations are, $$\begin{aligned}
\partial\dot{\mathrm{a}} &=& -i\omega_{\mathrm{a}}\partial\mathrm{a}-i\dfrac{\mathrm{G}_{\mathrm{ac}}}{2}\left(\partial\mathrm{c}+\partial\mathrm{c}^\dag\right)\,,\nonumber \\
\partial\dot{\mathrm{b}} &=& -(\gamma+i\omega_{\mathrm{m}})\partial\mathrm{b} + i\dfrac{\mathrm{G}_{\mathrm{mc}}}{2}\left(\partial\mathrm{c}+\partial\mathrm{c}^\dag\right)+\sqrt{2\gamma}\,\mathrm{b}_{\mathrm{in}}\,,\nonumber \\
\partial\dot{\mathrm{c}} &=& -\left(\kappa+i\,\Delta \right)\partial \mathrm{c} +i\dfrac{\mathrm{G}_{\mathrm{mc}}}{2}\left(\partial\mathrm{b}+\partial\mathrm{b}^\dag\right)\nonumber\\
&&-i\dfrac{\mathrm{G}_{\mathrm{ac}}}{2}\left(\partial\mathrm{a}+\partial\mathrm{a}^\dag\right)+\sqrt{2\,\kappa}\, \mathrm{c}_{\mathrm{in}}\,.\label{linrz}\end{aligned}$$ The linearized quantum Langevin equations show that the fluctuations of mechanical resonator and BEC are now coupled to the cavity field quadrature fluctuations by the effective couplings $\mathrm{G}_{\mathrm{mc}}=\sqrt{2}\,\mathrm{g}_{\mathrm{mc}}\left<\mathrm c\right>_\mathrm{ss}$ and $\mathrm{G}_{\mathrm{ac}}=\sqrt{2}\,\mathrm{g}_{\mathrm{ac}}\left<\mathrm c\right>_\mathrm{ss}$, which can be made very large by increasing the amplitude $\left<\mathrm c\right>_\mathrm{ss}$ of the intracavity field. Linearized quantum Langevin equations (\[linrz\]) and their corresponding Hermitian conjugate form a system of six first-order coupled operator equations, for which the Ruth-Hurwitz criteria implies that the system will be stable only if the following stability condition is satisfied $$\left(\Delta^2+\kappa^2\right)\omega_{\mathrm{m}}\omega_{\mathrm{a}}-\Delta\left(\mathrm{G}^2_{\mathrm{mc}}+\mathrm{G}^2_{\mathrm{ac}}\right)>0\,.\label{stblty}$$ In the following we consider only red-detuning regime ($\Delta>0$) and from now on we assume that the above stability condition is satisfied. The quantum Langevin equations (\[linrz\]) are linear in creation and annihilation operators. We transform to the quadratures, *i.e*, $\partial\mathrm{q}_{\mathrm{m}}=(\partial\mathrm{b}+\partial\mathrm{b}^\dag)/\sqrt{2},\,\partial\mathrm{p}_{\mathrm{m}}=(\partial\mathrm{b}-\partial\mathrm{b}^\dag)/i\sqrt{2},\,\partial\mathrm{q}_{\mathrm{a}}=(\partial\mathrm{a}+\partial\mathrm{a}^\dag)/\sqrt{2},\,\partial\mathrm{p}_{\mathrm{a}}=(\partial\mathrm{a}-\partial\mathrm{a}^\dag)/i\sqrt{2},\,\partial\mathrm{q}_{\mathrm{c}}=(\partial\mathrm{c}+\partial\mathrm{c}^\dag)/\sqrt{2},\,\partial\mathrm{p}_{\mathrm{c}}=(\partial\mathrm{c}-\partial\mathrm{c}^\dag)/i\sqrt{2}$. The system of linearized equations of motion can be written in compact matrix form as $\dot {\mathrm{R}}(t)=\mathrm{M}\,\mathrm{R}(t)+\mathrm{F}(t)$, where, $\mathrm{R}=(\partial\mathrm{q}_{\mathrm{m}},\, \partial\mathrm{p}_{\mathrm{m}},\,\partial\mathrm{q}_{\mathrm{a}},\,\partial\mathrm{p}_{\mathrm{a}},\partial\mathrm{q}_{\mathrm{c}},\,\partial\mathrm{p}_{\mathrm{c}})^\mathrm{t}$ is the vector of the quadrature fluctuations, and in superscript $\mathrm{t}$ describes transpose of matrix. Furthermore, $\mathrm{F}$ is the vector corresponding to noises, whereas $\mathrm{M}$ is drift matrix. Since the quantum noises are white in nature and the dynamics is linearized, hence the state of the system will be a zero mean Gaussian state, and therefore completely determined by the covariance matrix $\mathrm{V}_{\mathrm{ij}}=\left<(\mathrm{R}_\mathrm{i}\,\mathrm{R}_\mathrm{j}+\mathrm{R}_\mathrm{j}\,\mathrm{R}_\mathrm{i})-2\mathrm{R}_\mathrm{i}\,\mathrm{R}_\mathrm{j}\right>$. In order to find the steady state covariance matrix $\mathrm{V}$, we solve the linearized quantum Langevin equations as did in [@Vitali]. In steady state the covariance matrix fulfills the Lyapunove equation $$\mathrm{M}\,\mathrm{V}+\mathrm{V}\,\mathrm{M}^{\mathrm{t}}= -\mathrm{V}_{\mathrm{F}}. \label{lymp}$$ Eq.(\[lymp\]) is the linear matrix equation and can straight forwardly be solved. However, the general exact expression is too cumbersome and not reported here. One can extract all the information about the steady state of the system from the correlation matrix.
**[Steady state entanglement]{}**
=================================
We compute the entanglement between mechanical mode and the BEC mode in steady-state by tracing out the cavity mode. The steady state entanglement is determined by computing the logarithmic negativity $\mathrm{E}_{\mathrm{N}}$ from the corresponding covariance matrix $\mathrm{V}$. We consider an example where the length of the cavity $\mathrm{L}=1\,\mathrm{mm}$ and laser input power $\mathrm{P}= 50 \,\mathrm{mW}$ [@Vitali]. The effective mass and resonance frequency of the mechanical resonator are $\mathrm{m}=4\,\mathrm{ng}$ and $\omega_{\mathrm{m}}= 1\, \mathrm{MHz}$. The decay rate of the mechanical resonator is $\gamma= 2\pi\times 100\, \mathrm{Hz}$ and cavity finesse $\mathrm{F}=1\times10^4$. For these values of the parameters, the coupling $\mathrm{g}_{\mathrm{mc}}$ between mechanical resonator is in the order of $\mathrm{kHz}$. Moreover, the interaction of the optical field with Bose-Einstein condensate is kept small, so that Bogoliubove mode expansion becomes possible.
#### {#section-4 .unnumbered}
Measurement of the entanglement between the mechanical resonator and Bose-Einstein condensate, requires as to compute $\mathrm{E}_\mathrm{N}$, which is obtained by tracing out the cavity mode, *i.e*, removing the rows and columns of $\mathrm{V}$ which correspond to the cavity mode. The reduce state is still Gaussian and fully characterized by $4\times4$ matrix $ \mathrm{V'}$. In order to measure the entanglement between mechanical mirror and intracavity filed, we consider the Logarithmic negativity $\mathrm {E}_{\mathrm{N}}$. In the case of continuous variable (CV), $\mathrm{E}_{\mathrm{N}}$ can be defined as [@Adesso] $$\mathrm{E}_{\mathrm{N}}=\mathrm{max}\,[0,-\ln 2\,\nu_-]\,,\label{55}$$ where, $\nu_-= 2^{-1/2}\{\sum(\mathrm{V'})-[\sum(\mathrm{V'})^2-4\det \mathrm{V'}]^{1/2}\}^{1/2}$, with $\sum(\mathrm{V'})\equiv \det \mathrm{X} + \det\mathrm{Y}-2\det\mathrm{Z}$, is the smallest symplectic eigenvalue. However, the second eigenvalue $\nu_+= 2^{-1/2}\{\sum(\mathrm{V'})+[\sum(\mathrm{V'})^2-4\det \mathrm{V'}]^{1/2}\}^{1/2}>>1/2$ at any value of the parameters. Therefore, it has no effect on the non-separability of the state [@Simon]. Moreover, the correlation matrix $\mathrm{V'}$ in $2\times2$ block form can be written as
$\mathrm{V'}$=$
\begin{bmatrix}
\mathrm{X} & \mathrm{Z} \\ \mathrm{Z}^{\mathrm{t}} & \mathrm{Y}
\end{bmatrix}
$.
It is clear from Eq.(\[55\]) that the $\mathrm{E}_{\mathrm{N}}$ is the decreasing function of $,\nu_-$ and it quantifies how much two Gaussian states are entangled. The Gaussian state gets entangled only if $\nu_-<1/2$, and it is Simon’s necessary and sufficient entanglement non-positive partial transpose criterion of the Gaussian states [@Simon], and this condition can also be written as $4\det \mathrm{V'}<\sum(\mathrm{V'})-1/4$.
#### {#section-5 .unnumbered}
In Fig.\[ent\] we show that the entanglement between nano-mechanical resonator and Bose-Einstein condensate quantify by Logarithmic negativity $\mathrm{E}_{\mathrm{N}}$ as a function of the coupling of the mechanical resonator and Bose-Einstein condensate with field in the cavity. In Fig.\[e=2\], we have $\mathrm{E}_{\mathrm{N}}\simeq0.15$ for $\mathrm{g}_{\mathrm{mc}}=\mathrm{g}_{\mathrm{ac}}\thicksim 300\, \mathrm{Hz}$ and $\Delta= 2\pi\times2\,\mathrm{MHz}$. In Fig.\[e=3\], we find that the $\mathrm{E}_{\mathrm{N}}\simeq0.2$ for $\mathrm{g}_{\mathrm{mc}}=\mathrm{g}_{\mathrm{ac}}\thicksim 300\, \mathrm{Hz}$ and $\Delta= 2\pi\times3\,\mathrm{MHz}$.
\
#### {#section-6 .unnumbered}
In Fig.\[pzet\], we also study the robustness of the steady state entanglement of the nano-mechanical resonator to the Bose-Einstein condensate with respect to several parameters in system. Fig.\[P\] shows the dependence of $\mathrm{E}_{\mathrm{N}}$ on the input laser power $\mathrm{P}$ and normalized detuning $\Delta/\omega_{\mathrm{m}}$ for $\mathrm{g}_{\mathrm{ac}}=100\, \mathrm{Hz}$. Fig.\[z\] shows the dependence of $\mathrm{E}_{\mathrm{N}}$ on optomechanical coupling rate $\mathrm{g}_{\mathrm{mc}}$ and normalized detuning $\Delta/\omega_{\mathrm{m}}$ for $\mathrm{g}_{\mathrm{ac}}=100\, \mathrm{Hz}$. Moreover, in Fig.\[e\] we plot the $\mathrm{E}_{\mathrm{N}}$ as function of normalized detuning $\Delta/\omega_{\mathrm{m}}$ for two different values of the mass m of the mechanical resonator, *i.e*, black solid and red dashed lines for $\mathrm{m} = 4\,\mathrm{ng}$ and $\mathrm{m} = 5\,\mathrm{ng}$ respectively. One can easily observe that $\mathrm{E}_{\mathrm{N}}$ exists only within a finite interval of values of the $\Delta$ around $\Delta\simeq4.5\,\omega_{\mathrm m}$. Now, we investigate the effects of temperature on the entanglement. We consider $\mathrm{E}_{\mathrm{N}}$ of the evolved system at a fixed value of detuning. At high temperature, thermal fluctuation always suppress the entanglement of the coupling systems. Therefore, the logarithmic negativity is the decreasing function of temperature. In Fig.\[T\], we plot the logarithmic negativity as a function of temperature at a fixed value of the detuning $\Delta=2\pi\times4\,\mathrm{MHz}$. The black solid line refers to mass $\mathrm{m} = 4\,\mathrm{ng}$ and red dashed line refers to mass $\mathrm{m} = 5\,\mathrm{ng}$. Fig.\[T\] shows that $\mathrm{E}_{\mathrm{N}}$ monotonically decreases with temperature. Moreover, it is noted that $\mathrm{E}_{\mathrm{N}}$ is also very sensitive to the mass of mechanical resonator and quickly decay for large value of the mass.
#### {#section-7 .unnumbered}
Latter, we find the effective coupling between mechanical resonator and Bose-Einstein condensate. We consider the regime in which the dynamics of the cavity mode remains unperturbed due to the motion of the mechanical mode and BEC mode, and slowly mediates the interaction between the two. Therefore, we chose the regime where the cavity mode can be eliminated adiabatically. The Hamiltonian corresponding to the linearized quantum Langevin equations for the fluctuations operator $\partial\mathrm{q}_{\mathrm{m}},\, \partial\mathrm{p}_{\mathrm{m}},\,\partial\mathrm{q}_{\mathrm{a}},\,\partial\mathrm{p}_{\mathrm{a}},\partial\mathrm{q}_{\mathrm{c}}$ and $\partial\mathrm{p}_{\mathrm{c}}$ is given by $$\begin{aligned}
\mathcal{H}&=&\dfrac{\omega_{\mathrm m}}{2}\,\left(\partial\mathrm{p}^2_{\mathrm{m}} +\partial\mathrm{q}^2_{\mathrm{m}}\right) + \dfrac{\omega_{\mathrm a}}{2}\,\left(\partial\mathrm{p}^2_{\mathrm{a}} + \partial\mathrm{q}^2_{\mathrm{a}}\right)\nonumber \\
&& - \mathrm{G}_{\mathrm{mc}}\,\partial\mathrm{q}_{\mathrm{c}}\, \partial\mathrm{q}_{\mathrm{m}} + \mathrm{G}_{\mathrm{ac}}\,\partial\mathrm{q}_{\mathrm{c}}\, \partial\mathrm{q}_{\mathrm{a}}. \label{lh}\end{aligned}$$ The corresponding parameteric regime for the fast cavity mode dynamics is, $\Delta>> \mathrm{G}_{\mathrm{mc}},\mathrm{G}_{\mathrm{ac}}$ or $\kappa >> \mathrm{G}_{\mathrm{mc}},\mathrm{G}_{\mathrm{ac}}$. Due to the second condition, cavity-mediated coherent dynamics is destroyed. Therefore, we only consider the regime where $\Delta$ takes large values, and the fluctuation quadratures of the cavity mode adiabatically follow the dynamics of positions fluctuations of the mechanical resonator and BEC mode. We further assume that both the mechanical resonator and BEC modes to be on resonance, *i.e*, $\omega_{\mathrm a}=\omega_{\mathrm m}=\omega$. On eliminating the photon degree of freedom adiabatically we get the following effective Hamiltonian $$\begin{aligned}
\mathcal{H}_{\mathrm{eff}}&=& \mathcal{H}_{\mathrm{o}}+\mathcal{H}_{\mathrm{ma}} \nonumber \\
& =& \dfrac{\omega}{2} \,\left(\partial\mathrm{p}^2_{\mathrm{m}}+ \partial\mathrm{p}^2_{\mathrm{a}}\right) + \dfrac{\omega + \omega_{1}}{2}\, \partial\mathrm{q}^2_{\mathrm{m}} + \dfrac{\omega + \omega_{2}}{2}\, \partial\mathrm{q}^2_{\mathrm{a}} \nonumber\\
&&+ \dfrac{\mathrm{G_{ma}}}{2} \,\partial\mathrm{q}_{\mathrm{m}}\partial\mathrm{q}_{\mathrm{a}}\,, \label{eff} \end{aligned}$$ where, $\omega_{\mathrm{1}} = 4\,\mathrm{G}^2_{\mathrm{mc}}\,\Delta/(\kappa^2 + \Delta^2)$, $\omega_{\mathrm{2}} = 4\,\mathrm{G}^2_{\mathrm{ac}}\,\Delta/(\kappa^2 + \Delta^2)$ and $\mathrm{G_{ma}} = -8\,\mathrm{G}_{\mathrm{ac}}\,\mathrm{G}_{\mathrm{mc}}\,\Delta/(\kappa^2+\Delta^2)$. It is noted that the effective interaction $\mathrm{G}_{\mathrm{ma}}$ between mechanical resonator and Bose-Einstein condensate is increased as the coupling of mechanical oscillator and BEC is increased with the intracavity field. The effective interaction between a mechanical resonator and Bose-Einstein condensate can be described via the Hamiltonian $\mathcal{H}_{\mathrm{ma}}$, from Eq.(\[eff\]) $$\mathcal{H}_{\mathrm{ma}}=\mathrm{G_{ma}}(\partial \mathrm{a}\,\partial \mathrm{b}^\dag + \partial \mathrm{a}^\dag\,\partial \mathrm{b})/2\,+\, \mathrm{G_{ma}}(\partial \mathrm{a}\,\partial\mathrm{b}\, +\, \partial \mathrm{a}^\dag\,\partial \mathrm{b}^\dag)/2, \label{squeez}$$ where $\mathrm{G_{ma}}$ is the effective coupling strength between mechanical mode and BEC. This Hamiltonian is analogous to the interaction of two optical fields in a nonlinear medium generating the 2-modes squeezed state [@Ou]. The first term in Eq.(\[squeez\]) corresponds to an energy exchange take place between mechanical and atomic modes. The second term in Eq.(\[squeez\]) accounts for the down-conversion interaction, describes the creation and annihilation of the atomic and mechanical modes phonons in pairs, which corresponds to entangling the atomic and mechanical modes. For $\mathrm{G_{ma}}\simeq\omega_{\mathrm{m}}$ or greater, the mechanical resonator and Bose-Einstein condensate are entangled, and the parameters are chosen such that this condition is fulfilled.
**[Experimental detection]{}**
==============================
For experimental realization of the generated entanglement, one has to measure several quadrature correlations [@Duan] as have been experimentally measured for the entanglement of the two optical modes [@Laurat]. However, in our case we consider another Fabry Perot cavity adjacent to first one and is driven by a weak laser field, a scheme of this kind has been discussed in [@Vitali]. In addition, we assume that the movable mirror is perfect reflector at both sides so there is entanglement between the optical modes of the two cavities. The equation of motion of the annihilation operator $\mathrm{c_1}$ of the optical mode of the second cavity similar to the linearized version of Eq.(\[linrz\]) is $$\begin{aligned}
\partial\dot{\mathrm{c}}_1 &=& -\left(\kappa_1+i\,\Delta_1 \right)\partial \mathrm{c}_1 +i\dfrac{\mathrm{G}_{\mathrm{mc1}}}{2}\left(\partial\mathrm{b}+\partial\mathrm{b}^\dag\right)\nonumber\\
&&-i\dfrac{\mathrm{G}_{\mathrm{ac1}}}{2}\left(\partial\mathrm{a}\,+\,\partial\mathrm{a}^\dag\right)+\sqrt{2\,\kappa_1}\, \mathrm{c}_{\mathrm{in1}}\,, \label{c2}\end{aligned}$$ where $\kappa_1$, $ \Delta_1 $ and $\mathrm{c_{in_1}}$ are the cavity decay rate, effective detuning and the input noise of the second cavity mode respectively. In addition, $\mathrm{G_{mc1}}$ and $\mathrm{G_{ac1}}$ are the effective coupling rates of the second cavity mode to the mechanical resonator and Bose-Einstein condensate respectively. Moreover, we assume $\left<\mathrm{c}\right>_\mathrm{ss} >> \left<\mathrm{c}\right>_\mathrm{ss1}$ and $\Delta_1=\omega_{\mathrm{m}}>>\kappa$, $\mathrm{G_{mc1}}$, $\mathrm{G_{ac1}}$. Therefore, in the rotating frame at $\Delta_1=\omega_{\mathrm m}$, Eq.(\[c2\]) for slow variables $\partial \tilde{o}(t)=\partial o(t)\mathrm{exp}\left(i\omega_{\mathrm{m}}t\right) $ can be rewritten as $$\begin{aligned}
\partial\dot{\tilde{\mathrm{c}}}_1 &=& -\kappa_1 \partial \tilde{\mathrm{c}}_1 + \dfrac{i}{2}\left[\mathrm{G_{mc1}}\partial\tilde{\mathrm{b}}-\mathrm{G_{ac1}}\partial\tilde{\mathrm{a}}\right]\nonumber\\
&&+\sqrt{2\,\kappa_1} \tilde{\mathrm{c}}_{\mathrm{in1}}. \label{slow}\end{aligned}$$ Here, we assume $\omega_{\mathrm{m}}=\omega_{\mathrm{a}}=\omega$ and neglect the fast oscillating terms at frequency $2\omega$. On eliminating the cavity mode adiabatically, Eq.(\[slow\]) can be written as $$\partial\tilde{\mathrm{c}}_1\simeq \dfrac{i}{2\kappa_1}\left[\mathrm{G_{mc1}}\partial\tilde{b} - \mathrm{G_{ac1}}\partial\tilde{a}\right]+ \sqrt{\dfrac{2}{\kappa_1}}\tilde{\mathrm{c}}_{\mathrm{in1}}.$$ According to the stranded input-output relation [@Gardiner], $\tilde{\mathrm c}_{\mathrm{out1}}=\sqrt{2\,\kappa_1}\,\partial\tilde{\mathrm {c}}_1- \tilde{\mathrm{c}}_{\mathrm{in1}}$, the output field is given by $$\tilde{\mathrm c}_{\mathrm{out1}}=\dfrac{i}{2\kappa_1}\left[\mathrm{G_{mc1}}\partial\tilde{b} - \mathrm{G_{ac1}}\partial\tilde{a}\right] + \tilde{\mathrm{c}}_{\mathrm{in1}}. \label{homo}$$ From Eq.(\[homo\]) we can measure the $\mathrm{G_{mc1}}\partial\tilde{b} - \mathrm{G_{ac1}}\partial\tilde{a}$ by homodyning the output of the second cavity mode. Therefore, all the entries of the correlation matrix can be determined by measuring the correlation between the output of the two cavities, hence from the correlation matrix logarithmic negativity can be calculated numerically.
**[Conclusion]{}**
==================
In conclusion, we discuss quantum correlation in a system which consists of Bose-Einstein condensates trapped inside a Fabry-Perot cavity with a moving end mirror driven by single mode optical field. We describe a scheme to generate the steady state entanglement of the motional degree of freedom of the nano-mechanical resonator (end mirror of the cavity) and collective oscillation of the atomic density of the Bose-Einstein condensate. Moreover, it is observed that the entanglement generated between Bose-Einstein condensate and nano-mechanical resonator is very sensitive with respect to temperature and persist only upto $20\,\mathrm{\mu K}$ and $100 \,\mathrm{\mu K}$ for mass $4\, \mathrm{ng}$ and $5\, \mathrm{ng}$, respectively. The generated entanglement is measured by considering the second optical cavity driven by a weak laser field.
[99]{}
T. J. Kippenberg and K. J. Vahala, Science **321**, 1172 (2008). V. B. Braginsky, *Measurement of Weak Forces in Physics Experiments* (University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1977). S. Mancini, V. Giovannetti, D. Vitali and P. Tombesi, Phys. Rev. Lett. **88**, 120401 (2002). J. Zhang, K. Peng, and S. L. Braunstein, Phys. Rev. A **68**, 013808 (2003). L. Tian and P. Zoller, Phys. Rev. Lett. **93**, 266403 (2004). A. Naik, O. Buu, M. D. LaHaye, A. D. Armour, A. A. Clerk, M. P. Blencowe and K. C. Schwab, Nature (London) **443**, 193 (2006). H. Ian, Z. R. Gong, Y. X. Liu, C. P. Sun, and F. Nori, Phys. Rev. A **78**, 013824 (2008). C. Genes, D. Vitali, and P. Tombesi, Phys. Rev. A **77**, 050307(R) (2008); K. J$\ddot{\mathrm{a}}$hne, C. Genes, K. Hammerer, M. Wallquist, E. S. Polzik and P. Zoller, Phys. Rev. A **79**, 063819 (2009). D. Meiser and P. Meystre, Phys. Rev. A **73**, 033417 (2006). C. Genes, H. Ritsch, and D. Vitali, Phys. Rev. A **80**, 061803(R) (2009). D. Rugar, R. Budakian, H. J. Mamin and B. W. Chui, Nature (London) **430**, 329 (2004). V. Braginsky and S. P. Vyatchanin, Phys. Lett. A **293**, 228 (2002). M. A Nielsen and I. L. Chuang, *Quantum Computation and Quantum Information* (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2000). M. Paternostro, D. Vitali, S. Gigan, M. S. Kim, C. Brukner, J. Eisert, and M. Aspelmeyer, Phys. Rev. Lett. **99**, 250401 (2007). D. Vitali, S. Gigan, A. Ferreira, H. R. B$\ddot{\mathrm{o}}$hm, P. Tombesi, A. Guerreiro, V. Vedral, A. Zeilinger, and M. Aspelmeyer, Phys. Rev. Lett. **98**, 030405 (2007). J. Esteve, C. Gross, A. Weller, S. Giovanazzi and M. K. Oberthaler, Nature (London) **455**, 1216 (2008); Ferdinand Brennecke, Tobias Donner, Stephan Ritter, Thomas Bourdel, Michael Köhl and Tilman Esslinger, ibid, **450**, 268 (2007). F. Brennecke, S. Ritter, T. Donner, T. Esslinger, Science **322**, 235 (2008). D. Nagy, P. Domokos, A. Vukics, and H. Ritsch, Eur. Phys. J. D **55**, 659 (2009). C. K. Law, Phys. Rev. A **51**, 2537 (1995). C. Maschler and H. Ritsch, Phys. Rev. Lett. **95**, 260401 (2005). G. Adesso, A. Serafini, and F. Illuminati, Phys. Rev. A **70**, 022318 (2004). R. Simon, Phys. Rev. Lett. **84**, 2726 (2000). L. M. Duan, G. Giedke, J. I. Cirac, and P. Zoller, Phys. Rev. Lett. **84**, 2722 (2000). Z. Y. Ou, S. F. Pereira, H. J. Kimble, and K. C. Peng, Phys. Rev. Lett. **68**, 3663 (1992). J. Laurat, G. Keller, J. A. Oliveira-Huguenin, C. Fabre, T. Coudreau, A. Serafini, G. Adesso, and F. Illuminati, J. Opt. B: Quantum Semiclass. Opt. **7**, S577 (2005). C. W. Gardiner and P. Zoller,*Quantum Noise* (Berlin:Springer-Verlag 2000).
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'Induced coherence in parametric down-conversion between two coherently pumped nonlinear crystals that share a common idler mode can be used as an imaging technique. Based on the interference between the two signal modes of the crystals, an image can be reconstructed. By obtaining an expression for the interference pattern that is valid in both the low- and the high-gain regimes of parametric down-conversion, we show how the coherence of the light emitted by the two crystals can be controlled. With our comprehensive analysis we provide deeper insight into recent discussions about the application of induced coherence to imaging in different regimes. Moreover, we propose a scheme for optimizing the visibility of the interference pattern so that it directly corresponds to the degree of coherence of the light generated in the two crystals. We find that this scheme leads in the high-gain regime to a visibility arbitrarily close to unity.'
address:
- 'Univ. Lille, CNRS, UMR 8523 - PhLAM - Physique des Lasers Atomes et Molécules, F-59000 Lille, France.'
- 'Department of Physics, University of Ottawa, 25 Templeton Street, Ottawa, Ontario K1N 6N5, Canada.'
- 'Department of Physics, University of Ottawa, 25 Templeton Street, Ottawa, Ontario K1N 6N5, Canada.'
- 'Institute of Optics, University of Rochester, Rochester, New York 14627, USA.'
author:
- 'Mikhail I. Kolobov'
- 'Enno Giese, Samuel Lemieux, Robert Fickler'
- 'Robert W. Boyd'
bibliography:
- 'bibliography.bib'
title: Controlling induced coherence for quantum imaging
---
[*Keywords*]{}: induced coherence, parametric down-conversion, nonlinear interferometer, quantum imaging
Introduction
============
Induced coherence without induced emission [@Zou91; @Wang91] is a remarkable phenomenon in which nonclassical features seem to manifest themselves in ordinary interference patterns instead of higher-order correlation functions. The experiment consists of two nonlinear crystals that share a common idler mode and are coherently pumped. By placing an object into the idler mode between the two crystals, its image can be obtained from the interference of the two output signal modes.
In light of the application of nonlinear interferometers to spectroscopy [@Kalashnikov16], the concept of induced coherence has been recently applied to quantum imaging [@Barreto-Lemos14; @Lahiri15], whereas the original experiment [@Zou91] focussed on the physical principle behind the effect. The imaging experiments have been performed in the low-gain regime of parametric down-conversion, where a quantum description and interpretation is the only possibility. However, induced coherence is not restricted to this regime [@Belinsky92] and also persists for higher gain [@Wiseman00]. In particular, essential properties for imaging, such as the the signal-to-noise ratio, improve for the latter [@Shapiro15].
In this article we provide a comprehensive treatment of induced coherence, compare and contrast different regimes of parametric down-conversion, and outline how to optimize the properties of such a setup.
Setup and low-gain interpretation {#subsec_Setup_and_low-gain_interpretation}
---------------------------------
The first experiments [@Zou91; @Wang91] of induced coherence without induced emission were performed with a small parametric gain. In fact, only in the low-gain regime induced emission is suppressed and an intuitive quantum interpretation can be given. In this section we recapitulate the setup used in [@Zou91] and explain the results for low gain with the quantum-mechanical arguments.
A simplified scheme of this experiment is shown in . It consists of two nonlinear crystals A and B optically pumped by a light wave obtained from the same laser source. In the process of parametric down-conversion, each crystal emits its own signal and idler waves. The two signal waves, emitted into separate modes $1'$ and $2'$, are brought to interference through the use of a 50:50 beam splitter S$_2$ and are detected at the detectors D$_1$ and D$_2$. The two idler waves are emitted into the same spatial mode such that crystal A seeds the input idler mode of crystal B. By inserting a filter S$_1$ with intensity transmittance $T$ into the idler mode between the two crystals, one can control the strength of the coupling caused by the idler wave propagating from A to B. Obviously, for $T=0$ the two crystals emit independently and no coherence between the two signal modes $1'$ and $2'$ can be observed when they interfere after the beam splitter S$_2$. However, for a nonvanishing transmittance the wave transmitted by S$_1$ seeds crystal B and therefore establishes coherence between the modes $1'$ and $2'$, which reflects itself in a nonzero visibility in the interference pattern.
![ Setup of an experiment to observe induced coherence. Two second-order nonlinear crystals A and B are pumped by the same coherent pump laser. Both crystals share the same idler mode, whereas their two signal modes interfere at a beam splitter S$_2$ and are detected by two detectors D$_1$ and D$_2$. The coherence induced in crystal B can be controlled by introducing a filter S$_1$ into the idler mode between the two crystals. []{data-label="fig_Setup"}](main-figure0)
The interference in [@Zou91] was observed in the low-gain regime of spontaneous parametric down-conversion, in which case the emission of photons in crystals A and B seems to be completely uncorrelated. If only a single pair of photons is detected, one can argue that the quantum state of the system is a superposition of single-photon state created in crystal A *and* a single-photon state created in crystal B. The visibility of the interference pattern in this regime depends linearly on the amplitude transmittance $\sqrt{T}$ of the filter S$_1$. The interference phenomenon in the single-photon regime and the dependence on $T$ was explained in [@Zou91; @Barreto-Lemos14] in terms of indistinguishability of the photons emitted by the crystals A and B. Indeed, for $T=1$ it is impossible to determine which of two crystals contributed the photon detected at D$_1$ or D$_2$. In the opposite limit of $T=0$ it becomes in principle possible to determine with absolute certainty the origin of the detected photon, wiping out the interference. This explanation is also used in more recent and complicated applications, for example in [@Heuer15].
Connection to previous work and outline
---------------------------------------
The experiment [@Zou91] has attracted great attention after its publication [@Belinsky92; @Burlakov97; @Korystov01; @Burlakov02] and continues to influence the quantum optics community to date [@Barreto-Lemos14; @Shapiro15; @Heuer15]. We shall mention here only a few papers that are closely related to our analysis.
In [@Belinsky92] the experiment from [@Zou91] is analyzed for arbitrary parametric gains in the two crystals and a general expression for the visibility is obtained. The authors conclude that the interference effect observed in [@Zou91] in the low-gain regime will persist in the high-gain regime and pointed out that the visibility becomes diminished if all the modes are seeded. With a very similar treatment, [@Wiseman00] shows that the first-order coherence function of the two modes $1'$ and $2'$ approaches unity in the high-gain regime.
In a recent experiment [@Barreto-Lemos14] the original idea from [@Zou91] was generalized to a spatially multi-mode configuration that allowed them to develop an imaging technique in which the object is sensitive only to the frequency of the idler, but not the one of the signal. The authors were able to obtain an image by detecting the signal photons, even though only the idler photons were sensitive to the object. In [@Shapiro15] it was argued that almost all features of the experiment [@Barreto-Lemos14] are present if crystal A is pumped in the high-gain regime. In fact, some of the imaging properties such as the signal-to-noise ratio is improved in this limit even though the visibility of the interference pattern is decreased.
In we investigate the interference pattern and the visibility of the scheme from [@Zou91] for arbitrary parametric gains of the two crystals similarly to [@Belinsky92]. Furthermore, we derive an expression for the coherence of the two interfering modes $1'$ and $2'$ as suggested by [@Wiseman00].
In we use the previously obtained expressions to find the interference signal in the low-gain regime [@Belinsky92], an intermediate regime in analogy to [@Shapiro15] and the high-gain regime. The conclusion drawn in [@Shapiro15] is that the visibility decreases when going from the low-gain regime to a high gain of crystal A. The same holds if both crystals are strongly pumped. However, in general there are two reasons for deterioration of the visibility in the interference pattern: (i) the intensities of two interfering waves become increasingly different, or (ii) the degree of coherence between these waves deteriorates. Therefore, it is important to understand which one of two reasons (if not both) is responsible for deterioration of the visibility.
We discuss in detail both factors and determine in an optimal value for the visibility in the interference experiment as a function of the transmittance $T$. We find that this optimal visibility does not deteriorate with increasing parametric gain of the crystal A but, on the contrary, improves. Moreover, for high parametric gain and nonvanishing transmittance this optimum visibility attains values arbitrarily close to unity, as predicted in [@Wiseman00] by the behavior of the coherence between the two signal waves $1'$ and $2'$.
Finally, we show in that the signal-to-noise ratio improves for an increasing gain. Unless a higher intensity would destroy the sample, there is no benefit for the signal-to-noise ratio to work in the low-gain regime, as already mentioned for the intermediate regime [@Shapiro15]. We then conclude in .
For completeness, we describe in \[sec\_Induced\_coherence\_in\_the\_Heisenberg\_picture\] each mode at every instance by bosonic creation and annihilation operators and calculate the photon number expectation values at the detectors D$_{1,2}$.
Interference signal and induced coherence {#sec_Interference_signal_and_induced_coherence}
=========================================
To find a convenient treatment for the whole setup, we represent each mode $j =1,2,3,4$ as shown in in terms of annihilation and creation operators $\hat{a}_{j}$ and $\hat{a}_{j}^{\dagger}$ so that the expectation value of the corresponding photon number operator gives the mean photon number of mode $j$. A description of all annihilation operators at every instance of this experiment can be found in \[sec\_Induced\_coherence\_in\_the\_Heisenberg\_picture\]. We use these results to obtain the photon numbers $\hat{N}_{1,2}'' = \hat{a}_{1,2}^{\prime\prime \dagger} \hat{a}_{1,2}''$ that are detected by the detectors D$_{1,2}$.
For a vacuum input, we find from the expression N\_[1,2]{}”= (V\_A+ V\_B + V\_A V\_BT ) (1 2)\[eq\_N12\] for the expectation value in the two output ports. Here, we defined the visibility = 2 . \[eq\_Visibility\] as well as the phase \[eq\_phi\] 2 (u\_A v\_A v\_B\^\*) of the interference fringes, in complete agreement with the results of [@Belinsky92]. Note that $u_j$ and $v_j$ with $U_j-V_j\equiv |u_j|^2-|v_j|^2=1$ are the complex parameters of the Bogoliubov transformation from and describing the parametric process of crystal $j=$A,B with an undepleted pump. Since the parameters $u_j$ and $v_j$ can be represented by hyperbolic functions, they scale exponentially with the parametric gain of the respective crystal. Note that any phase shifter introduced in the idler mode between the crystals or in the signal modes shifts the phase of the interference pattern.
As noted in [@Wiseman00], the ultimate limit of the visibility is in fact given by the first-order coherence of the two arms before the final beam splitter, which can be quantified by the degree of coherence \[eq\_coherence\] \_[12]{}| \_1\^ \_2\^|/ . of the two signal modes $1'$ and $2'$, where we defined the photon number operators $\hat{N}_j'=\hat{a}_j^{\prime\dagger }\hat{a}_j'$. Note that this parameter describes the coherence induced between the two crystals, we will therefore refer to this quantity as *induced coherence*. With the help of and we arrive at the expressions | \_1\^ \_2\^|= as well as $$\label{e_N1prime}
\eqalign{
\left\langle \hat N_{1}'\right\rangle= V_A \cr
\left\langle \hat N_{2}'\right\rangle= (1+ T V_A) V_B,
}$$ where we again assumed a vacuum input state in analogy to \[sec\_Induced\_coherence\_in\_the\_Heisenberg\_picture\]. With this insight, we find \[eq\_gamma\] \_[12]{}= for the induced coherence, in complete agreement with [@Wiseman00]. Note that it is independent of $V_B$, but changes depending on the transmittance $T$ and the gain in crystal A, parameterized by $V_A$.
![ Dependence of the induced coherence $\gamma_{12}$ on the transmittance $T$ for different values of $V_A$. The coherence approaches unity for increasing gain $V_A T\gg 1$ and vanishes for $T=0$. The smallest coherence is obtained in the low-gain regime for $V_A\ll 1$ (black line). []{data-label="fig_gamma_12"}](main-figure1)
We plot the dependence of the coherence on $T$ in for different values of $V_A$. We see that the coherence increases with increasing gain and approaches the value of unity for $V_A T\gg 1$, which we show analytically in . This fact has been already pointed out in [@Wiseman00], but we discuss in the following the connection to different cases in the literature, explain the diminishing visibility in the high-gain regime and find a way to optimize the visibility to its maximum given by the induced coherence.
Regimes of induced coherence {#sec_Regimes_of_induced_coherence}
============================
We derived a general expression for the visibility of the interference signal and the induced coherence in the preceding section, and discuss now three special cases of interest: (i) The low-gain regime in which the interpretation from is valid and the experiments of [@Zou91; @Wang91; @Barreto-Lemos14] were performed. (ii) The case of a high-gain source that is analyzed in [@Shapiro15], where the gain of crystal A is strong, but the one of crystal B is weak. (iii) We increase the gain in both crystals simultaneously and find a deterioration of the visibility for large transmittance in this high-gain regime.
Low-gain regime
---------------
The low-gain regime of spontaneous parametric down-conversion is also contained in our description. We obtain this regime in the limit of vanishing gain, that is, for $V_A=V_B\ll 1$, where in fact induced emission is strongly suppressed [@Zou91]. In this case, we find from as well as , in complete agreement with [@Zou91; @Wang91; @Barreto-Lemos14], that the visibility and induced coherence are related by \[eq\_V\_lg\] \^= =\_[12]{}\^. We notice that in this limit the induced coherence from coincides with the visibility, which means that the coherence induced in the modes $1'$ and $2'$ is the only limiting factor that reduces the visibility. As we shall see later, this is not always the case.
is plotted in as a black line. This dependence on the transmittance has been verified multiple times experimentally and was seen as a quantum signature of the induced coherence. However, in [@Shapiro15] it is pointed out that in this limit the signal-to-noise ratio is very small. This is due to the decreasing amplitude of the detected signal. In fact, we find from the following relation for the expectation values N\_[1,2]{}”\^V\_A (1 2) 1, where we have to keep in mind that the number of photons produced in one crystal corresponds to $V_A \ll 1$ and is extremely small in the spontaneous regime.
High-gain source {#subsec_High-gain_source}
----------------
According to [@Shapiro15], increasing the gain in the source that induces the coherence, that is, crystal A, leads to a much better signal-to-noise ratio. For the remainder of this article, we call this limit the regime of a *high-gain source*. In fact, [@Shapiro15] refers to it as the *classical* regime and contrasts it to the *quantum* regime of spontaneous down-conversion discussed above.
We obtain the same results as [@Shapiro15] in the limit $1 \ll V_A$ and $V_B \ll 1$, where we arrive by at the expression \[eq\_V\_hgs\] \^2 1 for the visibility with a high-gain source. In this regime it is small and, in a naive comparison of with , we in fact find $\mathcal{V}^\mathrm{(hgs)} \ll \mathcal{V}^\mathrm{(lg)}$. However, [@Shapiro15] points out that the signal-to-noise ratio is *better* for a high gain source in comparison to the low-gain case. This result can be seen directly from the relation N\_[1,2]{}”\^ (1 2 2) 1, where, when we identify $V_A \gg 1$ with the number of photons created in crystal A, we find a large signal with small visibility. We come back to this point when we discuss the signal-to-noise ratio in .
In contrast to the low-gain case, the visibility does not correspond to the coherence between the two arms, and, in particular, is significantly smaller than the coherence function (for $T\neq 0$).
High-gain regime {#subsec_High-gain_regime}
----------------
In this section we investigate the influence of increased gain in both crystals. For that, we assume equal gain in both crystals, that is, $V_A=V_B$, and find from that the visibility is given by \[eq\_V\_ep\] \^= 2. We plot this expression for the visibility with dotted lines for different values of $V_A$ in .
![ Visibility of the interference signals for different regimes and different gain $V_A$. The dotted lines show the visibility $\mathcal{V}^\mathrm{(eg)}$, given by , for equal pumping ($V_A=V_B$), the solid lines show the optimal visibility $\mathcal{V}^\mathrm{(opt)}$, defined in . Note that the optimal visibility corresponds to the induced coherence, that is, $\mathcal{V}^\mathrm{(opt)}=\gamma_{12}$, so that the solid lines are exactly the same as in . The low-gain visibility $\mathcal{V}^\mathrm{(lg)}$ is obtained for $V_A=0$ (black line). []{data-label="fig_V_opt"}](main-figure2)
For low transmittance and high gain we have a behavior that is close to the induced coherence $\gamma_{12}$ (the respective solid lines) that corresponds to the optimal visibility (see ), exceeding the low-gain visibility (black line). However, for increasing gain and higher transmittance, the visibility drops significantly below the low-gain result. There is an intuitive explanation for this fact: due to seeding by crystal A, crystal B produces more photons than the first one. Hence, both arms become unevenly populated and the visibility drops for increasing gain. But if the transmittance is sufficiently small, the seeding effect is suppressed (since most photons from crystal A are not transmitted) and both arms have roughly the same intensity. This explains why the visibility follows the coherence for a small transmittance and diminishes for a large one.
Optimization {#sec_Optimization}
============
As pointed out in the previous section, the visibility is limited not only by the induced coherence, but also by the intensity difference in the two modes $1'$ and $2'$ before the second beam splitter. With the help of we find that for \[eq\_opt\_V\_B\] V\_B = the photon-number difference $\langle \hat N_{1}'\rangle-\langle \hat N_{2}'\rangle$ vanishes. By adjusting the pump of crystal B (varying $V_B$) according to the strength of the seed (which is determined by $T$ and $V_A$), the photon number produced by crystal B changes in such a way that it corresponds to the photon number in the other arm of the interferometer. In fact, with this choice of $V_B$ we arrive with at the visibility \[eq\_V\_opt\] \^== \_[12]{}, where we identified the optimized visibly with the induced coherence from .
We depict $\mathcal{V}^\mathrm{(opt)}$ (and by that the induced coherence $\gamma_{12}$) for different gain values in (solid lines) and see that it always exceeds the low-gain limit of spontaneous parametric down-conversion (black line) as well as the visibility for equal pumping, that is, $\mathcal{V}^\mathrm{(ep)}\leq \mathcal{V}^\mathrm{(opt)}=\gamma_{12}$. In fact, we achieve almost perfect visibility in the high-gain regime, which is apparent when we expand for $TV_A\gg 1$ giving rise to \[eq\_hg\_opt\_vis\] \^1 - + (). It is remarkable to note that in the low-gain regime a low transmittance limits the visibility, whereas the optimized version in the high-gain regime approaches unity even for small $T$. This fact can be used to enhance the distinction between two slightly different small values of $T$ and perform high-contrast imaging of objects with low transmittance.
However, we obtain not only the optimal visibility close to unity, but also find an increased signal. Using again the adjusted $V_B$ from in , we arrive at N\_[1,2]{}”\^= V\_A (1 2). Therefore, the overall amplitude of the interference signal also scales with the number of photons produced by crystal A.
To investigate how the transmittance $T$ affects the coherence of the two crystals we compare it to a more general setup. For that, we introduce an additional beam splitter with transmittance $T_2$ in the mode $2'$ after crystal B. By setting either $T$ or $T_2$ to unity, we can switch between two different situations: (i) a non-unity transmittance after crystal B to attenuate the population of mode $2'$ and (ii) a transmittance between the crystal that controls the induced coherence.
Performing exactly the same analysis with an additional beam splitter of transmittance $T_2$ in the output signal mode of crystal B leads to the same expectation value from , where only $V_B$ is replaced by $T_2 V_B$. Hence, the condition for optimal visibility reads \[e\_T2Vb\_opt\] T\_2 V\_B = in analogy to and can be easily interpreted: equal intensities in both arms cannot only be found by adjusting the gain of crystal B, but also by modulating the output of crystal B with the help of the transmittance $T_2$. Hence, using the additional beam splitter only introduces a second parameter to control this photon number.
Signal-to-noise ratio {#sec_Signal_to_noise_ratio}
=====================
Considering that the effect of induced coherence without induced emission was used in [@Barreto-Lemos14] as an imaging technique, not only the visibility is essential, but also the signal-to-noise ratio. In fact, it was pointed out in [@Shapiro15] that for a high-gain source the signal-to-noise ratio is improved in comparison to the low-gain regime. In this section we extend this discussion to the optimized scheme as well as the high-gain regime and show that in both cases the signal-to-noise ratio is even higher.
General expression
------------------
Since in the imaging experiment of [@Barreto-Lemos14] the image was obtained from the difference of the two output signals $\hat{N}_-\equiv \hat{N}_{1}''-\hat{N}_2''$, we restrict our treatment to the same quantity. The signal-to-noise ratio can be defined as the square of the expectation value divided by the variance, that is, \_- = \_-\^2/\_-\^2. From it is easy to see that the expectation value of the photon number difference takes the form \[eq\_N\_-\] \_-= 2 2 . With the operators obtained in \[sec\_Induced\_coherence\_in\_the\_Heisenberg\_picture\] we find after a straightforward, but cumbersome, calculation that \[eq\_SNR\_general\] \_-= for the vacuum expectation value. In the following we investigate this expression in the different regimes.
Note that the equations above as well as in the remainder of this section describe the signal-to-noise ratio for a single mode. However, our treatment can be generalized to the measurement of multiple modes, for example to many pump pulses in analogy to [@Shapiro15]. In fact, we can define the normalized multi-pulse photon-number difference for $p$ pulses (where the previously obtained photon numbers are now labelled by an additional index for the $j$th pulse). Its expectation value corresponds to the one obtained for a single pulse, namely \_-\^[(p)]{} = \_[j=1]{}\^p \_[1]{}”(j)-\_[2]{}”(j) = \_- . Note that we assumed equal gain for all pulses and thus the summation can be performed trivially. We see that the normalized difference of the two output signals remains unchanged and equal to Eq. . In the same way, multiple pulses increase the number of photons produced if the signals of the two detectors are not subtracted. However, the visibility per pulse—by definition normalized to unity—is independent of the number of pulses $p$.
In contrast to this result, we find for the multi-pulse variance \_-\^[(p) 2]{} =\_-\^2 and therefore \_-\^[(p)]{}= p \_-. Hence, the signal-to-noise ratio is increased by (and proportional to) the number of pulses $p$. In the following we discuss only the signal-to-noise ratio of a single pulse. We will see that it does not exceed unity and can take very small values. However, we emphasize that our results can be easily generalized to a multi-pulse treatment by multiplying them with the number of pulses. This way, values larger than unity can be experimentally achieved.
Low-gain regime {#subsec_SNR_Low-gain_regime}
---------------
When we take the low-gain limit in both crystals ($V_A=V_B \ll 1$) we arrive with the help of and at the expression \[eq\_SNR\_lg\] \_-\^2 T V\_A \^2 21 for the signal-to-noise ratio in accordance with [@Shapiro15]. Because the overall amplitude scales with the number of photons generated in one crystal, the signal-to-noise ratio in the low-gain limit is very small. We see this effect when we plot $\mathrm{SNR}_-^\mathrm{(lg)}$ as a function of $\tau =T \cos^2 2 \phi$ in (dashed thick line) for $V_A=0.01$. The fact that $\tau$ depends on two parameters $\phi$ and $T$ accounts for the possible application in phase and absorption imaging.
![ Signal-to-noise ratio of the difference of photon numbers in the two exit ports. The dependence on $\tau = T \cos^22\phi$ reflects the fact that this setup can be used for phase and absorption imaging. We see that the low-gain approximation (lg, dashed thick line) scales with the parameter $V_A$. The ratio increases for an increasing gain in crystal A (hgs, dotted thin lines), where we used the low-gain value of $V_B=0.01$. It is even better if the gain is optimized and the crystals are operated in the high-gain regime, as we see for different values of $V_A$ (opt, solid lines). []{data-label="fig_SNR"}](main-figure3)
High-gain source {#high-gain-source}
----------------
In contrast to the low-gain regime, a high-gain source gives \_-\^ in the limit of $V_B \ll 1$ and $V_A\gg 1$ using and .
This result, as well as , were already obtained in [@Shapiro15], where it was demonstrated that $\mathrm{SNR}_-^\mathrm{(hgs)}$ is larger than $\mathrm{SNR}_-^\mathrm{(lg)}$. We show this effect in , where we plot $\mathrm{SNR}_-^\mathrm{(hgs)}$ for different gain values and depending on $\tau= T \cos^22\phi$. In fact, the low-gain result for $V_A=0.01$ (dashed thick line) is smaller in comparison to the high-gain source (thin dotted lines) for $V_B=0.01$ and different $V_A$. Thus, increasing the gain of crystal A is beneficial for imaging, as already implied in and pointed out by [@Shapiro15].
Optimized gain
--------------
Since our treatment is general enough to include the high-gain regime for both crystals, we demonstrate that this limit is even more beneficial from the point of view of the signal-to-noise ratio. For that, we first discuss the case of an optimized gain following the results from .
When we choose $V_B$ according to so that the visibility is optimal, we arrive with and at the expression \[eq\_SNR-opt\] \_-\^= , which we plot as function of $\tau= T \cos^22\phi$ in for increasing values of $V_A$. We see that it approaches unity for $V_A \tau \gg 1 $ and that $\mathrm{SNR}_-^\mathrm{(opt)}$ (solid lines) is even larger than $\mathrm{SNR}_-^{\mathrm{(hgs)}}$ (thin dotted lines). Note further that this equation reduces to $\mathrm{SNR}_-^\mathrm{(lg)}$ for $V_A \ll 1$. In fact, for small parametric gain we obtain the low-gain limit from (the thick dashed and the black solid line are on top of each other).
High-gain regime {#high-gain-regime}
----------------
One could imagine that the signal-to-noise ratio is better for an optimized visibility compared to the high-gain regime with an equal pumping in both crystals, where the visibility deteriorates. However, we shall show in the following that this reasoning is misleading.
For that, we assume equal gain in both crystals, set $V_A=V_B$ in and , and arrive at \[eq\_SNR\_eg\] \_-\^= . When we now consider the ratio \[eq\_SNR\_ratio\] =1- 1, we see that even though the visibility is optimized, $\mathrm{SNR}_-^\mathrm{(opt)}$ is always *smaller* when compared to an equal gain in both crystals for $T\neq 0$. This can be understood by the fact that the overall signal is smaller if crystal B is adjusted for optimal visibility. However, we see from that this difference vanishes in the high-gain regime ($ V_A T \cos^2 2\phi\gg 1$). Since the behavior is almost exactly the one of , we refrain from plotting additional curves but emphasize that the respective lines would follow closely the solid ones in .
Conclusions {#sec_Conclusions}
===========
In this article we have shown that the effect of induced coherence persists in different regimes of parametric gain for two crystals. Whereas in the low-gain regime of spontaneous parametric-down conversion with suppressed induced emission the induced coherence is limited by the transmittance in the idler mode between two crystals, and, therefore, by the distinguishability of the two sources, it approaches unity in the high-gain regime [@Wiseman00]. However, due to intensity difference of two signal waves before the final beam spitter, the visibility deteriorates with increasing gain. This effect can be compensated by adjusting the gain in the second crystal.
Induced coherence can be used to perform imaging [@Barreto-Lemos14], but the signal-to-noise ratio is small in the low-gain regime [@Shapiro15]. It can be improved by operating crystal A with high parametric gain and even more when both crystals are operated in this regime.
Our results can be generalized to the case where a nonvanishing classical field seeds the input of one of the crystals, which we plan to address in the future. Let us note that we considered in this article a classical pump neglecting depletion. Using such a strong pump field leads necessarily to higher-order photon creation in both crystals. Therefore, a seeding effect of crystal B by an idler photon from crystal A can never be excluded, even in the low-gain regime, where these events are extremely rare.
Our results represent a comprehensive treatment of the effect of induced coherence with a classical pump, explain different regimes discussed in the literature [@Belinsky92; @Wiseman00; @Shapiro15] and show the potential for possible applications for imaging in the high-gain regime. In this regime, we observe a better signal-to-noise ratio and can optimize the visibility such that the contrast for small transmittance is enhanced.
We thank M. Lahiri for fruitful discussions. MIK acknowledges partial financial support by the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 665148 (QCUMbER). He also thanks the Max Planck Centre for Extreme and Quantum Photonics, University of Ottawa, where part of this work was accomplished, for its hospitality during his stay. SL, RF, and RWB gratefully acknowledge support by the Canada Excellence Research Chairs program and the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC). RF acknowledges the support of the Banting postdoctoral fellowship of the NSERC and SL the financial support from Le Fonds de Recherche du Québec Nature et Technologies (FRQNT). EG is grateful to the Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg for an Eugen Lommel stipend.
Heisenberg picture {#sec_Induced_coherence_in_the_Heisenberg_picture}
==================
We shall consider the scheme of in the Heisenberg representation and describe each mode $j=1,2,3,4$ of the nonlinear interferometer in terms of annihilation and creation operators $\hat{a}_{j}$ and $\hat{a}_{j}^{\dagger}$, obeying standard single-mode commutations relations, $[\hat{a}_{j},\hat{a}_{k}^{\dag}]=\delta_{j,k}$, and normalized so that $\langle \hat{N}_{j} \rangle=\langle \hat{a}_{j}^{\dagger} \hat{a}_{j} \rangle$ gives the mean photon number in the corresponding mode $j$. This description is in analogy to [@Belinsky92; @Wiseman00].
We start by noting that the transformation $$\label{eq_trafo_A}
\eqalign{
\hat{a}_1' = u_A \hat{a}_1 + v_A \hat{a}_3^\dagger \cr
\hat{a}_3' = u_A \hat{a}_3 + v_A \hat{a}_1^\dagger
}$$ describes the photon annihilation operators in the output modes $1'$ and $3'$ of crystal A for an undepleted classical pump. Here, $\hat{a}_1$ and $\hat{a}_3$ describe the photon annihilation operators for the two input modes according to . Note that this transformation corresponds to a unitary Bogoliubov transformation with \[eq\_bogu\_A\] 1=|u\_A|\^2-|v\_A|\^2U\_A - V\_A. Furthermore, $u_A$ and $v_A$ are in general complex and $U_A$ and $V_A$ can be represented by respective hyperbolic functions.
The transmittance in the idler modes between the crystals A and B leads to the transformation $$\eqalign{
\hat{a}_3''= t \hat{a}_3' + r \hat{a}_4 \cr
\hat{a}_4'= t \hat{a}_4 - r \hat{a}_3'
}$$ for the annihilation operators in the output modes $3''$ and $4'$ of the beam splitter S$_1$. Here, we assumed $t,r \in \mathbb{R}$, which fulfil the relation \[eq\_transmit\] 1= t\^2 + r\^2 T + R, where $T$ and $R$ denote the transmittance and reflectivity of the intensity. The annihilation operators $\hat{a}_3'$ and $\hat{a}_4$ represent the input modes of the beam splitter. Since $\hat{a}_3'$ is the output of crystal A, we find from the expression \[eq\_a3doubleprime\] \_3”= t v\_A \_1\^+ t u\_A \_3 + r \_4 .
The transformation $$\label{eq_trafo_B}
\eqalign{
\hat{a}_2' = u_B \hat{a}_2 + v_B \hat{a}_3^{\prime\prime\dagger}\cr
\hat{a}_3''' = u_B \hat{a}_3'' + v_B \hat{a}_2^\dagger
}$$ describes the action of crystal B and fulfils, in analogy to , the relation \[eq\_bogu\_B\] 1=|u\_B|\^2-|v\_B|\^2U\_B - V\_B. Since crystal B is seeded by one of the output modes of beam splitter S$_1$, we find with the help of the expression \[eq\_a2prime\] \_2’ = t v\_A\^\* v\_B \_1 + u\_B \_2 + t u\_A\^\* v\_B \_3\^+ r v\_B \_4\^, where $*$ denotes the complex conjugate.
So far, we have obtained the expression for the annihilation operators in the modes $1'$ and $2'$, which only depend on the input modes $1,2,3$ and $4$. These two modes interfere at the final beam splitter S$_2$, which we assume to be a 50:50 beam splitter, and thus fulfil the relation $$\eqalign{\hat{a}_1''= \left(\hat{a}_1' + \hat{a}'_2\right)/\sqrt{2}\cr
\hat{a}_2''= \left(\hat{a}_1' - \hat{a}'_2\right)/\sqrt{2}}$$ describing the two output modes $1''$ and $2''$. With and we therefore arrive at $$\eqalign{
\hat{a}_{1,2}''=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\big[& \left( t v_A^* v_B \pm u_A \right)\hat{a}_1+ u_B \hat{a}_2 \cr
&+ \left(t u_A^* v_B \pm v_A \right) \hat{a}_3^\dagger + r v_B \hat{a}_4^\dagger\big]
}$$ for the annihilation operators before detection.
With these results we are able to calculate the expectation values of the photon numbers $\hat{N}_{1,2}''=\hat{a}_{1,2}^{\prime \prime \dagger} \hat{a}_{1,2}''$ in the two exit ports and arrive at $$\label{eq_app_N12}
\eqalign{\hat{N}_{1,2}''= \frac{1}{2}\Big[& \left| t v_A^* v_B \pm u_A \right|^2 \hat{N}_1 + U_B \hat{N}_2+ R V_B \left(\hat{N}_4+1\right)\\
& + \left|t u_A^* v_B \pm v_A \right|^2 \left(\hat{N}_3+1\right) \\
& + \mathrm{~combinations~of~input~modes}\Big].
}$$ Since the crystals is not seeded, we assume a vacuum input with $\langle\hat{a}_j^\dagger \hat{a}_k \rangle=0$ for all combinations $j,k=1,2,3,4$. With this insight and the definition t u\_A v\_A v\_B\^\* (2 ) we use , , as well as to find from the expectation values $$\label{eq_app_N12_expectation}
\eqalign{
\left\langle \hat{N}_{1,2}''\right\rangle= \frac{1}{2}\Big[& (V_A+V_B+T V_A V_B)\cr
& \pm 2 \sqrt{T U_A V_A V_B} \cos(2\phi) \Big]
}$$ for the photon number at the detector D$_1$ and D$_2$.
{#section .unnumbered}
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'Smoothed particle hydrodynamics is a particle-based, fully Lagrangian, method for fluid-flow simulations. In this work, fundamental concepts of the method are first briefly recalled. Then, we present a thorough comparison of three different incompressibility treatments in SPH: the weakly compressible approach, where a suitably-chosen equation of state is used; and two truly incompressible methods, where the velocity field projection onto a divergence-free space is performed. A noteworthy aspect of the study is that, in each incompressibility treatment, the same boundary conditions are used (and further developed) which allows a direct comparison to be made. Problems associated with implementation are also discussed and an optimal choice of the computational parameters has been proposed and verified. Numerical results show that the present state-of-the-art truly incompressible method (based on a velocity correction) suffer from density accumulation errors. To address this issue, an algorithm, based on a correction for both particle velocities and positions, is presented. The usefulness of this density correction is examined and demonstrated in the last part of the paper.'
address:
- 'Institute of Fluid-Flow Machinery, Polish Academy of Sciences, ul. Fiszera 14, 80-952 Gdańsk, Poland'
- 'Electricité de France, Direction de la Recherche et du Développement, Département Mécanique de Fluides, Energies et Environnement, 6 quai Watier, F-78401 Chatou, France'
author:
- 'K. Szewc'
- 'J. Pozorski'
- 'J.-P. Minier'
title: Analysis of the incompressibility constraint in the Smoothed Particle Hydrodynamics method
---
particle method ,SPH ,incompressible flows ,density correction
Introduction {#sec:introduction}
============
Smoothed Particle Hydrodynamics (SPH) is a fully Lagrangian, particle-based approach for fluid-flow computations. This method was independently proposed by Gingold & Monaghan and Lucy [@Lucy; @1977] to simulate some astrophysical phenomena at the hydrodynamic level (compressible flow). Nowadays, SPH is more and more often used for flows with interfaces and in geophysical applications. Its main advantage over Eulerian techniques is that there is no requirement of the grid. Therefore, the SPH method is natural to use for complex geometries or multi-phase flows.
An important issue in SPH is the proper implementation of the incompressibility constraints. In the present work, three different implementations are critically discussed and compared for a selection of validation examples. The first one is the Weakly Compressible SPH (WCSPH), which is the most common technique. It involves the standard set of governing equations closed by a suitably-chosen, artificial equation of state, cf. Sect. \[sec:weakly compressible sph\]. The second and third implementations, called truly incompressible SPH (ISPH), are based on the Projection Method, introduced in SPH by Cummins & Rudman . Generally in ISPH, a Poisson equation is solved to obtain the divergence-free velocity field, cf. Sect. \[sec:truly incompressible sph\]. In the second approach, this Poisson equation is solved on an auxiliary regular mesh. Here, this method is called the Grid-Projected Poisson Solver (GPPS). Since this approach consists in combining the Eulerian and Lagrangian techniques, it is not an optimal choice for free-surface flows; yet, since SPH has a huge potential in the subject of multi-phase flows, its usefulness seems to be worth of discussion. The third approach considered is the ISPH scheme with the Particle Poisson Solver (PPS), cf. Sect. \[sec:particle poisson solver\]. In this concept the Poisson equation is rewritten in SPH formulation and solved on the grid of Lagrangian points (particles). The main advantage of this idea is that the additional domain discretization and related discretization errors are avoided. The paper is also related to the work of Lee et al. [@Lee; @et; @al.; @2008], where a similar comparison between WCSPH and ISPH - PPS approaches has been done. However, in the present work, a comprehensive analysis of boundary conditions is performed. Moreover, since we use the same (ghost-particle) boundary conditions for both WCSPH and ISPH approaches, our comparison offers a new look at the usefulness of the incompressibility variants. For the sake of validation for both single- and two-phase flows, the three different implementations of the incompressibility constraints are compared for the lid-driven cavity flow and the Rayleigh-Taylor instability. For the former case, the impact of various computational parameters on the results have been analyzed and optimal setting has been found; it is consequently used also for the latter case.
A very good comparison of ISPH solvers was presented by Xu et al. [@Xu; @et; @al.; @2009]. However, the authors do not discuss the problem of accumulating density errors in the ISPH approach. Since, like other authors , we have been faced with such a problem, we decided to examine the usefulness of the correction algorithm proposed by Pozorski and Wawreńczuk , cf. Sect. \[sec:pozorski and wawrenczuk constant-density approach\]. This formulation, used also in the PDF computations of turbulent flows , consists in retrieving the constant fluid density field by applying the correction to the particles’ position. In practice, that procedure involves the computations of the second Poisson solver. The effectiveness of such an approach and the improvement of results are demonstrated.
Another common field of research in SPH is the proper implementation of the boundaries. In the present work, among many techniques, the ghost-particle boundary approach is applied. This implementation involves the use of fictitious external particles that are reflections of the fluid particles in the computational domain. The main advantages of this method are simplicity and conformity with different phases of the fluid [@Valizadeh; @et; @al.; @2008]. Computing the lid-driven cavity test problem with the WCSPH approach, we have found that the standard implementation of the no-slip boundary condition by the ghost-particle approach may cause the stability problems. Our proposal to overcome these difficulties is based on the combination of the free-slip and no-slip boundary conditions. The detailed discussion of this problem is presented in Sect. \[sec:boundary conditions\].
Formulation of the SPH method {#sec:formulation of the SPH method}
=============================
The main idea behind SPH is the introduction of the kernel interpolants for the field quantities so that the fluid dynamics is represented by particle evolution equations. The SPH method is based on three approximations.
The first is interpolation of the field quantities at a point. To construct it, we utilize an integral interpolant ${\widehat{A}}(\mathbf r)$ of any field $A(\mathbf r)$ (for simplicity we consider here a scalar field) $$\label{integral interpolant}
{\widehat{A}}(\mathbf r) = \int_{\Omega} A(\mathbf r') W(\mathbf r - \mathbf r', h) d\mathbf r',$$ where the integration is over all the domain $\Omega$ and $W(\mathbf r, h)$ is a weighting function (the kernel) with the parameter $h$ called the smoothing length (a linear dimension of smoothing). Generally, the kernel should posses a symmetrical form $$\label{kernel symmetry}
W(\mathbf r, h) = W(-\mathbf r, h),$$ satisfy the limit condition $$\label{kernel prop 1}
\lim_{h \rightarrow 0} W(\mathbf r, h) = \delta(\mathbf r),$$ where $\delta({\mathbf r})$ is the Dirac delta distribution, and should be normalized so that $$\label{kernel prop 2}
\int_{\Omega} W(\mathbf r, h) d\mathbf r = 1.$$ Additionally, the kernel should be at least as many times differentiable as the field $A$. Taking into consideration the computational effort and the proper implementation of the boundary conditions (Sect. \[sec:boundary conditions\]), it is worth to use compact support kernels. Since there are a lot of possibilities to choose $W(\mathbf r, h)$, we decided to compare solutions obtained employing three different 2D kernels (Sect. \[sec:lid-driven cavity\]): the cubic B-spline form $$\label{cubic spline kernel}
W(\mathbf r, h) = \frac{10}{7\pi h^2} \begin{cases}
1 - \frac{3}{2} {q}^2 + \frac{3}{4} {q}^3, & \text{for } 0 \leq {q}\leq 1, \\
\frac{1}{4} \left(2-{q}\right)^3, & \text{for } 1 \leq {q}\leq 2, \\
0, & \text{otherwise},
\end{cases}$$ the quintic form proposed by Wendland [@Wendland; @1995] $$\label{quintic Wendland}
W(\mathbf r, h) = \frac{7}{4\pi h^2} \begin{cases}
\left( 1-\frac{q}{2} \right)^4
\left(2q+1\right), & \text{for } |\mathbf r| \leq 2h, \\
0, & \text{otherwise},
\end{cases}$$ and the quintic B-spline form introduced by Morris [@Morris; @et; @al.; @1997] $$\label{quintic Morris}
W(\mathbf r, h) = \frac{7}{478\pi h^2} \begin{cases}
\left(3-{q}\right)^5 - 6\left(2-{q}\right)^5 + 15\left(1-{q}\right)^5, & \text{for } 0 \leq {q}\leq 1, \\
\left(3-{q}\right)^5 - 6\left(2-{q}\right)^5, & \text{for } 1 \leq {q}\leq 2, \\
\left(3-{q}\right)^5, & \text{for } 2 \leq {q}\leq 3, \\
0, & \text{otherwise},
\end{cases}$$ where $q = |\mathbf r|/h$.
The second approximation of the SPH technique is the discretization of space. It is done through dividing the domain into a fine-grained representation (particles). Each particle carries the properties of the field. The integral interpolant ${\widehat{(\cdot)}}$, Eq. (\[integral interpolant\]), becomes then the summation interpolant ${\left\langle \cdot \right\rangle}$ $$\label{summation interpolant}
{\left\langle A \right\rangle}(\mathbf r) = \sum_{b} A(\mathbf r_b) W(\mathbf r - \mathbf r_b, h)
\Omega_b,$$ where $\mathbf r_b$ and $\Omega_b$ denote the position and volume of the particle $b$. The SPH task involves the foregoing computations of the interpolant at each particle, so that Eq. (\[summation interpolant\]) may be rewritten into the common form $$\label{SPH interpolant}
{\left\langle A \right\rangle}_a = \sum_b A_b W_{ab}(h) \Omega_b,$$ where ${\left\langle A \right\rangle}_a = {\left\langle A \right\rangle}(\mathbf r_a)$, $A_a = A(\mathbf r_a)$ and $W_{ab}(h) = W_{ba}(h) = W(\mathbf r_b - \mathbf r_a, h)$.
An additional advantage of SPH reveals with the differentiation of fields. In accordance with (\[integral interpolant\]), the gradient of $A(\mathbf r)$ assumes the form $$\label{nabla integral interpolant}
{\widehat{\nabla A}}(\mathbf r) = \int_{\Omega} \nabla A(\mathbf r') W (\mathbf r - \mathbf r', h) d\mathbf r'.$$ Taking advantage of the integration by parts rule and utilizing the kernel symmetry, we can transform the foregoing equation into $$\label{nabla integral interpolant after integration by parts}
{\widehat{\nabla A}}(\mathbf r) = \int_{\partial \Omega} A(\mathbf r')W(\mathbf r - \mathbf r') \mathbf n' dS + \int_{\Omega} A(\mathbf r') \nabla' W (\mathbf r - \mathbf r', h) d\mathbf r',$$ where $\mathbf n'=\mathbf n({\mathbf r'})$ is the normal vector to surface $\partial \Omega$. Generally, the first term does not necessarily vanish for finite domain sizes, cf. . However, it is a common practice to neglect this term and deal with the boundaries explicitly. The SPH form (discretization) of (\[nabla integral interpolant after integration by parts\]) brings the common rule $$\label{SPH nabla interpolant}
{\left\langle \nabla A \right\rangle}_a = \sum_b A_b \nabla_a W_{ab}(h) \Omega_b.$$ Since the nabla operator acts only on the kernel, the gradient of the field is dependent only on the values of the fields at particles, not gradients.
The third SPH feature is the assumption that the field value $A_a$ at a point and its SPH approximation ${\left\langle A \right\rangle}$ are in relation $${\left\langle A \right\rangle}_a \approx A_a.$$ Since, in the case of the time dependent simulations, for each time step, the calculation of the field quantities is performed using the results obtained in the previous step, the above introduced assumption becomes natural.
Governing equations {#sec:governing equations}
===================
The full set of governing equations for incompressible viscous flow is composed of the Navier-Stokes (N-S) equation $$\label{NS}
\frac{d \mathbf u}{dt} = -\frac{1}{\varrho} \nabla p + \nu \nabla^2 \mathbf u +
\mathbf f,$$ where $\varrho=const$ is the density, $\mathbf u$ the velocity, $t$ the time, $p$ the pressure, $\nu$ the kinematic viscosity and $\mathbf f$ an external force, and the continuity equation $$\label{continuity equation}
\frac{d\varrho}{dt} = -\varrho \nabla \cdot \mathbf u,$$ that for $\varrho = const$ arises to the form $$\label{div u = 0}
\nabla \cdot \mathbf u = 0.$$
The whole set of governing equations should be expressed in the SPH formalism. Utilizing the relation (\[SPH nabla interpolant\]), the divergence of velocity becomes $$\label{SPH div u basic}
{\left\langle \nabla \cdot \mathbf u \right\rangle}_a = \sum_{b} \mathbf u_b \cdot \nabla_a
W_{ab}(h)\Omega_b.$$ Therefore, the continuity equation (\[continuity equation\]) takes the form $$\label{SPH continuity equation basic}
\frac{d\varrho_a}{dt} = -\varrho_a \sum_b \frac{m_b}{\varrho_b} \mathbf{u}_b \cdot \nabla_a W_{ab}(h),$$ where $m_b/\varrho_b = \Omega_b$. It is important to note that various ways exist to express the divergence, for example, $$\label{SPH continuity symmetrical}
\frac{d\varrho_a}{dt} = \sum_{b} m_b \mathbf{u}_{ab} \cdot \nabla_a W_{ab}(h),$$ where $\mathbf{u}_{ab} = \mathbf u_a - \mathbf u_b$. The advantage of the above form over (\[SPH continuity equation basic\]) is the symmetry with swapping particles $a$ and $b$. Therefore, in practice, it is more accurate to use (\[SPH continuity symmetrical\]) [@Morris; @1996]. However, there exists an alternative formulation. The fluid density can be computed directly from the SPH formula (\[SPH interpolant\]) $$\label{SPH direct density computation}
\varrho_a = \sum_b \varrho_b W_{ab}(h) \Omega_{b} = \sum_b m_b W_{ab}(h).$$ A practical disadvantage of this approach is that $\varrho$ must be evaluated by summing over the particles before other quantities [@Morris; @et; @al.; @1997]. Therefore, the computational effort increases (Sect. \[sec:lid-driven cavity\]). Another disadvantage is the problem with representing sharp discontinuities near material interfaces. To avoid this difficulty, Hu & Adams suggested to use the form $$\label{SPH direct density computation multiphase}
\varrho_a = m_a \sum_b W_{ab}(h).$$
In the SPH technique, the pressure N-S term is responsible for ensuring the incompressibility constraint (Sect. \[sec:incompressibility treatment\]). Utilizing (\[SPH nabla interpolant\]) it takes the form $$\label{SPH NS pressure term basic}
{\left\langle \frac{1}{\varrho} \nabla p \right\rangle}_a = \frac{1}{\varrho_a} \sum_b \frac{m_b}{\varrho_b} p_b \nabla_a W_{ab}(h).$$ Similarly to the continuity equation (\[SPH continuity symmetrical\]) there is a possibility to obtain more useful gradient approximations. In the present paper, we utilize the form proposed by Colagrossi and Landrini $$\label{SPH NS pressure term symmetrical colagrossi}
{\left\langle \frac{1}{\varrho} \nabla p \right\rangle}_a = \sum_{b} m_b \frac{p_a + p_b}{\varrho_a \varrho_b} \nabla_a W_{ab}(h).$$ is expressed as a combination of the finite difference and SPH discretisations [@Cummins; @et; @al.; @1997] . For the present work, we utilize the form (with a small regularising parameter $\eta=0.01h$) $$\label{SPH NS viscous term}
{\left\langle \nabla (\nu \nabla \cdot \mathbf u) \right\rangle}_a = \sum_{b} m_b \left( 8 \frac{\nu_a
+ \nu_b}{\varrho_a + \varrho_b} \frac{\mathbf u_{ab} \cdot \mathbf
r_{ab}}{r_{ab}^2 + \eta^2} \right) \nabla_a W_{ab}(h).$$ Since SPH is fully Lagrangian approach, the particle advection equation completes the system $$\label{SPH equation of motion}
\frac{d\mathbf r_a}{dt} = \mathbf u_a.$$
Incompressibility treatment {#sec:incompressibility treatment}
===========================
To compute incompressible flows in the Eulerian CFD, two approaches are commonly used: the artificial compressibility method (where a specific equation of state is applied) and the pressure-correction technique (where the velocity field is projected onto the divergence-free space). Generally, the analogs of these techniques are also used in the SPH approach. They are presented in the following.
Weakly Compressible SPH {#sec:weakly compressible sph}
-----------------------
The most common technique is the weakly compressible SPH (WCSPH). It involves the set of governing equations closed by a suitably chosen, artificial equation of state $p=p(\varrho)$. Since the fluid pressure is an explicit function of $\varrho$, the density gradient exerts an influence on the particle motion. The commonly used equation of state has the form [@Batchelor; @1967] $$\label{equation of state}
p=\frac{c^2\varrho_0}{\gamma} \left[ \left( \frac{\varrho}{\varrho_0} \right)^\gamma - 1 \right],$$ where the reference density $\varrho_0$, the numerical sound speed $c$ and parameter $\gamma$ are suitably chosen to reduce the density fluctuations down to demanded level. In the present work, to assure density variations lower than 1%, we set $\gamma=7$ and $c$ at the level at least $10$ times higher than the maximal fluid velocity [@Monaghan; @1994]. However, since the sound speed is high, the time step should be, correspondingly, very small (cf. Sect. \[sec:time step criteria\]). Therefore, the computational efficiency is the main weakness of the WCSPH method.
Truly Incompressible SPH with the grid-projected Poisson solver {#sec:truly incompressible sph}
---------------------------------------------------------------
The newest promising technique is the truly incompressible SPH (ISPH). It is based on the Projection Method which is a common approach for numerically solving time-dependent incompressible fluid-flow problems. In this technique the pressure needed to ensure incompressibility is found by projecting the calculated velocity field onto the divergence-free space . This is possible due to the Helmholtz decomposition which states: every vector field $\mathbf A$ that is twice continuously differentiable and vanishes faster than $1/r$ at infinity can be decomposed into the gradient and the curl parts as follows [@Gryffits; @1999] $$\label{Helmholtz decomposition}
\mathbf A = \nabla \phi + \nabla \times \mathbf B = \mathbf A_{\text{curl free}} + \mathbf A_{\text{div free}},$$ where $\phi$ and $\mathbf B$ are suitably chosen and $$\label{Helmholtz decomposition projection}
\begin{split}
\nabla \times \mathbf A_{\text{curl free}} &= \nabla \times (\nabla \phi) = 0,
\\
\nabla \cdot \mathbf A_{\text{div free}} &= \nabla \cdot (\nabla \times \mathbf
B) = 0.
\end{split}$$ In the ISPH approach, the decomposition procedure begins with splitting the integration of the N-S equation (\[NS\]) on the time interval $\delta t=t^{n+1}-t^n$ into two parts. The first, so-called predictor step, gives the fractional velocity $\mathbf u^*$ $$\label{ISPH predictor}
\frac{\mathbf u^* - \mathbf u^n}{\delta t} = \nu \nabla^2 \mathbf u^n + \mathbf
f^n.$$ The right-hand side of the above equation contains all the N-S terms except the one connected with the pressure. The second part of the procedure is the correction step $$\label{ISPH corrector}
\frac{\mathbf u^{n+1} - \mathbf u^*}{\delta t} = -\frac{1}{\varrho} \nabla p^{n+1}.$$ It imposes the correction of $\mathbf u^*$ to ensure compliance with the divergence-free constraint. To obtain an appropriate pressure $p^{n+1}$ we write the divergence of Eq. (\[ISPH corrector\]) $$\label{div of ISPH corrector}
\nabla \cdot \left(\frac{\mathbf u^{n+1} - \mathbf u^*}{\delta t} \right) =\nabla \cdot \left( -\frac{1}{\varrho} \nabla p^{n+1} \right).$$ Since we expect a divergence-free velocity field at the end of the time step, we require that $\nabla \cdot
\mathbf u^{n+1}=0$. Therefore, the formula (\[div of ISPH corrector\]) arises into the Poisson equation $$\label{Poisson}
\nabla \cdot \left( \frac{1}{\varrho} \nabla p^{n+1} \right) = \frac{\nabla \cdot \mathbf u^{*}}{\delta t}.$$ Now, the correction step (\[ISPH corrector\]), performed with $p^{n+1}$ obtained from the above relation, yields the divergence-free velocity field.
The common way to solve the Poisson equation in the SPH approach is to compute it directly on particles (irregular grid), cf. Sect. \[sec:particle poisson solver\]. However, there exists another, less useful (specially for free-surface flows), but much more efficient treatment, called here the Grid-Projected Poisson Solver (GPPS). It consists in projecting the r.h.s. of (\[Poisson\]) on an auxiliary grid and then to crunch it with some commonly known (from Eulerian approaches) solvers. This is a standard technique in various particle methods (more precisely, particle-mesh methods) such as Lagrangian PDF or Vortex-in-Cell.
Truly incompressible SPH with the particle Poisson solver {#sec:particle poisson solver}
---------------------------------------------------------
Employing together the SPH divergence and gradient operators, it is straightforward to obtain the direct SPH representation of the Laplace operator on the l.h.s. of (\[Poisson\]). However, Cummins & Rudman performed a simple one-dimensional hydrostatic test to show that such an approach produces a distinct pressure decoupling pattern. To avoid this problem, it is common to utilize the approximate Laplacian operator with the similar form as the viscous N-S term (\[SPH NS viscous term\]) $$\label{PPS pressure 1}
{\left\langle \nabla \cdot \frac{1}{\varrho} \nabla p \right\rangle}_a \approx \sum_{b} \frac{m_b}{\varrho_a} \frac{4}{\varrho_a + \varrho_b} \frac{p_{ab} \mathbf r_{ab} \cdot \nabla_a W_{ab}(h)}{r_{ab}^2 + \eta^2},$$ where $p_{ab} = p_a - p_b$. The pressure gradient is here computed using a finite-difference approximation. In this concept the Poisson equation (\[Poisson\]) is solved on the irregular grid of Lagrangian points (particles); therefore, this variant of ISPH will be called here the Particle Poisson Solver (PPS).
However, the main disadvantage of the PPS (Sect. \[sec:lid-driven cavity\]) is its inefficiency. Dealing with the Poisson equation using Eq. (\[PPS pressure 1\]) consists in solving a linear equation system with a sparse irregular coefficient matrix. It requires much more CPU time and memory than the Poisson solvers performed on a regular grid.
Time step criteria {#sec:time step criteria}
==================
In the way to assure the stability of the SPH scheme, several time step criteria must be satisfied [@Morris; @et; @al.; @1997] [@Monaghan; @1992]. In the case of the ISPH approach, the CFL time step condition is $$\delta t \le 0.25\frac{h}{|\mathbf u|_{max}},$$ where $|\mathbf u|_{max}$ is maximal velocity in the flow. In the WCSPH approach, due to the utilization of the equation of state (\[equation of state\]), the CFL time step condition is $$\delta t \le 0.25\frac{h}{c + |\mathbf u|_{max}}.$$ Since we demand density fluctuations to be lower than $1\%$, we have chosen $c
\ge 10 |\mathbf u|_{max}$ (Sect. \[sec:weakly compressible sph\]). Therefore, when the flow is not dominated by viscous or external forces, WCSPH is computationally less efficient than the ISPH approaches. In the case of explicit schemes for viscous flows, another stability criterium is $$\delta t \le 0.125\frac{h^2}{\nu}.$$ Additional condition must be satisfied due to the magnitude of particle accelerations $\mathbf f$ $$\delta t \le 0.25\min_a \left(\frac{h}{|\mathbf f_a|}\right)^{\frac{1}{2}}.$$
Boundary conditions {#sec:boundary conditions}
===================
The proper implementation of the boundaries is one of the common topics in the SPH developments during recent years. Early stage applications of WCSPH involved high Reynolds number simulations with free-slip boundaries, performed using one layer of boundary particles placed at the wall. The layer exerted a strong repulsive force to prevent penetrating solid surfaces [@Monaghan; @1989]. Since the number of interacting particles near the walls is decreased, the accuracy of numerical scheme degrades. Another treatment was proposed by Campbell [@Campbell; @1989] where the boundary condition was included in (\[nabla integral interpolant after integration by parts\]) through the residual boundary term. Today, the most often used boundary conditions are based on dummy particles [@Lee; @et; @al.; @2008] . They are regularly distributed on the boundaries and have prescribed velocity during the whole simulation (no-slip condition). In ISPH, the Poisson equation (\[Poisson\]) is solved on these dummy particles as well to repulse the fluid. To prevent inconsistency between density of inner particles and that of the wall, an additional set of dummy particle layers is placed outside the domain. Other popular, virtual-particle based boundary conditions utilize so-called mirror particles. These particles are given the prescribed velocity to assure the proper boundary condition. But, their properties are not integrated in time, unlike those of real SPH particles. Nowadays, there are two commonly used mirror-particle approaches. The first, developed by Morris [@Morris; @et; @al.; @1997], consists in the combination of dummy and mirror particles. The velocity of inner particles is suitably projected on fixed boundary particles. Then, the boundary particles interact with the fluid. The second approach, so-called Multiple Boundary Tangent method, is similar to the previous one but the procedure of projecting particle velocities is different [@Yildiz; @et; @al.; @2008].
The mirror-particle techniques, presented above, have been further developed to another, more natural approach, i.e., the ghost particle method . This technique is similar to the Classic Image Problem in electrostatics [@Gryffits; @1999] [@Maxwell; @1873]. To any particle $a$ located at $\mathbf r_a$ near the straight and infinite boundary, we introduce the image $a'$ of this particle located at $$\label{Ghost-particles straight mirror position}
\mathbf r_{a'} = 2\mathbf d + \mathbf r_a$$ where $\mathbf d$ is the vector pointing from the particle to the nearest point at the wall, cf. Fig. \[fig:ghost-particle no-slip boundary scheme\](a).
![The ghost-particle no-slip boundary scheme: a) straight wall, b) inner corner.[]{data-label="fig:ghost-particle no-slip boundary scheme"}](ghost.pdf){width="80.00000%"}
Since a chosen kernel is compact, the boundary may be finite. The role of these particles is to assure a high accuracy of the computation (to remedy the lack of particles near the boundaries) and to enforce the boundary condition for the field quantities. Thus, the natural way to obtain the proper implementation of the boundary condition, with the no-slip condition for velocity field, is to set: $$\label{Ghost-particle straigh no-slip set}
\mathbf u_{a'} = 2\mathbf u_\text{w} - \mathbf u_a, \quad
m_{a'} = m_a, \quad
\varrho_{a'} = \varrho_a,$$ where $\mathbf u_\text{w}$ is the velocity of the boundary. To enforce the proper Neumann boundary condition for the pressure $$\label{boundary condition Neumann pressure}
\frac{\partial p}{\partial n} = 0,$$ where $\mathbf n$ is the vector normal to the boundary, we extend the set (\[Ghost-particle straigh no-slip set\]) by an approximation of (\[boundary condition Neumann pressure\]) $$p_{a'} = p_a.$$ Let $\mathbf r_\text{w}$ stand for a position of any point placed at the boundary. Due to the kernel symmetry we have $$\label{Ghost-particles symmetry across boundary}
W(\mathbf r_\text{w} -\mathbf r_a, h) = W(\mathbf r_\text{w} - \mathbf r_{a'}, h).$$ Now, utilizing the SPH summation interpolant (\[SPH interpolant\]) for velocity, we write $$\label{velocity on the straight boundary no-slip}
\begin{split}
{\left\langle \mathbf u \right\rangle}(\mathbf r_\text{w}) &= \sum_a \frac{m_a}{\varrho_a} \mathbf u_a W(\mathbf r_\text{w} - \mathbf r_a, h) + \sum_{a'} \frac{m_{a'}}{\varrho_{a'}} (2\mathbf u_\text{w} - \mathbf u_{a} ) W(\mathbf r_\text{w} - \mathbf r_a', h) = \\
&= 2\mathbf u_\text{w} \sum_{a} \frac{m_a}{\varrho_a} W(\mathbf r_\text{w} -\mathbf r_a, h).
\end{split}$$ Since the summation in the above equation is over fluid particles only, assuming nearly homogeneous distribution of fluid particles, we have $$\label{summing the half of particles near the wall}
\sum_{a} \frac{m_a}{\varrho_a} W(\mathbf r_\text{w} - \mathbf r_a, h) \approx \frac{1}{2}$$ and (\[velocity on the straight boundary no-slip\]) becomes $$\label{proper no-slip condition on straight wall}
{\left\langle \mathbf u \right\rangle}(\mathbf r_\text{w}) \approx \mathbf u_\text{w}.$$ Therefore, (\[Ghost-particle straigh no-slip set\]) provides the proper formulation of the no-slip condition.
Another boundary type that can be treated with the ghost-particle approach is an inner corner. The technique of constructing particle images is presented in Fig. \[fig:ghost-particle no-slip boundary scheme\](b). In this case we have to use three mirror particles. It is important to note that the influence range of this corner is smaller than $2h$. For a larger distance from the corner, the boundary condition boils down to the previous case (both in vertical and horizontal directions). For the distances smaller than $2h$, Cummins and Rudman use the third particle placed symmetrically in respect to the corner point possessing the same density and mass but opposite velocity to fluid particle. Since the velocity vector computed at the corner is non-zero in the case of not moving boundaries, this formulation is improper. Therefore, in the way to find a more accurate approach, we parametrize the mirror particles’ properties as follows (using the notation from Fig. \[fig:ghost-particle no-slip boundary scheme\]): $$\label{Ghost-particle corner no-slip set}
\begin{aligned}
\varrho_a &= \varrho_{a'} = \varrho_{a''} = \varrho_{a'''}, \\
m_a &= m_{a'} = m_{a''} = m_{a'''},
\end{aligned} \quad
\begin{aligned}
\mathbf u_{a'} &= 2 \mathbf u_\text{w} - \mathbf u_{a}, \\
\mathbf u_{a''} &= -\mathbf u_a, \\
\mathbf u_{a'''} &= 2 \alpha \mathbf u_\text{w} + \mathbf u_a,
\end{aligned} \quad
\begin{aligned}
\mathbf r_{a'} &= 2 \mathbf d + \mathbf r_a, \\
\mathbf r_{a''} &= 2 \mathbf d' + \mathbf r_a, \\
\mathbf r_{a'''} &= 2 \mathbf d + 2 \mathbf d' + \mathbf r_a,
\end{aligned}$$ where $\alpha$ may change from $-1$ up to $1$. Now, for a point $\mathbf r_w$ at the boundary, we may carry similar investigation as in (\[velocity on the straight boundary no-slip\]) $$\label{velocity on the corner no-slip}
\begin{split}
{\left\langle \mathbf u \right\rangle}(\mathbf r_\text{w}) &= \sum_a \frac{m_a}{\varrho_a} \mathbf u_a W(\mathbf r_\text{w} - \mathbf r_a, h) + \sum_{a'} \frac{m_{a'}}{\varrho_{a'}} (2\mathbf u_\text{w} - \mathbf u_{a'}) W(\mathbf r_\text{w} - \mathbf r_{a'}, h) \\
&+ \sum_{a''} \frac{m_{a''}}{\varrho_{a''}} \mathbf u_{a''} W(\mathbf r_\text{w} - \mathbf r_{a''}, h) + \sum_a \frac{m_{a'''}}{\varrho_{a'''}} (2\mathbf u_\text{w} \alpha + \mathbf u_a''') W(\mathbf r_\text{w} - \mathbf r_{a'''}, h) \\
&= 2\mathbf u_\text{w} \sum_a \frac{m_a}{\varrho_a} \left[ W(\mathbf r_\text{w} - 2\mathbf d + \mathbf r_a, h) + \alpha W(\mathbf r_\text{w} - 2\mathbf d - 2\mathbf d' + \mathbf r_a, h) \right].
\end{split}$$ For a point placed exactly at the corner, the above equation reduces to the form $$\label{no-slip condition on corner}
{\left\langle \mathbf u \right\rangle}(\mathbf r_{\text{corner}}) \approx \frac{1}{2}\mathbf u_\text{w} (1+\alpha).$$ Depending on value of the parameter $\alpha$, the velocity of the corner changes from $\mathbf u (\mathbf r_{\text{corner}}) = \mathbf 0$ (for $\alpha = -1$) up to $\mathbf u (\mathbf r_{\text{corner}}) = \mathbf u_\text{w}$ (for $\alpha = 1$). Despite this parametrization, there is no way to assure proper velocity at boundary that is closer than $2h$ from the corner. This issue is presented in Fig. \[fig:corner problem\].
![The problem with the ghost-particle no-slip boundary condition near the corner: depending on value of the parameter $\alpha$, the velocity boundary condition changes.[]{data-label="fig:corner problem"}](corner.pdf){width="60.00000%"}
Yet, the simulations of various test problems show that varying parameter $\alpha$ does not have a significant impact on the global (except near the corner) velocity or density fields. Therefore, in the present work, we utilize the no-slip condition with $\alpha=0$.
Another problem with the no-slip condition implementation appears during computation of density in WCSPH utilizing the continuity equation (\[continuity equation\]). Assuming a statistically homogeneous distribution of particle positions, the velocity component tangential to the boundary is negligible for computing the divergence. Therefore, along straight boundaries the no-slip condition is properly stated. The problem appears near the corners. Utilizing (\[SPH nabla interpolant\]), we may compute the divergence of velocity at the boundary near the corner $$\label{div u on the corner no-slip}
\begin{split}
{\left\langle \nabla \cdot \mathbf u \right\rangle}(\mathbf r_\text{w}) &= \sum_a \frac{m_a}{\varrho_a} \mathbf u_a \cdot \nabla_a W(\mathbf r_\text{w} - \mathbf r_a, h) + \sum_{a'} \frac{m_{a'}}{\varrho_{a'}} \mathbf u_{a'} \cdot \nabla_{a'} W(\mathbf r_\text{w} - \mathbf r_{a'}, h) \\
&+\sum_{a''} \frac{m_{a''}}{\varrho_{a''}} \mathbf u_{a''} \cdot \nabla_{a''} W(\mathbf r_\text{w} - \mathbf r_{a''}, h) +
\sum_{a'''} \frac{m_{a'''}}{\varrho_{a'''}} \mathbf u_{a'''} \cdot \nabla_{a'''} W(\mathbf r_\text{w} - \mathbf r_{a'''}, h).
\end{split}$$ For the point $\mathbf r_{c}$ that is placed in the fluid $\varepsilon \rightarrow 0$ away from the corner we have $$\label{corner W symmetries x}
\begin{split}
&\nabla_a W(\mathbf r_c - \mathbf r_a, h) \cdot \mathbf n_x = \nabla_{a'} W(\mathbf r_c - \mathbf r_{a'}, h) \cdot \mathbf n_x
=\\
- &\nabla_{a''} W(\mathbf r_c - \mathbf r_{a''}, h) \cdot \mathbf n_x = - \nabla_{a'''} W(\mathbf r_c - \mathbf r_{a'''}, h) \cdot \mathbf n_x
\end{split}$$ and $$\label{corner W symmetries y}
\begin{split}
&\nabla_a W(\mathbf r_c - \mathbf r_a, h) \cdot \mathbf n_y =- \nabla_{a'} W(\mathbf r_c - \mathbf r_{a'}, h) \cdot \mathbf n_y =\\
&\nabla_{a''} W(\mathbf r_c - \mathbf r_{a''}, h) \cdot \mathbf n_y = - \nabla_{a'''} W(\mathbf r_c - \mathbf r_{a'''}, h) \cdot \mathbf n_y,
\end{split}$$ where $\mathbf n_x$ and $\mathbf n_y$ are unit vectors in $x$ and $y$ directions respectively. Therefore, connecting the above relations with (\[div u on the corner no-slip\]) and (\[Ghost-particle corner no-slip set\]) we obtain $$\label{improper div condition on corner}
{\left\langle \nabla \cdot \mathbf u \right\rangle}(\mathbf r_c) \approx 0.$$ Let us consider the situation where fluid particles are driven to the corner. To prevent penetrating the boundary, there should appear a repulsive force near this corner. In WCSPH this is done by a local density increase. However, since the divergence of velocity is always close to zero near the corner, according to the continuity equation (\[continuity equation\]), the density does not change. This may induce a growth of velocity instabilities near the corners (see Fig. \[fig:instabilities in lid-driven cavity\]).
![The WCSPH results of the lid-driven cavity (${\textit{Re}}=1000$) at $t=0.03$ with: a) the no-slip and b) the free-slip boundary treatment for velocity divergence computation; employing no-slip condition induces instabilities near the corners.[]{data-label="fig:instabilities in lid-driven cavity"}](instabilities.pdf){width="90.00000%"}
Therefore, only for computing the divergence of velocity, we suggest to use the free-slip condition.
![The ghost-particle free-slip boundary treatment for: a) the straight wall and b) the corner.[]{data-label="fig:ghost-particle free-slip boundary scheme"}](ghost2.pdf){width="80.00000%"}
For a straight boundary, cf. Fig. \[fig:ghost-particle free-slip boundary scheme\], the free-slip mirror particle is placed at $\mathbf r_{a'} = 2\mathbf d + \mathbf r_a$. It has the same mass and density, its velocity component normal to the boundary is opposite, while the tangential component is unchanged. At the corner, cf. Fig. \[fig:ghost-particle free-slip boundary scheme\](b), the mirror particles carry the following properties: $$\label{velocity on the corner free-slip}
\begin{aligned}
\varrho_a &= \varrho_{a'} = \varrho_{a''} = \varrho_{a'''}, \\
m_a &= m_{a'} = m_{a''} = m_{a'''}, \\
\mathbf r_{a'} &= 2 \mathbf d + \mathbf r_a, \\
\mathbf r_{a''} &= 2 \mathbf d' + \mathbf r_a, \\
\mathbf r_{a'''} &= 2 \mathbf d + 2 \mathbf d' + \mathbf r_a,\\
\end{aligned} \quad
\begin{aligned}
\mathbf u_{a'} \cdot \mathbf n_x &= \mathbf u_a \cdot \mathbf n_x, \\
\mathbf u_{a''} \cdot \mathbf n_x &= -\mathbf u_a \cdot \mathbf n_x, \\
\mathbf u_{a'''} \cdot \mathbf n_x &= -\mathbf u_a \cdot \mathbf n_x,
\end{aligned} \quad
\begin{aligned}
\mathbf u_{a'} \cdot \mathbf n_y &= -\mathbf u_a \cdot \mathbf n_y,\\
\mathbf u_{a'} \cdot \mathbf n_y &= \mathbf u_a \cdot \mathbf n_y,\\
\mathbf u_{a'} \cdot \mathbf n_y &= -\mathbf u_a \cdot \mathbf n_y.
\end{aligned}$$
Obviously, this kind of boundary treatment presented here is basically limited to flat wall segments only; more advanced formulations exist and represent the state of the art for arbitrarily-shaped boundaries, e.g., . However, since the main focus of our paper is on incompressibility treatments, we have chosen simple geometry cases to have enough reference data.
Velocity error measurement {#sec:velocity error measurement}
==========================
Lid-driven cavity {#sec:lid-driven cavity}
-----------------
The lid-driven cavity is a common test of numerical algorithms for viscous flows. It involves a fluid at density $\varrho_0$ inside a square ($L\times L$) box where only one boundary moves with the constant velocity $\mathbf u_w$. The geometry is very simple, however there is no analytical solution. In the present work, we computed the lid-driven cavity flow at $Re=|\mathbf u_w|L/\nu=1000$. For this value of Reynolds number the flow is still laminar and there is no necessity to use a turbulence model. All results are suitably non-dimensionalised with $L$, $|\mathbf u_w|$, $\varrho_0$ (especially time is normalized with the convective time scale $L/|\mathbf u_w|$) and compared to those from a numerical calculation on a fine grid performed with the Eulerian solver by Ghia et al. [@Ghia; @et; @al.; @1982].
### The kernel type influence {#sec:the kernels' influence}
One of the important issues that has an impact on the SPH solutions is a proper selection of the kernel. To compare the treatments of the incompressibility constraint, we decided to perform the benchmark simulation of the lid-driven cavity flow with the three kernels presented in Sect. \[sec:formulation of the SPH method\]. The particles’ number has been chosen with two requirements: $N$ should be large enough to get solutions comparable to reference data (yet not fully converged); however, it should be sufficiently small to show kernels’ defects. We decided to use $N=3600$ particles in the domain and $h/\Delta r=2$, cf. Sect. \[sec:the smoothing length h influence\]. The steady-state solution velocity profiles are presented in Fig. \[fig:lid-sph-kernels\]. The results performed with the cubic spline kernel are the most inconsistent with the reference data. This discrepancy is caused by the particles’ clustering phenomenon. Figs. \[fig:clustering\] and \[fig:histograms\] respectively present particles’ spatial distribution and histograms of the distance between the nearest pairs of particles for all mentioned kernels. As it transpires from the histogram for the cubic spline kernel, in this case there are many particles that move joined in groups, cf. also details in Fig. \[fig:clustering\]; as a consequence, the accuracy of the scheme is radically decreased. As far as the quintic kernels are concerned, both perform similarly to each other. However, the kernel proposed by Morris et al. (\[quintic Morris\]) shows a more pronounced tendency to clustering (Fig. \[fig:histograms\]); moreover, it is not zero up to $|\mathbf r|/h = 3$ (as contrasted to $|\mathbf r|/h = 2$ for the other kernels), so it involves many more particles. Therefore, the computational time is increased about 12% comparing to the Wendland kernel. Summarizing, due to a good agreement with the reference data, not noticeable clustering phenomenon, and finally the efficiency, for the further analysis we decided to use the quintic Wendland kernel. An interesting work about its behavior in SPH has recently been performed by Robinson [@Robinson; @2009] (Ch. 7).
\(a) WCSPH\
![The lid-driven cavity steady-state velocity profiles for: (a) WCSPH, (b) ISPH-GPPS and (c) ISPH-PPS against Ghia et al. [@Ghia; @et; @al.; @1982] results; profiles obtained for different kernels; $N=3600$, $h/\Delta r = 2$.[]{data-label="fig:lid-sph-kernels"}](lid_wcsph_kernels_60.pdf "fig:"){width="95.00000%"}\
(b) ISPH-GPPS\
![The lid-driven cavity steady-state velocity profiles for: (a) WCSPH, (b) ISPH-GPPS and (c) ISPH-PPS against Ghia et al. [@Ghia; @et; @al.; @1982] results; profiles obtained for different kernels; $N=3600$, $h/\Delta r = 2$.[]{data-label="fig:lid-sph-kernels"}](lid_isph_kernels_60.pdf "fig:"){width="95.00000%"}\
(c) ISPH-PPS\
![The lid-driven cavity steady-state velocity profiles for: (a) WCSPH, (b) ISPH-GPPS and (c) ISPH-PPS against Ghia et al. [@Ghia; @et; @al.; @1982] results; profiles obtained for different kernels; $N=3600$, $h/\Delta r = 2$.[]{data-label="fig:lid-sph-kernels"}](lid_ppsph_kernels_60.pdf "fig:"){width="95.00000%"}
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
![The lid-driven cavity steady-state solution (${\textit{Re}}=1000$, $N=3600$) computed with the WCSPH approach and kernels: (\[cubic spline kernel\]), (\[quintic Wendland\]), (\[quintic Morris\]); the particle clustering phenomenon is noticeable with the cubic spline kernel.[]{data-label="fig:clustering"}](vel_wcsph_cubic.pdf "fig:"){width="31.00000%"} ![The lid-driven cavity steady-state solution (${\textit{Re}}=1000$, $N=3600$) computed with the WCSPH approach and kernels: (\[cubic spline kernel\]), (\[quintic Wendland\]), (\[quintic Morris\]); the particle clustering phenomenon is noticeable with the cubic spline kernel.[]{data-label="fig:clustering"}](vel_wcsph_quintic_morris.pdf "fig:"){width="31.00000%"} ![The lid-driven cavity steady-state solution (${\textit{Re}}=1000$, $N=3600$) computed with the WCSPH approach and kernels: (\[cubic spline kernel\]), (\[quintic Wendland\]), (\[quintic Morris\]); the particle clustering phenomenon is noticeable with the cubic spline kernel.[]{data-label="fig:clustering"}](vel_wcsph_quintic_wendland.pdf "fig:"){width="31.00000%"}
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
![Histograms of the distance between the nearest pairs of particles; the results obtained for the WCSPH approach and kernels: (\[cubic spline kernel\]), (\[quintic Wendland\]), (\[quintic Morris\]).[]{data-label="fig:histograms"}](hist.pdf){width="70.00000%"}
### The kernel size influence {#sec:the smoothing length h influence}
Apart from the initial inter-particle distance $\Delta r$ (related to the number of particles in the domain), in the SPH approach there exists another characteristic length - the kernel parameter $h$. Examining the impact on the solutions, we decided to compute the lid-driven cavity problem ($Re=1000$) for chosen $N=3600$, the Wendland kernel and different $h/\Delta r$ values. Figure \[fig:lid-sph-h\] presents the velocity profiles for $h/\Delta r=2.31$, $2.0$, $1.67$ and $1.5$ computed with all the SPH incompressibility variants. In comparison to the Ghia et al. reference data, there is no significant effect of the kernel size on the velocity field. However, since the parameter $h/\Delta r$ determines the number of particles under the kernel hat, the number of interaction between particles (and the computational effort) grow like $\sim (h/\Delta
r)^D$, where $D$ is the space dimension. Weighting between the computational times and the accuracy, for all simulations presented henceforth, we decided to use $h/\Delta r=2.0$.
\(a) WCSPH\
![The lid-driven cavity steady-state velocity profiles for: (a) WCSPH, (b) ISPH-GPPS and (c) ISPH-PPS against Ghia et al. [@Ghia; @et; @al.; @1982] results; profiles obtained with different $h/\Delta r$ values; results obtained using the Wendland kernel [@Wendland; @1995] and $N=3600$ particles in domain.[]{data-label="fig:lid-sph-h"}](lid_wcsph_hdr.pdf "fig:"){width="95.00000%"}\
(b) ISPH-GPPS\
![The lid-driven cavity steady-state velocity profiles for: (a) WCSPH, (b) ISPH-GPPS and (c) ISPH-PPS against Ghia et al. [@Ghia; @et; @al.; @1982] results; profiles obtained with different $h/\Delta r$ values; results obtained using the Wendland kernel [@Wendland; @1995] and $N=3600$ particles in domain.[]{data-label="fig:lid-sph-h"}](lid_isph_hdr.pdf "fig:"){width="95.00000%"}\
(c) ISPH-PPS\
![The lid-driven cavity steady-state velocity profiles for: (a) WCSPH, (b) ISPH-GPPS and (c) ISPH-PPS against Ghia et al. [@Ghia; @et; @al.; @1982] results; profiles obtained with different $h/\Delta r$ values; results obtained using the Wendland kernel [@Wendland; @1995] and $N=3600$ particles in domain.[]{data-label="fig:lid-sph-h"}](lid_ppsph_hdr.pdf "fig:"){width="95.00000%"}
### The particle number influence {#sec:the particles' number N influence}
Examining the influence of the spatial resolution, the simulations were performed with a different number of particles in the domain (from $N=1600$ up to $N=57\,600$). The steady-state velocity profiles are presented in Fig. \[fig:lid-sph-n\]. In all the methods of incompressibility treatment, the profiles obtained for $N=1600$ did not agree very well with the Ghia solution [@Ghia; @et; @al.; @1982] obtained on $129
\times 129$ Eulerian mesh. Performing simulations with the higher resolutions, the accuracy increases so that in the case of $N=14\,400$, independently on the compressibility treatment, the obtained results are in very good agreement with the reference simulations. For $N=57\,600$ the velocity profiles computed using WCSPH and ISPH - PPS approaches practically overlap with the Ghia’s reference data. Unfortunately, the ISPH - GPPS solution is not so accurate as we expect. This deficiency is due to a higher numerical diffusion caused by the projection of the quantities from particles on a regular grid.
\(a) WCSPH\
![The lid-driven cavity steady-state velocity profiles for: (a) WCSPH, (b) ISPH-GPPS and (c) ISPH-PPS against Ghia et al. [@Ghia; @et; @al.; @1982] results; results for different number of particles $N$; data obtained using the Wendland kernel [@Wendland; @1995] and $h/\Delta r = 2$.[]{data-label="fig:lid-sph-n"}](lid_wcsph_N.pdf "fig:"){width="95.00000%"}\
(b) ISPH-GPPS\
![The lid-driven cavity steady-state velocity profiles for: (a) WCSPH, (b) ISPH-GPPS and (c) ISPH-PPS against Ghia et al. [@Ghia; @et; @al.; @1982] results; results for different number of particles $N$; data obtained using the Wendland kernel [@Wendland; @1995] and $h/\Delta r = 2$.[]{data-label="fig:lid-sph-n"}](lid_isph_N.pdf "fig:"){width="95.00000%"}\
(c) ISPH-PPS\
![The lid-driven cavity steady-state velocity profiles for: (a) WCSPH, (b) ISPH-GPPS and (c) ISPH-PPS against Ghia et al. [@Ghia; @et; @al.; @1982] results; results for different number of particles $N$; data obtained using the Wendland kernel [@Wendland; @1995] and $h/\Delta r = 2$.[]{data-label="fig:lid-sph-n"}](lid_ppsph_N.pdf "fig:"){width="95.00000%"}
Due to the utilization of the equation of state and the time step constraint in the WCSPH approach, the CPU time of the lid-driven cavity simulation computed by the ISPH method with PPS is about $7$ times shorter. On the other hand, performing the ISPH-GPPS simulations, the computational effort may be reduced about $15$ times. The comparison of CPU times for all considered SPH schemes is presented in Fig. \[fig:lid-driven cavity times\].
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- --
![The CPU times to obtain the steady-state solution of the lid-driven cavity (${\textit{Re}}=1000$) using the WCSPH and both ISPH approaches; for the WCSPH method, two continuity equations are compared: Eq. (\[SPH continuity symmetrical\]) and density definition (\[SPH direct density computation multiphase\]).[]{data-label="fig:lid-driven cavity times"}](time_lid.pdf "fig:"){width="60.00000%"}
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- --
The Rayleigh-Taylor instability {#sec:the rayleigh-taylor instability}
-------------------------------
The Rayleigh-Taylor instability is one of generic multi-phase flows, therefore it is commonly utilized as a test problem. It involves two immiscible fluids enclosed in a rectangular domain of width $L$ and height $2L$. Initially, in our case, the phases are separated by the interface located at $y=1-0.15\sin{(2\pi x)}$. The lower component has density $\varrho_L=\varrho_0$, while the upper one $\varrho_U=1.8 \varrho_0$. Since the system is subject to gravity $\mathbf g=(0, -g)$ and the upper phase is heavier, in the absence of the surface tension an instability always arises and vorticity is generated. The Reynolds number may be defined as $${\textit{Re}}= \frac{\sqrt{L^3 g}}{\nu} = 420.$$ The simulations were performed for $120\times 240$ particles in the domain. To compute the hydrostatic force, we use the technique described in [@Szewc; @et; @al.; @2011], where the hydrostatic pressure is computed on a regular mesh and later projected on the particles. Figure \[fig:rt-all\] presents particle positions (directly showing the location of liquid-liquid interface) computed with different treatments of the incompressibility condition. All the simulations are compared to the reference solutions from the Level-Set method ($312\times 624$ cells) computed by Grenier et al. [@Grenier; @et; @al.; @2009]. Presented data were obtained at $t=5$ (normalized with the convective time scale $\sqrt{L/g}$).
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ -- --
![The Rayleigh-Taylor instability; particle positions at $t=5$ obtained using different incompressibility treatments; solid line: liquid-liquid interface from the reference Level-Set solution [@Grenier; @et; @al.; @2009].[]{data-label="fig:rt-all"}](rt-wcsph.pdf "fig:"){width="33.00000%"} ![The Rayleigh-Taylor instability; particle positions at $t=5$ obtained using different incompressibility treatments; solid line: liquid-liquid interface from the reference Level-Set solution [@Grenier; @et; @al.; @2009].[]{data-label="fig:rt-all"}](rt-isph.pdf "fig:"){width="33.00000%"} ![The Rayleigh-Taylor instability; particle positions at $t=5$ obtained using different incompressibility treatments; solid line: liquid-liquid interface from the reference Level-Set solution [@Grenier; @et; @al.; @2009].[]{data-label="fig:rt-all"}](rt-ppsph.pdf "fig:"){width="33.00000%"}
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ -- --
Comparing the interface shapes, we find no convincing arguments to judge which SPH approach is more accurate. However, the comparison of the computational times shows that the most valuable choice is the ISPH-GPPS. The ISPH-PPS is slower about $6$ times, while the WCSPH about $13$ times.
Density error measurement {#sec:density error measurement}
=========================
In order to measure the density estimation errors, we compute two quantities: the mean density over the flow domain ${\overline{\varrho}}(t)$ and the root mean square of the density fluctuations $\varrho_{\text{rms}}(t)$. However, since in the Projection Methods the values of the density carried by particles do not change, there is the necessity to use formulas which are able to compute ${\overline{\varrho}}(t)$ and $\varrho_{\text{rms}}(t)$ taking into account both the density values and spatial distribution of the particles. The simplest proposals (expressed in the SPH formulae) are: for the mean density $${\overline{\varrho}}(t) = \frac{1}{N} \sum_a m_a \sum_b W_{ab}(h),$$ and for the density fluctuations $\varrho_{\text{rms}}(t)$ $$\varrho_{\text{rms}}(t) = \sqrt{ \frac{1}{N} \sum_{a} \left( m_a \sum_b W_{ab} - {\overline{\varrho}}(t) \right)^2}.$$
In WCSPH, comparing the influence of the kernel shape, we observe that the quintic kernel proposed by Wendland (\[quintic Wendland\]) gives the smallest fluctuations of the density field, cf. Fig. \[fig:wcsph-lid-rms\](a). The weakness of the Wendland kernel is a slight overestimation of the mean density. Even for a homogeneously distributed set of particles ($t=0$) the density field is flawed, cf. discussion in . At decrease of the $h/\Delta r$ parameter causes this error to grow from $0.2\%$ for $h/\Delta r=2.31$ up to about $0.8\%$ for $h/\Delta r=1.5$, cf. Fig. \[fig:wcsph-lid-rms\](b). Interestingly, parameter $h/\Delta r$ has no significant effect on $\varrho_{\text{rms}}(t)$.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\(a) ![The density mean value and the r.m.s. obtained for the lid-driven cavity flow at ${\textit{Re}}=1000$; the effect of: (a) the kernel choice, (b) $h/\Delta r$, (c) number of particles $N$ influence in the WCSPH approach; (d) particles number $N$ influence in both: ISPH-PPS and ISPH-GPPS techniques.[]{data-label="fig:wcsph-lid-rms"}](density_wcsph_60_kernels.pdf "fig:"){width="45.00000%"} \(b) ![The density mean value and the r.m.s. obtained for the lid-driven cavity flow at ${\textit{Re}}=1000$; the effect of: (a) the kernel choice, (b) $h/\Delta r$, (c) number of particles $N$ influence in the WCSPH approach; (d) particles number $N$ influence in both: ISPH-PPS and ISPH-GPPS techniques.[]{data-label="fig:wcsph-lid-rms"}](density_wcsph_hdr.pdf "fig:"){width="45.00000%"}
\(c) ![The density mean value and the r.m.s. obtained for the lid-driven cavity flow at ${\textit{Re}}=1000$; the effect of: (a) the kernel choice, (b) $h/\Delta r$, (c) number of particles $N$ influence in the WCSPH approach; (d) particles number $N$ influence in both: ISPH-PPS and ISPH-GPPS techniques.[]{data-label="fig:wcsph-lid-rms"}](density_wcsph_N.pdf "fig:"){width="45.00000%"} \(d) ![The density mean value and the r.m.s. obtained for the lid-driven cavity flow at ${\textit{Re}}=1000$; the effect of: (a) the kernel choice, (b) $h/\Delta r$, (c) number of particles $N$ influence in the WCSPH approach; (d) particles number $N$ influence in both: ISPH-PPS and ISPH-GPPS techniques.[]{data-label="fig:wcsph-lid-rms"}](density_isph.pdf "fig:"){width="45.00000%"}
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The particle number influence obtained with WCSPH is presented in Fig. \[fig:wcsph-lid-rms\](c). The density r.m.s. independently on the number of particles in domain, stabilizes after about $t=1$ and remains less than $1\%$ of initial density. Moreover, with increasing $N$ the density r.m.s. goes down. In the case of ISPH solvers, the growth of the r.m.s. stops only after obtaining the steady-state solution (roughly at $t=120$), cf. Fig. \[fig:wcsph-lid-rms\](d). Intriguing is the fact that for the ISPH approach, the increase of the number of particles $N$ increases the r.m.s. For ISPH-PPS the r.m.s. of the steady-state solution changes: from $7\%$ for $N=1600$ up to $9\%$ for $N=14400$. For ISPH-GPPS the density field is additionally affected by the projections between the particles and the grid. These projections cause additional smoothing and the density field r.m.s. of the steady-state solution varies: for $N=14400$ about $7\%$, for $N=3600$ about $6\%$ and $N=1600$ about $5\%$ of initial density.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --
![The lid-driven cavity flow: density field at the steady-state solution.[]{data-label="fig:density-f"}](density_wcsph.pdf "fig:"){width="48.00000%"} ![The lid-driven cavity flow: density field at the steady-state solution.[]{data-label="fig:density-f"}](density_ppsph.pdf "fig:"){width="48.00000%"}
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- --
![The density mean value and the r.m.s. obtained for the Rayleigh-Taylor instability (only upper phase $\varrho_U=1.8\varrho_0$) using WCSPH and both ISPH approaches.[]{data-label="fig:density-rt"}](density-rt.pdf "fig:"){width="45.00000%"}
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- --
This discrepancy between WCSPH and ISPH density error values is caused by the completely different mechanisms of computing the dynamical pressure in the Navier-Stokes equation. Since in the case of the WCSPH approach, the suitably-chosen equation of state is used, the density field suffers from short-scale density waves presented in Fig. \[fig:density-f\](a). In the case of ISPH, there is no explicit correction to the density. Therefore, during the computations, the density field strongly deviates from the level of the initial state, cf. Fig. \[fig:density-f\](b). Since the Projection Methods give such considerable density errors, it is meaningful to implement and an additional correction procedure, cf. Sect. \[sec:pozorski and wawrenczuk constant-density approach\].
In the case of the Rayleigh-Taylor instability, the comparison of density errors (cf. Fig. \[fig:density-rt\]) shows similar behavior as in the lid-driven cavity case.
Constant-density ISPH approach {#sec:pozorski and wawrenczuk constant-density approach}
==============================
In the previous section we have shown that in the ISPH approach the density errors cumulate during computations. To solve this problem, Pozorski and Wawreńczuk suggested to use the second correction term (a similar approach was later proposed, in the multi-phase flow context, by Hu and Adams ). Let us consider incompressible fluid with initially uniform density $\varrho_0$. After the time step performed with the ISPH approach, the corrected velocity field satisfies the divergence-free condition; however, this procedure does not explicitly guarantee that $\varrho = const$. The Pozorski and Wawreńczuk idea consists in performing an additional correction to the particle positions $$\mathbf r_a^{n+1} = \tilde{\mathbf r}_a^{n+1} - \frac{1}{\varrho_0} \nabla p_a^* = \mathbf r_a^n + \mathbf u_a^{n+1} \delta t - \frac{1}{\varrho_0} \nabla p_a^*,$$ where $\mathbf u_a^{n+1}$ and $\tilde{\mathbf r}_a^{n+1}$ are respectively the divergence-free velocity field and particle positions obtained after the ISPH time step, Eqs. (\[ISPH corrector\]) and (\[Poisson\]), while $p_a^*$ appears as a potential correction field computed from $$\label{Pozorski PPS}
\frac{1}{\varrho_0} \nabla \cdot \left( \frac{\varrho^n}{\varrho_0} \nabla p^* \right) = 1 - \frac{\tilde{\varrho}^{n+1}}{\varrho_0},$$ where $\tilde{\varrho}^{n+1}$ is the density obtained after the ISPH time step. Both $\varrho^n$ and $\tilde{\varrho}^{n+1}$ are computed using Eq. (\[SPH direct density computation multiphase\]). The Poisson Eq. (\[Pozorski PPS\]) is obtained from the request $$\varrho^{n+1}(\mathbf r_a) = m_a \sum_b W(\mathbf r_a - \mathbf r^{n+1}_b, h) = m_a \sum_b W(\mathbf r_a - \tilde{\mathbf r}_b^{n+1} - \nabla p_b^*, h) = \varrho_0(\mathbf r_a)$$ by the Taylor series expansion around $\mathbf r_a - \tilde{\mathbf r}_b^{n+1}$.
Since, performing such a correction, the second Poisson equation has to be solved, the computational effort is increased. However, there is no necessity to compute the correction at each time step; rather, it is applied only if the density error exceeds a certain threshold value. On the other hand, the procedure may be performed several times in one time step. Figure \[fig:poz-corr\] shows how the initial disturbance of the density field (a regular set of particles with one particle displaced) is corrected with (\[Pozorski PPS\]).
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
![The density field with local disturbance; left: the initial state (regular set of particles with one particle displaced), right: after 50 correction iterations.[]{data-label="fig:poz-corr"}](poz-dist-1.pdf "fig:"){width="49.00000%"} ![The density field with local disturbance; left: the initial state (regular set of particles with one particle displaced), right: after 50 correction iterations.[]{data-label="fig:poz-corr"}](poz-dist-2.pdf "fig:"){width="49.00000%"}
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To perform the test problems, we decided to utilize ISPH with particle positions correction performed once per time step. Since both Poisson equations were solved on particles, we got fully grid-free approach. The velocity profiles of the lid-driven cavity problem (${\textit{Re}}=1000$) are presented in Fig. \[fig:lid-poz\]. There are no noticeable differences between the velocities obtained using ISPH solver with (Fig. \[fig:lid-poz\]) and without (Fig. \[fig:lid-sph-n\]) the Pozorski and Wawreńczuk correction. However, comparing the density fields, cf. Fig. \[fig:density-poz\], with the results obtained without the correction, cf. Fig. \[fig:density-f\](d), the advantages of this approach become obvious: the growth of the r.m.s. density stops after $t=5$ and stays at a level less than 0.1%. The regularisation of the particles’ distribution is also visible in the histograms of the distance to the nearest neighbor of each particle: the comparison of histograms for ISPH-PPS with and without the correction procedure is presented in Fig. \[fig:histcor\]. Another convincing argument for the utility of the Pozorski and Wawreńczuk approach is the computational effort. Since, as in the case of WCSPH, the density error does not accumulate, and, despite the use of two Poisson solvers, the computational time is about 3 times shorter (and about 2 times longer than ISPH-PPS), the use of the density correction algorithm seems to be profitable.
On the other hand, it is interesting to note a higher convergence rate with increasing number of particles in domain, as compared to the solutions obtained by Lee et al. [@Lee; @et; @al.; @2008] (Fig. 6) and Xu et al. [@Xu; @et; @al.; @2009] (Fig. 25). We suppose that a better convergence rate in our case is due to a proper choice of computational parameters ($h/\Delta r$, kernel type and b.c.).
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ -- --
![The lid-driven cavity velocity profiles at the steady-state against Ghia et al. [@Ghia; @et; @al.; @1982] reference data (${\textit{Re}}=1000$); results obtained using ISPH with PPS and Pozorski & Wawreńczuk correction for the Wendland kernel [@Wendland; @1995], $h/\Delta r = 2$ and different number of particles $N$.[]{data-label="fig:lid-poz"}](lid-poz.pdf "fig:"){width="95.00000%"}
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ -- --
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --
![The density mean value and r.m.s. obtained using the ISPH approach with PPS and Pozorski & Wawreńczuk density correction ; (a) the lid driven cavity (${\textit{Re}}=1000$), (b) the Rayleigh-Taylor instability (${\textit{Re}}=420$); the results obtained for the Wendland kernel [@Wendland; @1995] and $h/\Delta r = 2$.[]{data-label="fig:density-poz"}](dens-poz-lid.pdf "fig:"){width="45.00000%"} ![The density mean value and r.m.s. obtained using the ISPH approach with PPS and Pozorski & Wawreńczuk density correction ; (a) the lid driven cavity (${\textit{Re}}=1000$), (b) the Rayleigh-Taylor instability (${\textit{Re}}=420$); the results obtained for the Wendland kernel [@Wendland; @1995] and $h/\Delta r = 2$.[]{data-label="fig:density-poz"}](dens-poz-rt.pdf "fig:"){width="45.00000%"}
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(a) (b)
![Histograms of the distance between the nearest pairs of the particles; the results obtained for the ISPH-PPS approach (a) without and (b) with the Pozorski and Wawreńczuk correction procedure.[]{data-label="fig:histcor"}](hist-pps.pdf "fig:"){width="49.00000%"} ![Histograms of the distance between the nearest pairs of the particles; the results obtained for the ISPH-PPS approach (a) without and (b) with the Pozorski and Wawreńczuk correction procedure.[]{data-label="fig:histcor"}](hist-poz.pdf "fig:"){width="49.00000%"}
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For the Rayleigh-Taylor instability, the calculated particle positions at times $t=1$, $3$ and $5$ are presented in Fig. \[fig:rt-poz\]. The comparison with the reference interface shapes [@Grenier; @et; @al.; @2009] show quite a good agreement. What is more, there are no considerable differences between ISPH with and without the Pozorski and Wawreńczuk correction term. Moreover, as in the case of the lid-driven cavity, the use of such a correction term assures that the density error (Fig. \[fig:density-poz\]) is kept below the desired level and the computational time is still acceptable (in comparison with the WCSPH approach).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- --
![The Rayleigh-Taylor instability (${\textit{Re}}=420$) computed using ISPH with PPS and Pozorski & Wawreńczuk density correction ; the black lines denote the interface position obtained by Grenier et al. [@Grenier; @et; @al.; @2009] using the Level-Set formulation ($312\times 624$ cells).[]{data-label="fig:rt-poz"}](rt-poz-1.pdf "fig:"){width="33.00000%"} ![The Rayleigh-Taylor instability (${\textit{Re}}=420$) computed using ISPH with PPS and Pozorski & Wawreńczuk density correction ; the black lines denote the interface position obtained by Grenier et al. [@Grenier; @et; @al.; @2009] using the Level-Set formulation ($312\times 624$ cells).[]{data-label="fig:rt-poz"}](rt-poz-3.pdf "fig:"){width="33.00000%"} ![The Rayleigh-Taylor instability (${\textit{Re}}=420$) computed using ISPH with PPS and Pozorski & Wawreńczuk density correction ; the black lines denote the interface position obtained by Grenier et al. [@Grenier; @et; @al.; @2009] using the Level-Set formulation ($312\times 624$ cells).[]{data-label="fig:rt-poz"}](rt-poz-5.pdf "fig:"){width="33.00000%"}
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- --
Conclusions {#sec:conclusions}
===========
In this paper three different SPH incompressibility treatments were considered. To validate these approaches, two tests cases were simulated: the lid-driven cavity at ${\textit{Re}}=1000$ and the Rayleigh-Taylor instability at ${\textit{Re}}=420$. Summarising, in comparison to the previous tests presented by Lee et al. [@Lee; @et; @al.; @2008] and Xu et al. [@Xu; @et; @al.; @2009], in all of the SPH incompressibility treatments, the velocity field exhibit a better convergence rate, when the number of particles in the domain grows. Detailed study of the incompressibility treatments revealed some pros and cons of the approaches. The main disadvantage of the WCSPH approach is its high computational cost. Therefore, from this point of view, it is better to use the ISPH approaches. Nevertheless, both the ISPH-GPPS and the ISPH-PPS solvers in their original formulation suffer from the density error accumulation.
For the fluid flows where besides the properly modelled velocity field, the correct density field is of importance, an interesting alternative to WCSPH is the ISPH approach with the separate density correction. In this approach the density accumulation error can be reduced to a specified level while still retaining the grid-free formulation. It is important to note that, as such, none of the ISPH approaches can be used to properly model gas-liquid flows such as a bubble raising in water, where the divergence-free condition is satisfied only for the liquid phase. Such flows can be relatively easily modelled with the WCSPH approach, where each phase can be computed with a different equation of state.
The study has also shown the importance of correct choice of computational parameters: the kernel formula $W$, its smoothing length $h$ for given inter-particle distance $h/\Delta r$, and the number of particles $N$ in the domain. The impact of those parameters on the results has been analyzed and optimal kernel has been found (the Wendland formula). Regarding the other quantities, they represent a compromise between the CPU efficiency and accuracy. Further work will be undertaken to extend the ISPH approach making it possible to model gas-liquid mixed flows with the interface phenomena such as the surface tension or the Marangoni effect. Also, there is the need of appropriate wall b.c. for SPH simulations in complex geometries (arbitrary shape of the boundary).
R.A. Gingold, J.J. Monaghan, Smoothed Particle Hydrodynamics: Theory and application to non-spherical stars, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 181 (1977) 375-389.
L.B. Lucy, A numerical approach to the testing of the fission hypothesis, Astron. J. 82 (1977) 1013-1024.
S.J. Cummins, M. Rudman, An SPH projection method, J. Comput. Phys. 152 (1999) 584-607.
E.-S. Lee, C. Moulinec, R. Xu, D. Violeau, D. Laurence, P. Stansby, Comparisons of weakly compressible and truly incompressible algorithms for the SPH mesh free particle method, J. Comput. Phys. 227 (2008) 8417-8436.
R. Xu, P. Stansby, D. Laurence, Accuracy and stability in incompressible SPH (ISPH) based on the projection method and a new approach, J. Comput. Phys. 228 (2009) 6703-6725.
X.Y. Hu, N.A. Adams, An incompressible multi-phase SPH method, J. Comput. Phys. 227 (2007) 264-278.
J. Pozorski, A. Wawreńczuk, SPH computation of incompressible viscous flows, J. Theor. Appl. Mech. 40 (2002) 917-937.
J.-P. Minier, J. Pozorski, Wall boundary conditions in PDF methods and application to a turbulent flow, Phys. Fluids 11 (1999) 2632-2644.
A. Valizadeh, M. Shafieefar, J.J. Monaghan, S.A. Salehi Neyshaboori, Modeling two-phase flows using SPH method, J. Applied Sci. 8 (2008) 3817-3826.
H. Wendland, Piecewise polynomial, positive definite and compactly supported radial functions of minimal degree, Adv. Comput. Math. 4 (1995) 389-396.
J.P. Morris, P.J. Fox, Y. Zhu, Modeling low Reynolds number incompressible flows using SPH, J. Comput. Phys. 136 (1997) 214-226.
J. Feldman, J. Bonet, Dynamic refinement and boundary contact forces in SPH with applications in fluid flow problems, Int. J. Numer. Meth. Engng. 72 (2007) 295-324.
J.P. Morris, Analysis of Smoothed Particle Hydrodynamics with Applications, (doctor’s thesis, Department of Mathematics, Monash University), 1996.
X.Y. Hu, N.A. Adams, A multi-phase SPH method for macroscopic and mesoscopic flows, J. Comput. Phys. 213 (2006) 844-861.
A. Colagrossi, M. Landrini, Numerical simulation of interfacial flows by smoothed particle hydrodynamics, J. Comput. Phys. 191 (2003) 227-264.
S.J. Cummins, M.J. Rudman, J.J. Monaghan, Projection methods and SPH, Monash University Applied Mechanics Report and Preprints, 1997.
P.W. Cleary, J.J. Monaghan, Conduction modelling using smoothed particle hydrodynamics, J. Comput. Phys. 148 (1999) 227-264.
G.K. Batchelor, An Introduction to Fluid Dynamics, Cambridge Univ. Press, 1967.
J.J. Monaghan, Simulating free surface flows with SPH, J. Comput. Phys. 110 (1994) 399-406.
D.J. Gryffits, Introduction to Electrodynamics - 3rd ed., Prentice Hall, New Jersey, 1999.
J.J. Monaghan, Smoothed Particle Hydrodynamics, Annu. Rev. Astron. Astrophys. 30 (1992) 542-574.
J.J. Monaghan, On the problem of penetration in particle methods, J. Comput. Phys. 82 (1989) 1-15.
P.M. Campbell, Some new algorithms for boundary value problems in smoothed particle hydrodynamics, Technical Report NA-TR-88-296, Mission Research Corporation, Albuquerque, 1989.
S. Shao, E.Y. Lo, Incompressible SPH method for simulating Newtonian and non-Newtonian flows with a free surface, Adv. Water Resour. 26 (2003) 787-800.
M. Yildiz, R.A. Rook, A. Suleman, SPH with multiple boundary tangent method, Int. J. Numer. Meth. Engng. 77 (2009) 1416–1438.
J.C. Maxwell, A treatise on electricity and magnetism, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1873.
U. Ghia, K.N. Ghia, C.T. Shin, High Re-solution for incompressible flow using the Navier-Stokes equations and a multigrid method, J. Comput. Phys. 48 (1982) 387-411.
M. Robinson, Turbulence and Viscous Mixing using Smoothed Particle Hydrodynamics, PhD thesis, Monash University, Australia, 2009.
K. Szewc, J. Pozorski, A. Tanière, Modeling of natural convection with Smoothed Particle Hydrodynamics: Non-Boussinesq formulation, Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer 54 (2011) 4807-4816.
N. Grenier, M. Antuono, A. Colagrossi, D. Le Touzé, B. Alessandrini, An Hamiltonian interface SPH formulation for multi-fluid and free-surface flows, J. Comput. Phys. 228 (2009) 8380-8393.
J. Hongbin, D. Xin, On criterions for smoothed particle hydrodynamics kernels in stable field, J. Comput. Phys. 202 (2005) 699-709.
List of figure captions {#list-of-figure-captions .unnumbered}
=======================
Fig. 1: The ghost-particle no-slip boundary scheme: a) straight wall, b) inner corner.
Fig. 2: The problem with the ghost-particle no-slip boundary condition near the corner: depending on value of the parameter $\alpha$, the velocity boundary condition changes.
Fig. 3: The WCSPH results of the lid-driven cavity (${\textit{Re}}=1000$) at $t=0.03$ with: a) the no-slip and b) the free-slip boundary treatment for velocity divergence computation; employing no-slip condition induces instabilities near the corners.
Fig. 4: The ghost-particle free-slip boundary treatment for: a) the straight wall and b) the corner.
Fig. 5: The lid-driven cavity steady-state velocity profiles for: (a) WCSPH, (b) ISPH-GPPS and (c) ISPH-PPS against Ghia et al. [@Ghia; @et; @al.; @1982] results; profiles obtained for different kernels; $N=3600$, $h/\Delta r = 2$.
Fig. 6: The lid-driven cavity steady-state solution (${\textit{Re}}=1000$, $N=3600$) computed with the WCSPH approach and kernels: (\[cubic spline kernel\]), (\[quintic Wendland\]), (\[quintic Morris\]); the particle clustering phenomenon is noticeable with the cubic spline kernel.
Fig. 7: Histograms of the distance between the nearest pairs of particles; the results obtained for the WCSPH approach and kernels: (\[cubic spline kernel\]), (\[quintic Wendland\]), (\[quintic Morris\]).
Fig. 8: The lid-driven cavity steady-state velocity profiles for: (a) WCSPH, (b) ISPH-GPPS and (c) ISPH-PPS against Ghia et al. [@Ghia; @et; @al.; @1982] results; profiles obtained with different $h/\Delta r$ values; results obtained using the Wendland kernel [@Wendland; @1995] and $N=3600$ particles in domain.
Fig. 9: The lid-driven cavity steady-state velocity profiles for: (a) WCSPH, (b) ISPH-GPPS and (c) ISPH-PPS against Ghia et al. [@Ghia; @et; @al.; @1982] results; results for different number of particles $N$; data obtained using the Wendland kernel [@Wendland; @1995] and $h/\Delta r = 2$.
Fig. 10: The CPU times to obtain the steady-state solution of the lid-driven cavity (${\textit{Re}}=1000$) using the WCSPH and both ISPH approaches; for the WCSPH method, two continuity equations are compared: Eq. (\[SPH continuity symmetrical\]) and density definition (\[SPH direct density computation multiphase\]).
Fig. 11: The Rayleigh-Taylor instability; particle positions at $t=5$ obtained using different incompressibility treatments; solid line: liquid-liquid interface from the reference Level-Set solution [@Grenier; @et; @al.; @2009].
Fig. 12: The density mean value and the r.m.s. obtained for the lid-driven cavity flow at ${\textit{Re}}=1000$; the effect of: (a) the kernel choice, (b) $h/\Delta r$, (c) number of particles $N$ influence in the WCSPH approach; (d) particles number $N$ influence in both: ISPH-PPS and ISPH-GPPS techniques.
Fig. 13: The lid-driven cavity flow: density field at the steady-state solution.
Fig. 14: The density mean value and the r.m.s. obtained for the Rayleigh-Taylor instability (only upper phase $\varrho_U=1.8\varrho_0$) using WCSPH and both ISPH approaches.
Fig. 15: The density field with local disturbance; left: the initial state (regular set of particles with one particle displaced), right: after 50 correction iterations.
Fig. 16: The lid-driven cavity velocity profiles at the steady-state against Ghia et al. [@Ghia; @et; @al.; @1982] reference data (${\textit{Re}}=1000$); results obtained using ISPH with PPS and Pozorski & Wawreńczuk correction for the Wendland kernel [@Wendland; @1995], $h/\Delta r = 2$ and different number of particles $N$.
Fig. 17: The density mean value and r.m.s. obtained using the ISPH approach with PPS and Pozorski & Wawreńczuk density correction ; (a) the lid driven cavity (${\textit{Re}}=1000$), (b) the Rayleigh-Taylor instability (${\textit{Re}}=420$); the results obtained for the Wendland kernel [@Wendland; @1995] and $h/\Delta r = 2$.
Fig. 18: Histograms of the distance between the nearest pairs of the particles; the results obtained for the ISPH-PPS approach (a) without and (b) with the Pozorski and Wawreńczuk correction procedure.
Fig. 19: The Rayleigh-Taylor instability (${\textit{Re}}=420$) computed using ISPH with PPS and Pozorski & Wawreńczuk density correction ; the black lines denote the interface position obtained by Grenier et al. [@Grenier; @et; @al.; @2009] using the Level-Set formulation ($312\times 624$ cells).
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'We study the ground state energy $E_G(n)$ of $N$ classical $O(n)$ vector spins with the Hamiltonian $ \mathcal H = -\sum_{i>j} J_{ij} \vec S_i .\vec S_j $ where the coupling constants {$J_{ij}$} are arbitrary. We prove that $E_G(n)$ is independent of $n$ for all $ n > n_{max}(N) = \big \lfloor \frac{\sqrt{8N+1}-1}{2} \big \rfloor $. We show that this bound is the best possible. We also derive an upper bound for $E_G(m)$ in terms of $E_G(n)$, for $m<n$. We obtain an upper bound on the frustration in the system, as measured by $F(n) \equiv \frac{\sum_{i>j} |J_{ij}| + E_G(n)}{\sum_{i>j} |J_{ij}|} $. We describe a procedure for constructing a set of $J_{ij}$’s such that an arbitrary given state, {$\vec{S}_i$}, is the ground state.'
address: 'Department of Theoretical Physics, Tata Institute of Fundamental Research, Homi Bhabha Road, Colaba, Mumbai-400005, INDIA'
author:
- Samarth Chandra
title: 'Dependence of ground state energy of classical $n$-vector spins on $n$'
---
I. Introduction
===============
In this paper, we study the ground states of $N$ unit classical $O(n)$ spins, $\vec S_i$, having a hamiltonian of the form $$\begin{aligned}
\mathcal H = -\sum_{i>j} J_{ij} \vec S_i .\vec S_j \end{aligned}$$ where $J_{ij}$’s are arbitrary real numbers–positive, negative or zero. Such hamiltonians with arbitrary bonds and couplings are of interest in the context of disordered systems, especially spin glasses \[1\]. One of the interesting questions is the behavior of the ground state energy as the spin space dimension, $n$, is increased. For example one can study the behavior of such models when $n$ is large. In this context, Hastings \[2\] proved that for $N$ spins beyond a spin space dimension of $ n_{max}(N) = \big \lfloor \frac{\sqrt{8N+1}-1}{2} \big \rfloor $ the ground state energy does not decrease any further and also that this bound is saturated. Aspelmeier and Moore \[3\] have then used this bound in accelerating their numerical simulations of spin glasses. We provide an alternate proof for this bound. A similar analysis has been done earlier in the context of correlation matrices by Grone, et. al. \[4\] and for a relaxed version of maxcut problem of theoretical computer science \[5\].
An interesting question is the behavior of the *average* number of non-zero spin space components (average over disorder) in the ground state, as a function of the number of spins, $N$. For the infinite range model with gaussian distributed $J_{ij}$’s, this number increases as $N^{\mu}$ where $\mu = \frac{2}{5}$ \[2,3\]. Lee, Dhar and Young \[6\] have numerically determined $\mu$ for several different models.
We also derive both upper and lower bounds on the ground state energy of $O(m)$ spins in terms of the ground state energy when they are replaced by $O(n)$ spins ($m \neq n$) keeping the couplings, $J_{ij}$’s, the same. A stronger bound is also provided for Ising spins ($m=1$) when all couplings are antiferromagnetic and $E_G(n)$ is low.
We also consider the problem of finding the ground state of such a hamiltonian \[7\]. We study the inverse problem—how to find a (non-trivial) hamiltonian of the form in equation (1) so that a given spin state {$ \vec S_i$} is the ground state. This question is trivial for Ising spins. One just assigns a non-negative $J_{ij}$ if the spins are parallel, and a non-positive $J_{ij}$ if they are anti-parallel. However with $O(n)$ spins $(n>1)$ the problem is non-trivial and in some cases there is no (non-zero) solution, for example, $N=3$, $n \geq 3$, with the three spins non-coplanar. In general, to find the desired set of couplings, $J_{ij}$’s, we can express the hamiltonian in terms of the angles of the spherical polar coordinates of the spins and set the derivatives with respect to the angles equal to zero at the angles corresponding to the desired ground state. This gives a set of linear relations between the couplings, $J_{ij}$’s. In addition, to ensure that this extremum is a minimum, and not a maximum or a saddle point, we have the additional constraint of the Hessian being positive semi-definite. Finding $J_{ij}$’s which simultaneously satisfy the linear relations as well as the positive semidefiniteness constraint on the Hessian is non-trivial. It is a semi-definite programming problem \[8\] for which fast algorithms and their software implementations are available.
We provide a simple procedure for obtaining a large class of such hamiltonians. However, not all hamiltonians with {$ \vec S_i$} as the ground state are obtained by this procedure. We conjecture a characterisation of the hamiltonians obtained and give proof of a part of the conjecture.
The plan of the paper is as follows. In section II we summarise some properties of the correlation matrices of classical spin states which are found useful in the later sections. In section III, we prove that for $N$ spins beyond a spin space dimension of $n_{max}(N)$ the ground state energy becomes independent of $n$. That this is the best bound is proved by providing a sequence of graphs and couplings, one for each $N$, such that $E_G(n_{max}-1) > E_G(n_{max})$. In section IV, we derive both upper and lower bounds on the ground state energy of $O(m)$ spins in terms of the ground state energy when they are replaced by $O(n)$ spins ($m \neq n$) keeping the couplings, $J_{ij}$’s, the same. For Ising spins with all couplings antiferromagnetic, in a special case, a stronger bound is derived. We obtain an upper bound on spin frustration, as measured by $F(n) \equiv \frac{\sum_{i>j} |J_{ij}| + E_G(n)}{\sum_{i>j} |J_{ij}|} $ — we show that $F(n) - F(\infty) \leq \beta_n$ where $\beta_n $ is a constant, independent of $J_{ij}$’s. In section V, we provide a procedure for constructing hamiltonians of the form in equation (1) with arbitrary given state {$\vec {S}_i$} as the ground state. Section VI summarises the results.
II. Some properties of correlation matrices of classical spin states
====================================================================
For an arbitrary state {$\vec{S_i}$} of $O(n)$ spins define the $(N \times N)$ correlation matrix, $C = [\vec S_i .\vec S_j]$. Alternatively,
$$C = S^T S$$
where $S$ is the $(n \times N)$ matrix with vector of the $i^{th}$ spin as the $i^{th}$ column. Clearly, $C$ is real, symmetric, has diagonal elements unity and can be written as $C = ODO^T$, where $O$ is an orthogonal matrix and $D$ diagonal.
$C$ is positive semidefinite, i.e. all eigenvalues of $C$ are non-negative, since for every $x \in R^N, x^TCx = (Sx)^T(Sx) \geq 0 $.
The number of non-zero (and hence positive) eigenvalues of $C$ is atmost $n$. This can be seen as follows: each row of $C$ is a linear combination of the $n$ rows of $S$ implying that the number of linearly independent rows of $C$ is atmost $n$. Diagonalising $C$, let $C = ODO^T$ where $O$ is an orthogonal matrix and $D$ diagonal with (let’s say) first $k$ eigenvalues positive and rest zero. The rows (columns) of $O$ are mutually orthogonal and hence linearly independent. $(DO^T)$ now has $k$ linearly independent rows and thus $ODO^T$ also has $k$ linearly independent rows. The number of linearly independent rows of $C$ we have already argued to be atmost $n$. Hence the number of positive eigenvalues of $C$ is atmost $n$.
Conversely, if $C$ is a real, symmetric matrix with diagonal elements unity and having $n$ or fewer positive eigenvalues and rest zero, then there exists a spin state of classical $O(n)$ unit spins for which it is the correlation matrix. To see this, $C$ being real and symmetric, can be diagonalised as $C = ODO^T = (O \sqrt{D})(O \sqrt{D})^T$ where $O$ is an orthogonal matrix and $D$ diagonal with first $k (\leq n)$ diagonal entries positive. The last $(N-n)$ rows of $(O \sqrt{D})^T$ are known to be zero and we drop them to define an $(n \times N)$ matrix $S$ such that $C=S^TS$. Since $c_{ii} = 1 \mbox{ } \forall \mbox{ } i$ each column of $S$ can be interpreted as a unit classical $O(n)$ spin, $C$ being their correlation matrix.
III. The independence of the ground state energy from $n$ for $n \geq n_{max}(N)$
=================================================================================
Consider the variation of the ground state energy $E_G(n)$ as a function of the spin space dimension $n$ of the $O(n)$ spins keeping the couplings, $J_{ij}$’s, the same. For $n' > n$ we have $E_G(n) \geq E_G(n')$ because for any state of $O(n)$ spins we can construct a corresponding state of $O(n')$ spins with the same value of energy by augmenting each vector with $(n' - n)$ zeroes. Also for any $n > N$ we have $E_G(n) = E_G(N)$ because $N$ spins span an atmost $N$ dimensional subspace of the $n$ dimensional spin space implying that by an appropriate choice of basis we can make all coordinates after the first $N$ coordinates zero and by dropping them we get an $O(N)$ spin state with the same value of energy.
**Theorem 1** For $N$ classical unit $O(n)$ vector spins with hamiltonian $\mathcal H = -\sum_{i>j} J_{ij} \vec S_i .\vec S_j$, where {$J_{ij}$} are any real numbers, the ground state energy $E_G(n) = E_G(n_{max})$ for all $n > n_{max}$ where $$n_{max}(N) = \big \lfloor \frac{\sqrt{8N+1}-1}{2} \big \rfloor$$
Here $\lfloor x \rfloor $ for $ x \in \mathbf R $ is the greatest integer not greater than $x$.
**Proof** Let us summarise the idea of the proof before getting into the details. Suppose we have a ground state which has more than $n_{max}(N)$ dimensions. Starting fron the correlation matrix of this state we construct another matrix which is the correlation matrix of a spin state which is embedded in one less spin space dimension but has the same energy. This construction always works whenever the spin state is embedded in more than $n_{max}(N)$ dimensions. Since, as shown above, $E_G(n) \geq E_G(n')$ for $n' > n$ this implies that for $n > n_{max}$, $E_G(n) = E_G(n_{max})$, as desired.
We now discuss the proof. When the spins are $O(N)$ vectors let {$\vec{S}_i$} be a ground state. Consider the correlation matrix, $C$, with elements $ c_{ij} = \vec S_i .\vec S_j $ for all $i$, $j$. Diagonalising $C$, we can write $C = O^T D O $ with $D$ a diagonal matrix and $O$ an orthogonal matrix. Let
$$D = \left[ \begin{array}{cccccc}
d_1 & \ldots & 0 & 0 & \ldots & 0 \\
\ldots & & \ldots & 0 & \ldots & 0 \\
0 & \ldots & d_k & 0 & \ldots & 0 \\
0 & \ldots & 0 &0 & & 0\\
\ldots & \ldots & \ldots & & & \ldots \\
0 & \ldots & \ldots & & & 0 \end{array} \right]$$
where the first $k$ diagonal entries of $D$ are positive and rest zero.
Consider $C' = O^T (D + rB)O$ where $B$ is symmetric with $B_{ij} = 0 \mbox{ if } i > k \mbox{ or } j > k$. This leaves $ \frac {1}{2} k (k+1) $ free parameters in $B$ and ensures that $C'$ is also symmetric and the zero eigenvalues of $C$ and the corresponding eigenvectors are not perturbed. Also, let $B$ satisfy
$$\label{Bdiag1}
[O^T B O]_{tt} = 0$$
for all $t=1,2, \ldots N$. This ensures that the diagonal elements of $C'$ remain unchanged.
The $ \frac {1}{2} k (k+1) $ free parameters of $B$ must satisfy the $N$ linear homogenous equations (5). Hence whenever $ \frac {1}{2} k (k+1) > N $ such a non-zero $B$ will exist and we can increase $r$ till one of the first $k$ eigenvalues of $C$ becomes zero. Thus we obtain a matrix $C'$ which is the correlation matrix of a spin state embedded in $(k-1)$ dimensions. As shown in the next paragraph, this spin state is a ground state. Thus applying this procedure repeatedly we obtain a ground state embedded in atmost $ \big \lfloor \frac{\sqrt{8N+1}-1}{2} \big \rfloor $ dimensions.
The matrix $B$ chosen above is such that for $r$ small enough $C' = C \pm r O^T BO$ are *both* correlation matrices of valid spin states with energy $ - \sum_{i>j} J_{ij} c_{ij} \pm r [\sum_{i>j} J_{ij}(O^TBO)_{ij}] $. Since we started from a $C$ which was a ground state this can happen only if $\sum_{i>j} J_{ij}(O^TBO)_{ij} = 0$ i.e. if $O^TBO$ was a neutral direction. Thus the correlation matrix $C'$ also corresponds to a ground state.
Hence we have provided a construction for continuously deforming a ground state and bringing it to lie in an atmost $n_{max}(N)$ dimensional subspace of the spin space without changing the energy, thus proving the desired result.
**Theorem 2** The bound in theorem 1 is the best possible, i.e. there exist values of {$J_{ij}$} such that $E_G(n_{max}) < E_G(n_{max}-1)$ where $ n_{max}(N) = \big \lfloor \frac{\sqrt{8N+1}-1}{2} \big \rfloor$.
**Proof** Consider three spins $\vec S_p$, $\vec S_q$ and $\vec S_{pq}$ with $J_{pq} = -J$ and $J_{p(pq)} = J_{q(pq)} = \sqrt{2} J $, see figure 1. It is easy to see that for this system of three spins in the ground state $\vec S_p$ is perpendicular to $\vec S_q$. If we integrate over $\vec S_{pq}$, we get an effective interaction between $\vec S_p$ and $\vec S_q$. Now construct a set of $k$ spins with this effective interaction between every pair of them (including the intermediate spins the total number of spins will be $N = \frac{1}{2} k (k+1)$). Their energy gets fully minimised only when these $k$ spins are perpendicular to each other which happens only in an atleast $n_{max} = k$ dimensional space thus completing the proof.
![A sequence of examples for which $E_G(n_{max}(N)) < E_G(n_{max}(N)-1) $. Shown are three of those members of the sequence for which $ \frac{\sqrt{8N+1}-1}{2} $ is an integer (such $N$’s are $3,6,10,\ldots=\frac{1}{2}k(k+1)$). Rest of the members are obtained by adding appropriate number of free spins to the example of the last $N$ for which $\frac{\sqrt{8N+1}-1}{2}$ is an integer eg. $N=8$ example has two more free spins added to the $N=6$ example.[]{data-label="advcorr"}](spin_theorems_fig1.eps){width="0.9\columnwidth"}
IV. Bounds on the ground state energy
=====================================
We have seen that $E_G(m) \geq E_G(n)$ for $m<n$. Now we will derive an *upper* bound on $E_G(m)$ in terms of $E_G(n)$. This result (theorem 3) generalises a known result on the performance of Goemans-Williamson algorithm for maxcut problem of theoretical computer science \[5\]. The result by Goemans and Williamson, when translated into statistical physics language, would correspond to the special case of $m=1$. Theorem 4 is a translation of a known result on maxcut problem into statistical physics language \[5\]. The connection between the problem of finding the ground states of Ising spins and maxcut problem has been known before\[9\].
It will be helpful to summarise the overall strategy before getting into the details. Suppose the various possible orientations of $O(m)$ spins occur according to an arbitrary given probability distribution. Then the energy is also a random variable and the expected value of the energy will always be greater than or equal to the ground state energy, i.e. $E_G(m) \leq E[\mathcal{H}_m]$, where $E[\mathcal{H}_m]$ denotes the expected value of the energy of $O(m)$ spins. If we choose the probability distribution in such a way that we are able to bound $E[\mathcal{H}_m]$ in terms of $E_G(n)$ from above we would have obtained the desired result.
Now we give the derivation in detail. First we define a randomised procedure for obtaining an $O(m)$ state, say {$\vec{S}_{i(m)}$}, from the ground state {$\vec{S}'_{i(n)}$} of $O(n)$ spins. In the spin space of $O(n)$ spins randomly choose an $m$-dimensional subspace and project all the spins onto it. Normalise the $O(m)$ vectors thus obtained. Clearly different $O(m)$ states are obtained by this procedure depending on which $m$-dimensional subspace was chosen for projection. The expectation value of the $O(m)$ energy is $E[\mathcal{H}_m] = - \sum_{i>j} J_{ij} E[\vec{S}_{i(m)} . \vec{S}_{j(m)}]$. Now if $\mathcal{P}_{mn}$ denotes a projection operator from $n$ to $m$ dimensions
$$E[\vec{S}_{i(m)} . \vec{S}_{j(m)}] = \int \frac {\mathcal{P}_{mn} \vec{S}'_{i(n)} . \mathcal{P}_{mn} \vec{S}'_{j(n)}}{|\mathcal{P}_{mn} \vec{S}_{i(n)}| \mbox{ } |\mathcal{P}_{mn} \vec{S}_{j(n)}| } d{\mathcal{P}_{mn}} \equiv f_{mn}(\theta_{ij})$$
where $\theta_{ij}$ is the angle between $\vec{S}'_{i(n)}$ and $\vec{S}'_{j(n)}$ and the integral is over all projection operators $\mathcal{P}_{mn}$ with equal measure. As an example, in spherical polar coordinates,
$$f_{23}(\theta) = \int_{\phi_2 = 0}^{\pi} \int_{\phi_1 = 0}^{2 \pi} \frac{\sin\phi_2(\cos\theta - \cos\phi_1 \sin^2\phi_2 \cos(\phi_1 - \theta) )}{4 \pi \sqrt{1-\cos^2\phi_1 \sin^2\phi_2} \sqrt{1- \sin^2\phi_2 \cos^2(\phi_1 - \theta)} } \,d\phi_2 \,d\phi_1$$
By reversing the direction of $\vec{S}'_{i(n)}$ we observe that $$f_{mn}(\pi - \theta_{ij}) = - f_{mn}(\theta_{ij})$$
Also $\frac {1-f_{mn}(\theta)}{1-\cos\theta} \geq 0 $ for all $\theta \in (0, \pi] $. Hence we can find a lower bound on $\frac {1-f_{mn}(\theta)}{1-\cos\theta}$, denoted by $\alpha_{mn}$, which gives $$f_{mn}(\theta) \leq (1 - \alpha_{mn}) + \alpha_{mn} \cos\theta$$
Also replacing $\theta$ by $(\pi - \theta)$ in this inequality we get $$- f_{mn}(\theta) \leq (1 - \alpha_{mn}) - \alpha_{mn} \cos\theta$$
For $J_{ij} < 0$, using (9), we get $$-J_{ij} f_{mn}(\theta_{ij}) \leq - (1- \alpha_{mn}) J_{ij} - \alpha_{mn} J_{ij} \cos\theta_{ij}$$
For $J_{ij} > 0$, using (10), we get $$-J_{ij} f_{mn}(\theta_{ij}) \leq (1- \alpha_{mn}) J_{ij} - \alpha_{mn} J_{ij} \cos\theta_{ij}$$
Summing (11) over all those $ij$-pairs for which $J_{ij} < 0$ and (12) over all those $ij$-pairs for which $J_{ij} > 0$ and adding we get $$E[\mathcal{H}_m] = - \sum_{i>j} J_{ij} f_{mn}(\theta_{ij}) \leq (1-\alpha_{mn}) \sum_{i>j} |J_{ij}| + \alpha_{mn} E_G(n)$$
Now the minimum value of a random variable is always less than or equal to its expectaion value.
Therefore, we have
**Theorem 3** For $(m < n)$ $$E_G(n) \leq E_G(m) \leq (1- \alpha_{mn}) \sum_{i>j} |J_{ij}| + \alpha_{mn} E_G(n)$$ where $\alpha_{mn}$ is the minimum value of $\frac{1-f_{mn}(\theta)}{1-\cos\theta} $ over the interval $\theta \in (0, \pi] $ and $f_{mn}(\theta)$ has been defined above.
Or rearranging the inequality, $\left(\frac{1}{\alpha_{mn}} \right) E_G(m) - \left( \frac{1-\alpha_{mn}}{\alpha_{mn}} \right) \sum_{i>j} |J_{ij}| \leq E_G(n) \leq E_G(m)$
As an example, for $m=1$ and $n$ arbitrary, $f_{1n}(\theta_{ij}) = 1 - 2 \frac{\theta_{ij}}{\pi} $ and $\alpha_{1n} \approx 0.87856 $ \[5\]. We have determined $f_{23}$ and $f_{34}$ numerically by representing them as integrals in spherical polar coordinates, see equation (7) for instance. The graphs of $f_{34}(\theta)$ and $q_{34}(\theta) = \frac{1-f_{mn}(\theta)}{1-\cos\theta}$ are shown in figure 2. We find that $\alpha_{23} \approx 0.96$ and $\alpha_{34} \approx 0.98$.
![The functions $f_{34}(\theta)$ and $q_{34}(\theta) = \frac{1-f_{34}(\theta)}{1-\cos\theta}$ []{data-label="advcorr"}](spin_theorems_fig2.ps){width="0.7\columnwidth"}
As a specific instance, for the triangular lattice anti-ferromagnet $E_G(1) = - \frac {1}{3} J$ implying that $ -(0.52)J \leq E_G(2) \leq -\frac{1}{3} J $. It is known that $E_G(2) = -(0.5)J $ which compares very well with the *non-trivial part* of the inequality.
Now, we prove a stronger bound for a special case of Ising antiferromagnets:
**Theorem 4** For the special case of $m=1$, let all couplings, [$J_{ij}$]{}, be antiferromagnetic. Then for the case $(E_G(n) \leq \delta \sum_{i>j} |J_{ij}|)$ ($\delta \approx -0.69 $) we have the stronger bound
$$\begin{aligned}
& & E_G(n) \\ & \leq & E_G(1) \\ & \leq & (-\sum_{i>j} |J_{ij}|) \frac{2}{\pi} \arccos \left( \frac{E_G(n)}{\sum_{i>j}|J_{ij}|} \right) + \sum_{i>j} |J_{ij}| \end{aligned}$$
**Proof** Again using the randomised procedure in the derivation of theorem 3, from the ground state {$\vec{S}'_{i(n)}$} of $O(n)$ model, various Ising states are obtained with different probabilities such that $ E[\mathcal H_1] = - \sum_{i>j} J_{ij} + \sum_{i>j} J_{ij} \frac{2}{\pi} \arccos x_{ij} $ where $x_{ij} = \vec {S}'_{i(n)} . \vec {S}'_{j(n)} $ (using $f_{1n}(\theta_{ij}) = 1 - 2 \frac{\theta_{ij}}{\pi} $).
Consider the function $\arccos x$. Draw the *oblique* tangent from (1,0) to the curve, intersecting the curve tangentially at $(\delta, \arccos \delta )$. Consider the function $h(x)$ which is the same as $\arccos x$ for $x< \delta$ and the same as the tangent for $x \in [\delta, 1]$.
Clearly, $ \arccos x_{ij} \geq h(x_{ij}) $ and since all $J_{ij} \leq 0$,
$$\begin{aligned}
& & E[\mathcal{H}_1] \\ & \leq & \frac{2}{\pi} \sum_{i>j} J_{ij} h(x_{ij}) -\sum_{i>j} J_{ij} \\
& \leq & -\frac{2}{\pi} (\sum_{i>j} |J_{ij}|) h \left( \sum_{i>j} \frac{|J_{ij}|}{\sum_{p>q} |J_{pq}|} x_{ij} \right) - \sum_{i>j} J_{ij} \end{aligned}$$
where the last inequality uses the convexity of $h(x)$.
Since the minimum value of a random variable is less than or equal to its expectation value, we have $E_G(n) \leq E_G(1) \leq E[\mathcal H_1] $. Also, for $ x < \delta$ we have $h(x) = \arccos x$ and the desired inequality is proved.
In the presence of antiferromagnetic $J_{ij}$’s, there may not exist any spin configuration that minimises the energy of each individual bond to $-|J_{ij}|$. One of the possible measures of the frustration of spins is
$$F(n) \equiv \frac{\sum_{i>j} |J_{ij}| + E_G(n)}{\sum_{i>j} |J_{ij}|}$$
We can consider spin frustration as arising in two steps: first we choose the $J_{ij}$’s but do not put any restriction on the dimensionality of the spin space—it is allowed to be as large as desired for the minimisation of energy. The frustration of this system will be $F(\infty)$ which will be the same as $F(N)$ because $E_G(n) = E_G(N)$ for $n>N$. To obtain the actual $O(n)$ system we *now* restrict the number of dimensions in the spin space to $n$, thus increasing the spin frustration from $F(\infty)$ to $F(n)$.
**Theorem 5** If $(m < n)$
$$\frac{E_G(m) - E_G(n)}{\sum_{i>j}|J_{ij}|} \leq 2 (1-\alpha_{mn})$$
As a particular case, $$F(n)-F(\infty) \leq 2 (1-\alpha_{nN})$$ where $\alpha_{mn}$ are the same as in theorem 3.
**Proof** In theorem 3, subtract $E_G(n)$ throughout, divide by $\sum_{i>j} |J_{ij}|$ and observe that $\frac{E_G(n)}{\sum_{i>j} |J_{ij}|} \geq -1$ thus completing the proof.
In particular, for all $n$, $F(n) - F(\infty) \leq F(1) - F(\infty) \leq 2(1-\alpha_{1N}) \approx 0.24288 $.
V. Procedure for constructing a model with an arbitrary given ground state
==========================================================================
For $N$ classical spins of $O(n)$ type let {$\vec{S}'_i$} be a given state. We want to construct a hamiltonian with only two-spin Heisenberg type interactions which has {$\vec{S}'_i$} as the ground state. The following procedure constructs a hamiltonian of the form in eq. (1) (upto a constant) which has {$\vec{S}'_i$} as the ground state.
1\. For the given ground state {$\vec{S}'_i$} construct the correlation matrix, $C'$, such that $c'_{ij} = \vec{S}'_i . \vec{S}'_j \mbox{ } \forall i,j = 1, 2, \ldots N$.
2\. Let $C' = O' D' O'^T$ where $O'$ is an orthogonal matrix and $D'$ diagonal with, let’s say, the first $k$ diagonal entries non-zero and rest entire matrix zero.
3\. Construct an $(N \times N)$ auxilliary matrix $G$ as follows:
$$G = \left[ \begin{array}{cc}
G_1 & G_2 \\
G_3 & G_4 \end{array} \right]$$
where $G_1$ is a $(k \times k)$ matrix, etc. Moreover, choose $G_1 = 0$, $G_2 = 0$, $G_3 = 0$ and $G_4$ to be any $(N-k) \times (N-k)$ real, symmetric matrix with all eigen values *non-positive*.
4\. Define $J = [J_{ij}] = O' G O'^T $.
**Theorem 6**: For the hamiltonian $ \mathcal H = -\sum_{i,j = 1}^N J_{ij} \vec S_i .\vec S_j $ thus constructed, the spin state {$\vec{S}'_i$} is the ground state.
**Proof**: For any spin state {$\vec{S}_i$}, construct the correlation matrix $C= [c_{ij}] = [\vec{S}_i . \vec{S}_j]$ and diagonalise it, $$\label{Cdiag}
C = ODO^T$$ where $O$ is an orthogonal matrix and $D$ is diagonal with all eigenvalues non-negative.
Also for the matrix $J$ defined above let $$\label{Jdiag}
(-J)^T = \hat{O} \hat{D} \hat{O}^T$$ where $\hat{O}$ is an orthogonal matrix and $\hat{D}$ is diagonal. Since $J$ is negative semidefinite, $(-J)$ is positive semidefinite, thus the entries of $\hat{D}$ are non-negative.
Now $\mathcal{H} = Tr((-J)^TC)$. Using equations (25) and (26) and repeatedly using $Tr(AB) = Tr(BA)$ we get $\mathcal{H} = Tr[W^T W] \geq 0$ where $W = \sqrt{\hat{D}} \hat{O}^T O \sqrt{D}$. Therefore, for any state {$\vec{S}_i$}, $$\label{Hpos}
\mathcal{H} \geq 0$$
For {$\vec{S}'_i$}, by construction, $\mathcal{H} = Tr((-J)^T C') = 0 $ implying that {$\vec{S}'_i$} is a ground state of $\mathcal{H}$.
Although a large number of hamiltonians with arbitrary given state {$\vec{S}'_i$} as the ground state can be obtained by this procedure, not all the hamiltonians with this property are obtained. For instance, it can be easily checked that for three Ising spins, one up and the other two down, happens to be a ground state when all three couplings are antiferromagnetic with equal strength, but this set of couplings can not be obtained by the above procedure for any allowed choice of the matrix $G_4$. Thus we would like to characterise which hamiltonians can be obtained by this procedure for a given ground state and which hamiltonians can not be obtained.
We expect that a hamiltonian with {$\vec{S}'_i$} as the ground state is obtained by this procedure if and only if upon replacing the given spins by spins with any higher spin space dimension, keeping $J_{ij}$’s the same, the ground state energy remains the same. The *if* part is our conjecture while the *only if* part is proved as follows: for any $\tilde{n} > n$, by augmenting each vector of {$\vec{S}'_i$} by $(\tilde{n} - n)$ zeroes, we can obtain a state with the value of the hamiltonian $\mathcal H_{\tilde{n}} = 0$. Since the hamiltonian is expressible as the trace of the product of two symmetric positive semidefinite matrices its value cannot be negative as in equation (27), implying that the $\tilde{n}$ dimensional state thus obtained is the ground state of $O(\tilde{n})$ spins. Therefore, for $\tilde{n}>n$ we have $E_G(\tilde{n}) = E_G(n)$ thus completing the proof. This proof is consistent with the case of three Ising spins with antiferromagnetic couplings discussed above because if we replace three Ising spins by XY-spins the ground state energy decreases from $- \frac{1}{3} J $ per bond to $- \frac{1}{2} J $ per bond.
VI. Summary
===========
We showed that as we increase the spin space dimension, $n$, the ground state energy, $E_G(n)$, becomes independent of $n$ beyond a spin space dimension of $n_{max}(N)$, and this bound is the best possible. For $m<n$ we derived an upper bound for $E_G(m)$ in terms of $E_G(n)$, the lower bound was trivial. A stronger version for a special case of $m=1$ was also proved. Similar bounds on $ E_G(m) - E_G(n)$ and a measure of spin frustration, $F(n)$, were derived. A procedure was given for constructing a hamiltonian with an arbitrary given spin state, {$\vec{S}'_i$}, as the ground state.
I want to thank Prof. Deepak Dhar for his guidance and encouragement throughtout this work. I thank Prof. Daya Gaur for introducing me to the area of approximation algorithms for NP-complete problems and maxcut problem. I thank Abhishek Dhar, Sriram Shastry, Alan Bray, Stephan Boyd and Katya Schienberg for discussions, Kanval Rekhi Foundation for partial financial support and CSIR for Shyama Prasad Mukherjee fellowship.
[40]{}
\[1\] K.Binder, A.P.Young, Reviews of Modern Physics, Vol. 58, No. 4, October 1986
\[2\] M.B.Hastings, J.Stat.Phys. 99, 171 (2000)
\[3\] T. Aspelmeier and M.A.Moore, Phys. Rev. Lett., 92, 077201 (2004)
\[4\] R.Grone, S.Pierce, W.Watkins, Linear Algebra and its Applications, 134:63-70(1990)
\[5\] M.X.Goemans and D.P.Williamson, Journal of the Association for Computing Machinery, Vol.42, No.6, November 1995, pp. 1115-1145; M.X.Goemans, Mathematical Programming, 79(1997), pp. 143-161
\[6\] L.W.Lee, A.Dhar, A.P.Young, Physical Review E 71, 036146 (2005)
\[7\] This problem is known to be difficult—for Ising spins it is equivalent to the maxcut problem in theoretical computer science which is known to be NP-complete. See, for instance, L.Lovasz and M.D.Plummer, Matching Theory, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1986, page 354
\[8\] L.Vandenberghe and S. Boyd, Semidefinite Programming, SIAM Review, Vol. 38, issue 1, pages 49-95
\[9\] F. Barahona, M. Grotschel, M. Junger, G. Reinelt, Operations Research, Vol. 36, No. 3 (May-June, 1988), pp. 493-513
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
author:
- |
József Balogh [^1]\
[University of Illinois\
University of California, San Diego\
[email protected]]{}
- |
John Lenz [^2]\
[University of Illinois\
[email protected]]{}
bibliography:
- 'refs.bib'
title: 'On the Ramsey-Turán numbers of graphs and hypergraphs'
---
**Acknowledgement.** The authors would like to thank Dhruv Mubayi for suggesting the study of the Ramsey-Turán numbers of ${\operatorname{\mathrm{TK}}^{r}(s)}$. We are also indebted to Béla Bollobás, Jane Butterfield, Imre Leader, and Wojciech Samotij for helpful discussion and feedback.
[^1]: [This material is based upon work supported by NSF CAREER Grant DMS-0745185, UIUC Campus Research Board Grants 09072 and 08086, and OTKA Grant K76099.]{}
[^2]: [Work supported by 2010 REGS Program of the University of Illinois and the National Science Foundation through a fellowship funded by the grant DMS
0838434 “EMSW21MCTP: Research Experience for Graduate Students“.]{}
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: |
We introduce the concept or propagating equations and focus on the case of associativity propagating in varieties of loops.
An equation $\eqsymb$ propagates in an algebra $X$ if $\eqsymb(\overrightarrow y)$ holds whenever $\eqsymb(\overrightarrow x)$ holds and the elements of $\overrightarrow y$ are contained in the subalgebra of $X$ generated by $\overrightarrow x$. If $\eqsymb$ propagates in $X$ then it propagates in all subalgebras and products of $X$ but not necessarily in all homomorphic images of $X$. If $\mathcal V$ is a variety, the propagating core $\mathcal V_{[\eqsymb]} = \setof{X\in\mathcal V}{\eqsymb\text{ propagates in }X}$ is a quasivariety but not necessarily a variety.
We prove by elementary means Goursat’s Lemma for loops, and describe all subdirect products of $X^k$ and all finitely generated loops in $\mathbf{HSP}(X)$ for a nonabelian simple loop $X$. If $\mathcal V$ is a variety of loops in which associativity propagates, $X$ is a finite loop in which associativity propagates, and every subloop of $X$ is either nonabelian simple or contained in $\mathcal V$, then associativity propagates in $\mathbf{HSP}(X)\lor\mathcal V$.
We study the propagating core $\mathcal S_{[x(yz)=(xy)z]}$ of Steiner loops with respect to associativity. While this is not a variety, we exhibit many varieties contained in $\mathcal S_{[x(yz)=(xy)z]}$, each providing a solution to Rajah’s problem, i.e., a variety of loops not contained in Moufang loops in which Moufang Theorem holds.
address:
- 'Department of Mathematics, Charles University, Sokolovská 83, 186 75, Praha 8, Czech Republic'
- 'Department of Mathematics, University of Denver, 2390 S. York St, Denver, Colorado, 80208, USA'
author:
- Aleš Drápal
- 'Petr Vojtěchovsk'' y'
title: |
Subdirect products and propagating equations\
with an application to Moufang Theorem
---
[^1]
Introduction
============
It is natural to ask whether an equation holds in a given algebra $X$ if it is satisfied on a given generating subset of $X$. The following definition formalizes this idea under the restriction that the equation involves all elements of the generating subset and it is satisfied for at least one ordering of the generators.
Let $X$ be an algebra and $\eqsymb$ an equation with $n$ variables in the signature of $X$. Then $\eqsymb$ *propagates in $X$* if the implication $$\label{Eq:P}
\eqsymb(x_1,\dots,x_n) \Longrightarrow ( \eqsymb(y_1,\dots,y_n)\text{ for all }y_1,\dots,y_n\in\langle x_1,\dots,x_n\rangle )$$ holds for all $x_1,\dots,x_n\in X$. Here, $\langle x_1,\dots,x_n\rangle$ denotes the subalgebra of $X$ generated by $x_1,\dots,x_n$. An equation $\eqsymb$ *propagates in a class* $\mathcal X$ of algebras if it propagates in every $X\in\mathcal X$.
Some results in abstract algebra can be restated in the language of propagating equations. For instance, commutativity propagates in the variety of groups, i.e., if $xy=yx$ for some elements $x,y$ of a group, then the subgroup generated by $x$ and $y$ is commutative. The celebrated Moufang Theorem [@Moufang] (see [@Drapal] for a short proof) says that associativity propagates in the variety $\mathcal M$ of Moufang loops, i.e., if $x(yz)=(xy)z$ for some elements $x,y,z$ of a Moufang loop, then the subloop generated by $x,y,z$ is associative.
In the recent paper [@DV] we answered in affirmative a question of Rajah by exhibiting a variety of loops not contained in $\mathcal M$ in which associativity propagates, namely the variety of Steiner loops satisfying the identity $(xz)(((xy)z)(yz)) = ((xz)((xy)z))(yz)$. Our solution to Rajah’s problem was intentionally elementary, however, our understanding of propagation of associativity in loops remains limited, not to mention propagation of general equations in universal algebras. Typical questions that come to mind are:
- If an equation $\eqsymb$ propagates in an algebra $X$, under which assumptions does $\eqsymb$ propagate in the variety $\mathbf{HSP}(X)$ generated by $X$?
- If $\eqsymb$ propagates in the varieties $\mathcal V_1$ and $\mathcal V_2$, under which assumptions does $\eqsymb$ propagate in the join $\mathcal V_1\lor\mathcal V_2$?
- Given a variety $\mathcal V$ and an equation $\eqsymb$, what is the largest variety $\mathcal W$ contained in $\mathcal V$ in which $\eqsymb$ propagates, if it exists?
In this paper we make a few initial observations about propagation of equations and then focus heavily on the special case of associativity in loops, particularly on propagation in $\mathbf{HSP}(X)$ for a given loop $X$. After introducing notation and terminology, we show that the class of algebras in which a given equation propagates is a quasivariety but not always a variety; it is therefore closed under subalgebras and products but not always under homomorphic images. In Section \[Sc:Basic\] we derive basic properties of subdirect products of loops. In Section \[Sc:Lifted\] we prove Goursat’s Lemma for loops, showing that subdirect products of $X\times Y$ are precisely lifted graphs of isomorphisms. We also characterize normal subloops and normal subdirect products of $X\times Y$, and we describe a class of subdirect products of $X^k$. In the short Section \[Sc:SN\] we show that the above class accounts for all subdirect products of $X^k$ as long as $X$ is a nonabelian simple loop, and we describe all normal subloops of $X^k\times Y$ for an arbitrary loop $Y$. In Section \[Sc:Varieties\] we focus on the variety $\mathbf{HSP}(X)$ generated by a single nonabelian simple loop $X$ and we describe all finitely generated algebras of $\mathbf{HSP}(X)$. Returning to propagation of equations, we prove our main result:
*Suppose that an equation $\eqsymb$ propagates in a variety of loops $\mathcal V$ and in finite loops $X_1,\dots,X_n$. If every subloop $Y\le X_i$ is either in $\mathcal V$ or is nonabelian and simple, then $\eqsymb$ propagates in $\mathbf{HSP}(X_1,\dots,X_n)\lor\mathcal V$*.
Finally, in Section \[Sc:Steiner\] we study the class $\mathcal S_{[x(yz)=(xy)z]}$ of Steiner loops in which associativity propagates. We show that $\mathcal S_{[x(yz)=(xy)z]}$ is not a variety and we construct several varieties contained in $\mathcal S_{[x(yz)=(xy)z]}$ but not in the variety of abelian groups. Generalizing a result of Stuhl [@S], we prove that an oriented anti-Pasch Steiner loop belongs to $\mathcal S_{[x(yz)=(xy)z]}$ if and only if it has exponent $4$.
We anticipate that some of our results for the variety of loops can be generalized to larger varieties. For instance, Goursat’s Lemma [@G], suitably interpreted, is known to hold in any Mal’cev variety [@CKP].
Notation and terminology
------------------------
See [@Bruck] for an introduction to loop theory, [@BS] for universal algebra, and [@ColbournRosa] for triple systems.
A class of algebras with the same signature is a *variety* if it is equationally defined. Given a class $\mathcal X$ of algebras, let $\mathbf H(\mathcal X)$ (resp. $\mathbf S(\mathcal X)$, $\mathbf P(\mathcal X)$) be the class of all homomorphic images (resp. subalgebras, products) of algebras from $\mathcal X$. By Birkhoff Theorem, the smallest variety containing $\mathcal X$ is equal to $\mathbf{HSP}(\mathcal X)$.
In a magma $(X,\cdot)$, let $L_x\colon X\to X$, $L_x(y)=xy$ and $R_x\colon X\to X$, $R_x(y)=yx$ denote the left and right translation by $x\in X$, respectively. An algebra $(X,\cdot,{\backslash},{/})$ is a *quasigroup* if the identities $x(x{\backslash}y)=y=x{\backslash}(xy)$, $(x{/}y)y = x = (xy){/}y$ hold [@Evans]. A quasigroup $X$ is a *loop* if there is $e\in X$ such that $ex=xe=x$ holds for all $x\in X$. Equivalently (but not from a universal-algebraic point of view, cf. [@BK]), $(X,\cdot,e)$ is a loop if all translations $L_x,R_x$ are permutations of $X$ and $ex=xe=e$ for all $x\in X$. Note that then $x{\backslash}y = L_x^{-1}(y)$ and $x{/}y = R_y^{-1}(x)$.
For a nonempty subset $A$ of a loop $X$ we write $A\le X$ if $A$ is a subloop of $X$ and $A\unlhd X$ if $A$ is a normal subloop of $X$. A subloop $A$ of $X$ is *proper* if $A\ne X$ and *trivial* if $A=\{e\}$ or $A=X$. A loop $X$ is *abelian* if it is an abelian group.
The *inner mapping group* of a loop $X$ is the permutation group ${\operatorname{Inn}}(X)$ generated by $L_{x,y} = L_{yx}^{-1}L_yL_x$, $R_{x,y} = R_{xy}^{-1}R_yR_x$ and $T_x=R_x^{-1}L_x$, where $x,y\in X$. The permutations $L_{x,y}$, $R_{x,y}$ and $T_x$ are known as the *standard generators* of ${\operatorname{Inn}}(X)$. For each of the standard generators $\psi$ of ${\operatorname{Inn}}(X)$ there exists a loop term $t(x,y,z)$ such that $\psi(z)=t(x,y,z)$, where for $T_x$ we use $y$ as a dummy variable. Each such term will be called an *inner generating term*.
Note that a subloop $A$ of $X$ is normal in $X$ if and only if $t(x,y,z)\in A$ for every inner generating term $t$, every $x,y\in X$ and every $z\in A$. A loop $X$ is *simple* if it has no nontrivial normal subloops.
An element $z\in X$ is *central* if $t(x,y,z)=z$ for every inner generating term $t$ and every $x,y\in X$. The *center* $Z(X)$ of $X$ consists of all central elements of $X$. A subloop $A\le X$ is *central* if $A\le Z(X)$.
Given an abelian group $(Z,+,0)$, a loop $(F,\cdot,e)$ and a loop cocycle $f\colon F\times F\to Z$ satisfying $f(e,x)=f(x,e)=0$ for all $x\in F$, the *central extension* $X=\mathrm{Ext}(Z,F,f)$ *of $Z$ by $F$* is the loop $(Z\times F,*,(0,e))$ defined by $(a,x)*(b,y)=(a+b+f(x,y),xy)$. Note that $Z\times \{e\}\le Z(X)$ and $X/(Z\times \{e\})$ is isomorphic to $F$.
A *Steiner triple system of order $n$*, denoted by $STS(n)$, is a decomposition of the $n(n-1)/2$ edges of the complete graph $K_n$ into disjoint triangles, called blocks. There is a unique $STS(9)$ up to isomorphism. A *Hall triple system* is a Steiner triple system in which any three elements that do not form a block generate a subsystem isomorphic to $STS(9)$. A Steiner triple system is *anti-Pasch* if it contains no Pasch configurations. Note that every Hall triple system is anti-Pasch.
A *Steiner quasigroup* is a commutative quasigroup satisfying the identities $xx=x$ and $x(xy)=y$. There is a one-to-one correspondence between Steiner triple systems and Steiner quasigroups defined on a set $X$: if $x\ne y$ then $x*y=z$ if and only if $\{x,y,z\}$ is a block, and $x*x=x$. A *Steiner loop* is a commutative loop satisfying the identity $x(xy)=y$. There is a one-to-one correspondence between Steiner quasigroups and Steiner loops. If $(X,\cdot)$ is a Steiner quasigroup then $(X\cup\{e\},*)$ is a Steiner loop, where $x*e=e*x=x$ and $x*x=e$ for $x\in X\cup\{e\}$ and $x*y=xy$ if $x\ne y$ are elements of $X$. Conversely, if $(X\cup\{e\},*)$ is a Steiner loop then $(X,\cdot)$ is a Steiner quasigroup, where $xx=x$ and $xy=x*y$ whenever $x\ne y$.
A mapping ${\varphi}\colon X\to Y$ between loops is a *homomorphism* if ${\varphi}(xy)={\varphi}(x){\varphi}(y)$ for every $x,y\in X$. If ${\varphi}\colon X\to Y$ is a homomorphism then ${\varphi}(x{\backslash}y) = {\varphi}(x){\backslash}{\varphi}(y)$ and ${\varphi}(x{/}y) = {\varphi}(x){/}{\varphi}(y)$ for every $x,y\in X$. We let ${\operatorname{Im}}({\varphi})$ denote the image of ${\varphi}$ and ${\operatorname{Ker}}({\varphi})=\setof{x\in X}{{\varphi}(x)=e}$ the kernel of ${\varphi}$. Note that if ${\varphi}\colon X\to Y$ is a surjective loop homomorphism and $A\unlhd X$ then $f(A)\unlhd Y$ and $Y/f(A)$ is a homomorphic image of $X/A$.
Basic properties of equation propagation
----------------------------------------
For an equation $\eqsymb$ and a class of algebras $\mathcal X$ we call $$\mathcal X_{[\eqsymb]} = \setof{X\in\mathcal X}{\text{$\eqsymb$ propagates in $X$}}$$ the *propagating core of $X$ with respect to $\eqsymb$*.
\[Th:Quasivariety\] Let $\eqsymb$ be an equation and $\mathcal X$ the class of all algebras in a signature $\Sigma$. Then the propagating core $\mathcal X_{[\eqsymb]}$ is a quasivariety.
Let $T$ be the class of all terms in $\Sigma$ and note that $y\in\langle x_1,\dots,x_n\rangle$ if and only if $y=u(x_1,\dots,x_n)$ for some $u\in T$. The implication is therefore equivalent to the collection of implications $$\eqsymb(x_1,\dots,x_n) \Longrightarrow \eqsymb(u_1(x_1,\dots,x_n),\dots,u_n(x_1,\dots,x_n)),$$ where $u_1,\dots,u_n$ range over $T$.
\[Cr:HS-propagation\] Let $\eqsymb$ be an equation that propagates in the class $\mathcal X$ of algebras. Then $\eqsymb$ propagates in $\mathbf S(\mathcal X)$ and in $\mathbf P(\mathcal X)$.
This follows from Theorem \[Th:Quasivariety\] and from the fact that quasivarieties are closed under subalgebras and products, cf. [@BS Theorem V.2.25].
As an immediate consequence of Corollary \[Cr:HS-propagation\] we obtain:
\[Lm:PropFinGen\] An equation $\eqsymb$ propagates in an algebra $X$ if and only if it propagates in every finitely generated subalgebra of $X$.
Let $\eqsymb$ be an equation and $\mathcal V$ a variety. Then the propagating core $\mathcal V_{[\eqsymb]}$ is a variety if and only if $\mathbf{H}(\mathcal V_{[\eqsymb]})\subseteq\mathcal V_{[\eqsymb]}$.
The following example exhibits an algebra $X$ and an equation $\eqsymb$ that propagates in $X$ but not in $\mathbf{H}(X)$.
\[Ex:xxx\] Consider the loop equation $$\label{Eq:Exp3}
(xx)x=e$$ and the loop $(F,\cdot,e)$ with multiplication table $$\begin{array}{c|ccccc}
F&e&a&b&c&d\\
\hline
e&e&a&b&c&d\\
a&a&b&d&e&c\\
b&b&e&c&d&a\\
c&c&d&a&b&e\\
d&d&c&e&a&b
\end{array}$$ Then does not propagate in $F$ because $(aa)a = ba = e$, $b=aa\in \langle a\rangle$, but $(bb)b = cb = a\ne e$.
Let $X=\mathrm{Ext}(\mathbb Z_3,F,f) = (\mathbb Z_3\times F,*,(0,e))$, where $$f(x,y) = \left\{\begin{array}{ll}
0,&\text{ if $x=e$ or $y=e$ or $x\ne y$},\\
1,&\text{ if $x=y\ne e$}.
\end{array}\right.$$ Let $Z=\mathbb Z_3\times \{e\}\unlhd X$ and note that $X/Z$ is isomorphic to $F$. We claim that propagates in $X$. Consider $(r,x)\in X$. If $x\ne e$ then $((r,x)*(r,x))*(r,x) = (2r+1,x^2)*(r,x) = (1,x^2x)\ne (0,e)$, where we have used $x^2\ne x$. If $x=e$ then $(r,x)=(r,e)$ generates a subgroup of $Z\cong \mathbb Z_3$ in which certainly holds.
Example \[Ex:AssocDoesNotPropagate\] will furnish a finite Steiner loop $X$ such that associativity propagates in $X$ but not in $\mathbf{H}(X)$.
\[Ex:Ring\] Let $\mathcal R$ be the variety of unital commutative rings. We claim that $R\in\mathcal R_{[x^2=x]}$ if and only if $\mathrm{char}(R)=2$. Indeed, if idempotence propagates in $R$ then, since $1^2=1$, we must have $(1+1)^2=1+1$ and thus $\mathrm{char}(R)=2$. Conversely, suppose that $R\in\mathcal R$, $\mathrm{char}(R)=2$ and $r\in R$ satisfies $r^2=r$. Note that $\langle r\rangle = \setof{f(r)}{f\in\mathbb Z[x]} \subseteq \{0,1,r,1+r\}$. Then $u^2=u$ for every $u\in\langle r\rangle$. Note that $\mathcal R_{[x^2=x]}$ properly contains the variety $\setof{R\in\mathcal R}{x^2=x\text{ holds in }R}$ of unital boolean rings.
Summarizing, the propagating core $\mathcal V_{[\eqsymb]}$ of a variety $\mathcal V$ is a quasivariety but it need not be a variety, cf. Example \[Ex:xxx\]. When $\mathcal V_{[\eqsymb]}$ is a variety, it might be properly contained between the varieties $\mathcal V$ and $\setof{X\in\mathcal V}{\eqsymb\text{ holds in }X}$, cf. Example \[Ex:Ring\].
Basic properties of subdirect products in loops {#Sc:Basic}
===============================================
Let $I$ be an index set, $X_i$ a loop for every $i\in I$, and $X=\prod_{i\in I}X_i$. Given $x=(x_i)=(x_i)_{i\in I}\in X$, we denote by $\supp{x}=\setof{i\in I}{x_i\ne e}$ the support of $x$. For $J\subseteq I$, let $p_J:X\to \prod_{i\in J}X_i$ be the canonical projection defined by $p_J((x_i)_{i\in I}) = (x_j)_{j\in J}$, and let $e_J:\prod_{i\in J}X_i\to X$ be the canonical embedding defined by $e_J((x_i)_{i\in J}) = (y_i)_{i\in I}$, where $y_i=x_i$ if $i\in J$ and $y_i=e$ otherwise. For $A\subseteq X$ and $J\subseteq I$, let $$A_J=p_J(A)\qquad\text{and}\qquad A[J] = \setof{x\in A}{\supp{x}\subseteq J}.$$ If $A\le X$ then $A_J\le X_J$, $A[J]\le A$ and $A[J]_J = p_J(A[J])\le A[J]$. When $J=\{i\}$ is a singleton, we write $p_i$, $e_i$, $A_i$ and $A[i]$ instead of $p_J$, $e_J$, $A_J$ and $A[J]$, respectively.
We say that $A\subseteq \prod_{i\in I}X_i$ is *flat* if $A[i]_i=\{e\}$ for every $i\in I$.
A subloop $A\le \prod_{i\in I}X_i$ is a *subdirect product* of $\prod_{i\in I}X_i$ if $A_i=X_i$ for every $i\in I$, in which case we write $A\lesd \prod_{i\in I}X_i$. Note that the factorization of $X=\prod_{i\in I}X_i$ matters in the definition of subdirect product. For instance, $A=\setof{(x,x,x)}{x\in\mathbb R}$ is a subdirect product of $\mathbb R\times\mathbb R\times\mathbb R$ but not a subdirect product of $(\mathbb R\times\mathbb R)\times\mathbb R$.
\[partition\] Let $A\lesd \prod_{i\in I} X_i$ and let $\setof{I_k}{k\in K}$ be a partition of $I$. Then $A\lesd\prod_{k\in K}A_{I_k}$ and $A_{I_k}\lesd \prod_{i\in I_k}X_i$ for every $k\in K$.
Let $k\in K$. If $a_{I_k}\in A_{I_k}$ then there is $a\in A$ such that $p_{I_k}(a)=a_{I_k}$. This shows that $A\lesd\prod_{k\in K}A_{I_k}$. If $i\in I_k$ and $x_i\in X_i$ then there is $a\in A$ such that $p_i(a)=x_i$. But then also $p_i(p_{I_k}(a))=x_i$ and thus $A_{I_k}\lesd\prod_{i\in I_k}X_i$.
\[subloop\] Let $I$ be a finite index set and $A\le \prod_{i\in I}X_i$. Then $\prod_{i\in I}A[i]_i\le A$.
We have $A[i]_i\le A_i\le X_i$ and thus $\prod_{i\in I}A[i]_i\le X$. $x=(x_i)\in \prod_{i\in I}A[i]_i$. Then $x_i\in A[i]_i$ and $e_i(x_i)\in A[i]\le A$. If $I=\{1,\dots,n\}$, we conclude that $x=e_1(x_1)\cdots e_n(x_n)\in A[1]\cdots A[n]\le A$.
The conclusion of Lemma \[subloop\] does not necessarily hold when $I$ is infinite. For every $i<\omega$ let $X_i=\mathbb Z_2$ and let $A$ be the subgroup of $X=\prod_{i<\omega}X_i$ consisting of all sequences with finite support. Then $A[i]_i=\mathbb Z_2$ for every $i$ but $\prod_{i\in I}A[i]_i=X$ is not contained in $A$.
\[support\] Let $X= \prod_{i\in I}X_i$ and $J\subseteq I$. If $A\le X$ then $A[J]\unlhd A$ and $A[J]_J\unlhd A_J$. If $A\unlhd X$ then $A[J]\unlhd X$ and $A[J]_J\unlhd X_J$.
Let $t$ be an inner generating term. For $x,y\in X$ and $i\in I$ we have $t(x_i,y_i,e)=e$, which implies $t(x,y,X[J]) \subseteq X[J]$. If $A\le X$ then $t(A,A,A[J])\subseteq A\cap X[J]=A[J]$, proving $A[J]\unlhd A$. Since epimorphisms preserve normality, $A[J]_J\unlhd A_J$ follows. If $A\unlhd X$ then $t(X,X,A[J])\subseteq A\cap X[J]=A[J]$, so $A[J]\unlhd X$ and $A[J]_J\unlhd X_J$.
\[technical\] Let $X=\prod_{i\in I}X_i$ and let $J$, $K$ be subsets of $I$ such that
1. $J$, $K$ are finite,
2. $X_j$ is finite for every $j\in J$, and
3. for every $i\in I\setminus K$ there is $j\in J$ such that $X_i$ is isomorphic to $X_j$.
Then every finitely generated subloop of $X$ is isomorphic to a subloop of $X_L$ for some finite subset $L$ of $I$.
Without loss of generality, we can assume that $X_i=X_j$ whenever $X_i$ is isomorphic to $X_j$. Let $A=\genof{a_\ell=(a_{\ell,i})}{1\le \ell\le n}$ be a finitely generated subloop of $X$. Define an equivalence relation $\sim$ on $I$ by setting $i\sim j$ if and only if $X_i=X_j$ and $a_{\ell,i}=a_{\ell,j}$ for every $1\le\ell\le n$. Since $J$, $K$ are finite and every $X_j$ with $j\in J$ is finite, $\sim$ has only finitely many equivalence classes. Let $L$ be a complete set of representatives of the equivalence classes of $\sim$. Then $p_L(A)$ is isomorphic to $A$.
For $K\unlhd X$, denote by $\pi_{X/K}$ the canonical projection $X\to X/K$. A straightforward application of the Correspondence Theorem for loops yields:
\[correspondence\] Let $X=\prod_{i\in I}{X_i}$ and $K=\prod_{i\in I}K_i$, where $K_i\unlhd X_i$ for every $i\in I$. The mapping $\pi:X\to \prod_{i\in I}X_i/K_i$ defined by $\pi((x_i)) = (x_iK_i)$ induces a lattice isomorphism between all subloops $A\le X$ containing $K$ and all subloops $B\le\prod_{i\in I}X_i/K_i$. Moreover, when $A$, $B$ are such subloops, then:
1. $\pi^{-1}(B) = \setof{(x_i)}{(x_iK_i)\in B}$;
2. $A\unlhd X$ if and only if $\pi(A)\unlhd \prod_{i\in I}X_i/K_i$;
3. $A\lesd X$ if and only if $\pi(A)\lesd\prod_{i\in I}X_i/K_i$;
4. $\pi(A)[J] = \pi(A[J])$, $K_J\le A[J]_J$ and $(\pi(A)[J])_J = A[J]_J/K_J$ for every $J\subseteq I$.
Let $A\le X$ and $B=\pi(X)$. We can write $\pi = \prod_{i\in I}\pi_{X_i/K_i}$ as $\pi = \gamma\pi_{X/K}$, where $\gamma:X/K\to \prod X_i/K_i$ is the isomorphism given by $(x_i)K\mapsto (x_iK_i)$. Parts (i) and (ii) then follow from the Correspondence Theorem applied to $\pi_{X/K}$.
\(iii) Suppose that $A\lesd X$. Fix $j\in I$ and $a_jK_j\in X_j/K_j$. There is $(x_i)\in A$ such that $x_j=a_j$, and thus $(x_iK_i)\in B$ and $a_jK_j\in B_j$. Conversely, suppose that $B\lesd\prod X_i/K_i$. Fix $j\in I$ and $a_j\in X_j$. There is $(x_iK_i)\in B$ such that $x_jK_j=a_jK_j$ and we can assume that $a_j=x_j$. Then $(x_i)\in A$ and $a_j\in A_j$.
\(iv) Let $(x_iK_i)\in \pi(A)[J]$. Then there is $a=(a_i)\in A$ such that $(a_iK_i)=(x_iK_i)$ and $a_iK_i=K_i$ for $i\not\in J$. Let $k=(k_i)$ be defined by $k_i=1$ if $i\in J$, else $k_i=a_i$, and note that $k\in K$. Then $c=a/k\in A\cap X[J]=A[J]$ since $K\le A$, and $\pi(c)=\pi(a)=x$. Conversely, if $(x_iK_i)\in \pi(A[J])$ then there is $(a_i)\in A[J]\le A$ such that $(x_iK_i)=(a_iK_i)$, so certainly $a_iK_i=K_i$ for $i\not\in J$ and $(x_iK_i)\in \pi(A)[J]$.
If $x\in K_J$ then $x=k_J$ for some $k\in K$. Let $\ell = e_J(k_J)\in K[J]\le A[J]$. Then $\ell_J = k_J=x$ and $x\in A[J]_J$ follows. Finally, $(\pi(A)[J])_J = \pi(A[J])_J = ((A[J]K)/K)_J = (A[J]K)_J/K_J = (A[J]_J K_J)/K_J = A[J]_J/K_j$.
In the situation of Proposition \[correspondence\], if $K\le A$ then we certainly have $K_i\le A[i]_i$ for every $i\in I$, since $K_i$ embeds into $A[i]$. Conversely, if $I$ is *finite*, $A\le X$ and $K_i\le A[i]_i$ for every $i$, then $K\le A$ by Lemma \[subloop\].
\[factor-by-flat\] Let $I$ be a finite index set, $A\unlhd X=\prod_{i\in I}X_i$, and $N_i=A[i]_i$ for every $i\in I$. Then $N_i\unlhd X_i$ and we can define $\pi=\prod_{i\in I}\pi_{X_i/N_i}$, $B=\pi(A)$ and $Y=\pi(X)=\prod_{i\in I}X_i/N_i$. Then:
1. $B\unlhd Y$.
2. $B$ is a flat subloop of $Y=\prod_{i\in I}X_i/N_i$.
3. $A\lesd X$ if and only if $B\lesd Y$.
4. $X/A$ is isomorphic to $Y/B$.
Let $K_i=N_i=A[i]_i$ and $K=\prod_{i\in I}K_i$. By Lemma \[subloop\], $K\le A$ since $I$ is finite. By Lemma \[support\], $K_i\unlhd X_i$ and thus $K\unlhd X$. By Proposition \[correspondence\], $B\unlhd Y$, $B[i]_i = A[i]_i/K_i = K_i/K_i = K_i$, and $A\lesd X$ if and only if $B\lesd Y$. Write $\pi = \gamma\pi_{X/K}$ as in the proof of Proposition \[correspondence\]. Using the Third Isomorphism Theorem, we then have $X/A\cong (X/K)/(A/K) = \pi_{X/K}(X)/\pi_{X/K}(A) \cong \gamma\pi_{X/K}(X)/\gamma\pi_{X/K}(A) = Y/B$.
Lifted isomorphism graphs and subdirect products {#Sc:Lifted}
================================================
Let ${\varphi}\colon X_1 \to X_2$ be a mapping between loops. The *graph of ${\varphi}$* is the set $${\mathbf G}({\varphi}) = \setof{(x,{\varphi}(x))}{x\in X_1}.$$
\[graph-of-hom\] Let $X_1$, $X_2$ be loops and ${\varphi}\colon X_1 \to X_2$ a mapping. Then ${\varphi}$ is a homomorphism if and only if ${\mathbf G}({\varphi})\le X_1\times X_2$.
Indeed, if $x,y\in X_1$, then $(x,{\varphi}(x))(y,{\varphi}(y)) = (xy,{\varphi}(x){\varphi}(y))$ belongs to ${\mathbf G}({\varphi})$ if and only if ${\varphi}(x){\varphi}(y)={\varphi}(xy)$.
\[graph-of-inj\] Let ${\varphi}\colon X_1 \to X_2$ be an injective loop homomorphism. Then the following conditions are equivalent:
1. ${\mathbf G}({\varphi})\unlhd X_1\times X_2$,
2. $X_1$ is abelian and ${\operatorname{Im}}({\varphi})\le Z(X_2)$,
3. ${\mathbf G}({\varphi})\le Z(X_1\times X_2)$.
Working in the direct product $X_1\times X_2$, we have $$\label{Eq:t}
t((x,u),(y,v),(z,{\varphi}(z))) = (t(x,y,z),t(u,v,{\varphi}(z)))$$ for every $x,y,z\in X_1$, $u,v\in X_2$ and every inner generating term $t$.
Suppose that (i) holds. Then is an element of ${\mathbf G}({\varphi})$ and substituting $u=v=e$, we obtain $(t(x,y,z),{\varphi}(z)) \in{\mathbf G}({\varphi})$. Since $(z,{\varphi}(z))\in{\mathbf G}({\varphi})$ and ${\varphi}$ is injective, it follows that $t(x,y,z)=z$ and $X_1$ is abelian. With $x=y=e$ in , we obtain $(z,t(u,v,{\varphi}(z)))\in{\mathbf G}({\varphi})$, which means that $t(u,v,{\varphi}(z))={\varphi}(z)$ and ${\operatorname{Im}}({\varphi})\le Z(X_2)$.
Now suppose that (ii) holds. Then $(t(x,y,z),t(u,v,{\varphi}(z))) = (z,{\varphi}(z))$ and hence shows ${\mathbf G}({\varphi})\le Z(X_1\times X_2)$. Clearly, (iii) implies (i).
\[graph-iso-restricted\] Let ${\varphi}\colon K_1\to K_2$ be an isomorphism of loops and let $K_i\unlhd X_i$ for $i=1,2$. Then ${\mathbf G}({\varphi})\unlhd X_1\times X_2$ if and only if $K_i\le Z(X_i)$ for $i=1,2$.
In particular, if ${\varphi}\colon X_1\to X_2$ is an isomorphism of loops, then ${\mathbf G}({\varphi})\unlhd X_1\times X_2$ if and only if $X_1$ is abelian.
If $K_i\le Z(X_i)$ then ${\mathbf G}({\varphi})\le K_1\times K_2\le Z(X_1)\times Z(X_2) = Z(X_1\times X_2)$ an hence ${\mathbf G}({\varphi})\unlhd X_1\times X_2$. Conversely, suppose that ${\mathbf G}({\varphi})\unlhd X_1\times X_2$. Then $(t(x,y,z),{\varphi}(z)) = (t(x,y,z),t(e,e,{\varphi}(z))) = t((x,e),(y,e),(z,{\varphi}(z)))\in {\mathbf G}({\varphi})$ for every $x,y\in X_1$ and $z\in K_1$. But then $t(x,y,z)=z$ follows and we have $K_1\le Z(X_1)$. Similarly, $K_2\le Z(X_2)$.
If ${\varphi}\colon X_1\to X_2$ is an isomorphism, we deduce that $G({\varphi})\unlhd X_1\times X_2$ if and only if $X_i\le Z(X_i)$ for $i=1,2$, which says that $X_1$, $X_2$ are abelian. Since $X_1$ is isomorphic to $X_2$, it suffices to check that $X_1$ is abelian.
For $N_1\unlhd X_1$, $N_2\unlhd X_2$ and a mapping ${\varphi}\colon X_1/N_1\to X_2/N_2$, let $$\begin{aligned}
{\mathbf G}_{X_1/N_1,X_2/N_2}({\varphi}) &= (\pi_{X_1/N_1}\times \pi_{X_2/N_2})^{-1}({\mathbf G}({\varphi}))\\
&= \setof{(x_1,x_2)\in X_1\times X_2}{{\varphi}(x_1N_1)=x_2N_2}.\end{aligned}$$ If ${\varphi}$ is a homomorphism then ${\mathbf G}_{X_1/N_1,X_2/N_2}({\varphi})$ is a subloop of $X_1\times X_2$, being a preimage of ${\mathbf G}({\varphi})$ under the homomorphism $\pi_{X_1/N_1}\times\pi_{X_2/N_2}$.
We call a subset $A$ of $X_1\times X_2$ a *lifted isomorphism graph in $X_1\times X_2$* if there exist $N_1\unlhd X_1$, $N_2\unlhd X_2$ and an isomorphism ${\varphi}\colon X_1/N_1\to X_2/N_2$ such that $A = {\mathbf G}_{X_1/N_1,X_2/N_2}({\varphi})$. A typical lifted isomorphism graph can be visualized as follows $$\begin{array}{|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
\cellcolor{light-gray}N_1\times N_2&&&\\
\hline
&&\cellcolor{light-gray}\phantom{N_1\times N_2}&\\
\hline
&&&\cellcolor{light-gray}\phantom{N_1\times N_2}\\
\hline
&\cellcolor{light-gray}\phantom{N_1\times N_2}&&\\
\hline
\end{array}\,,$$ where the vertical axis is indexed by cosets of $N_1$ and the horizontal axis is indexed by cosets of $N_2$.
Given a lifted isomorphism graph $A$ in $X_1\times X_2$, it is clear that $N_1$, $N_2$ and $\varphi$ are uniquely determined. In particular, $N_i=A[i]_i$ for $i=1,2$.
\[Goursat\] Let $X_1$ and $X_2$ be loops. The subdirect products of $X_1\times X_2$ are precisely the lifted isomorphism graphs in $X_1\times X_2$.
Moreover, if $A={\mathbf G}_{X_1/N_1,X_2/N_2}({\varphi})$ is a lifted isomorphism graph in $X_1\times X_2$ then $A\unlhd X_1\times X_2$ if and only if $X_1/N_1$ is abelian.
Every lifted isomorphism graph in $X_1\times X_2$ is clearly a subdirect product of $X_1\times X_2$. Conversely, let $A\lesd X_1\times X_2$, let $N_i = A[i]_i$ and note that $N_i\unlhd A_i=X_i$ by Lemma \[support\].
Suppose first that $N_1=N_2=\{e\}$. If $(x_1,x_2)$, $(x_1,y_2)\in A$ then $(e,x_2/y_2) = (x_1/x_1,x_2/y_2)\in A$ and hence $x_2=y_2$ since $N_1=\{e\}$. Therefore, for each $x_1\in X_1$ there exists exactly one $x_2\in X_2$ such that $(x_1,x_2)\in A$. Similarly, for each $x_2\in X_2$ there exists exactly one $x_1\in X_1$ such that $(x_1,x_2)\in A$. Thus $A = {\mathbf G}({\varphi})$ for some bijection ${\varphi}\colon X_1\to X_2$. By Lemma \[graph-of-hom\], ${\varphi}$ is an isomorphism.
In the general case, let $\pi = \pi_{X_1/N_1}\times \pi_{X_2/N_2}$. By Proposition \[correspondence\], $\pi(A)\lesd X_1/N_1 \times X_2/N_2$ and $\pi(A)[i]_i = A[i]_i/N_i = N_i/N_i=N_i$. By the previous paragraph, $\pi(A)={\mathbf G}({\varphi})$ for some isomorphism ${\varphi}\colon X_1/N_1\to X_2/N_2$. Thus $A = \pi{^{-1}}(\pi(A)) = \pi{^{-1}}({\mathbf G}({\varphi})) = {\mathbf G}_{X_1/N_1,X_2/N_2}({\varphi})$.
The last assertion follows from Lemma \[graph-iso-restricted\] applied to ${\varphi}\colon X_1/N_1\to X_2/N_2$.
\[subdirect-normal\] The following conditions are equivalent for $A\le X_1\times X_2$:
1. $A\unlhd X_1\times X_2$,
2. there exist normal subloops $M_1\unlhd X_1$, $M_2\unlhd X_2$ such that $A\lesd M_1\times M_2$, $A[i]_i = N_i\unlhd X_i$, and $M_i/N_i\le Z(X_i/N_i)$ for $i=1,2$.
If the equivalent conditions are satisfied then $(X_1\times X_2)/A\cong (X_1/N_1\times X_2/N_2)/{\mathbf G}({\varphi})$ for some isomorphism ${\varphi}:M_1/N_1\to M_2/N_2$.
Suppose that $A\unlhd X_1\times X_2$ and set $M_i=A_i=p_i(A)\unlhd X_i$. Then $A\lesd M_1\times M_2$. We have $N_i=A[i]_i\unlhd X_i$ by Lemma \[support\] and obviously $N_i\le A_i=M_i$. By Goursat’s Lemma, $\pi(A) = {\mathbf G}({\varphi})$, where ${\varphi}\colon M_1/N_1\to M_2/N_2$ is some isomorphism and $\pi=\pi_{M_1/N_1}\times \pi_{M_2/N_2}$. Consider $\rho=\pi_{X_1/N_1}\times \pi_{X_2/N_2}$. By the Correspondence Theorem (or see Proposition \[correspondence\]), $A\unlhd X_1\times X_2$ implies $\rho(A) = \pi(A) = {\mathbf G}({\varphi})\unlhd X_1/N_1\times X_2/N_2$. By Lemma \[graph-iso-restricted\], $A_i/N_i\le Z(X_i/N_i)$ for $i=1,2$.
Conversely, suppose that (ii) holds and let ${\varphi}$ be the uniquely determined isomorphism $M_1/N_1\to M_2/N_2$ such that $\pi(A) = {\mathbf G}({\varphi})$. Since $A_i/N_i\le Z(X_i/N_i)$ for $i=1,2$, Lemma \[graph-iso-restricted\] implies ${\mathbf G}({\varphi})\unlhd X_1/N_1\times X_2/N_2$. Then, with $\rho$ as above, we have $A = \pi^{-1}({\mathbf G}({\varphi})) = \rho^{-1}({\mathbf G}({\varphi}))\unlhd X_1\times X_2$ by the Correspondence Theorem.
\[graph-in-graph\] Let ${\varphi}\colon X_1\to X_2$ and $\psi:X_1/N_1\to X_2/N_2$ be isomorphisms of loops and let $A={\mathbf G}_{X_1/N_1,X_2/N_2}(\psi)$. Then:
1. ${\mathbf G}({\varphi})\le A$ if and only if $\psi\pi_{X_1/N_1} = \pi_{X_2/N_2}{\varphi}$.
2. If ${\mathbf G}({\varphi})\le A$ then $A=\setof{(xn,{\varphi}(x))}{x\in X_1,\,n\in N_1}$.
3. If ${\mathbf G}({\varphi})\le A$ then ${\mathbf G}({\varphi})\unlhd A$ if and only if $N_1\le Z(X_1)$.
4. If ${\mathbf G}({\varphi})\unlhd A$ then $A/{\mathbf G}({\varphi})\cong N_1\cong N_2$.
\(i) The following conditions are equivalent: ${\mathbf G}({\varphi})\le A$, ${\varphi}(x) \in \psi(xN_1)$ for every $x\in X$, ${\varphi}(x)N_2 = \psi(xN_1)$ for every $x\in X_1$, $\pi_{X_2/N_2}{\varphi}= \psi \pi_{X_1/N_1}$. For the rest of the proof assume that ${\mathbf G}({\varphi})\le A$.
\(ii) If $x\in X_1$ and $n\in N_1$ then $\psi(xnN_1)=\psi(xN_1)={\varphi}(x)N_2$ by (i) and thus $(xn,{\varphi}(x))\in A$. Conversely, let $(x_1,x_2)\in A$ and let $x={\varphi}^{-1}(x_2)$. Since $(x_1,x_2)=(x_1,{\varphi}(x))\in A$ and $(x,{\varphi}(x))\in{\mathbf G}({\varphi})\le A$, we have $\psi(x_1N_1)=\psi(xN_1)$, $x_1N_1=xN_1$ and $x_1 = xn$ for some $n\in N_1$.
\(iii) Suppose that ${\mathbf G}({\varphi})\unlhd A$. In general, if $U\unlhd V$, $u_1,u_2\in U$, $v\in V$ and $t$ is an inner generating term, then $t(u_1,u_2,v)U=vU$. Hence $(t(x,y,n),e){\mathbf G}({\varphi}) = t((x,{\varphi}(x)),(y,{\varphi}(y)),(n,e)){\mathbf G}({\varphi}) = (n,e){\mathbf G}({\varphi})$ for all $x,y\in X_1$ and $n\in N_1$. Since $N_1\unlhd X_1$, we have $m=t(x,y,n)\in N_1$. We showed $(m,e)\in (n,e){\mathbf G}({\varphi}))$, so $(m,e)=(n,e)(z,{\varphi}(z))=(nz,{\varphi}(z))$ for some $z\in X_1$. But then $z=e$, $n=m=t(x,y,n)$, and $N_1\le Z(X_1)$ follows.
Conversely, suppose that $N_1\le Z(X_1)$. For any $x,y,z\in X_1$ and $n,m\in N_1$ we have $t((xn,{\varphi}(x)),(ym,{\varphi}(m)),(z,{\varphi}(z))) = ( t(xn,ym,z), t({\varphi}(x),{\varphi}(y),{\varphi}(z))) = (t(x,y,z),{\varphi}(t(x,y,z))) \in {\mathbf G}({\varphi})$, where we have used $n,m\in Z(X_1)$. It follows from (ii) that ${\mathbf G}({\varphi})\unlhd A$.
\(iv) Suppose again that ${\mathbf G}({\varphi})\unlhd A$. Then $N_1\le Z(X_1)$ by (iii). Consider $f\colon A\to N_1$ defined by $f(x,y)=x/{\varphi}^{-1}(y)$. For $x\in X_1$, $n\in N_1$ we have $f(xn,{\varphi}(x)) = (xn)/x = n$ thanks to $n\in Z(X_1)$. Then for every $x,y\in X_1$, $n,m\in N_1$, we have $f(xn,{\varphi}(x))f(ym,{\varphi}(y)) = nm = f((xy)(nm),{\varphi}(xy)) = f((xn)(ym),{\varphi}(x){\varphi}(y)) = f((xn,{\varphi}(x))(ym,{\varphi}(y)))$, so $f$ is a surjective homomorphism with kernel ${\mathbf G}({\varphi})$, establishing $A/{\mathbf G}({\varphi})\cong N_1$. Similarly, $A/{\mathbf G}({\varphi})\cong N_2$.
\[simple-1\] Let $A$ be a simple loop that is a homomorphic image of a subdirect product of $X_1\times X_2$. Then $A$ is abelian or a homomorphic image of $X_1$ or a homomorphic image of $X_2$.
Let $A\cong B/C$, where $B\lesd X=X_1\times X_2$ and $C\unlhd B$. Since $p_1:B\to X_1$ is a surjective homomorphism and $C\unlhd B$, it follows that $X_1/C_1$ is a homomorphic image of $B/C\cong A$. Since $A$ is simple, we have either $X_1/C_1\cong A$ (and we are done) or $C_1=X_1$. Similarly for the second coordinate.
We can therefore assume that $C_1=X_1$ and $C_2=X_2$, i.e., $C\lesd X_1\times X_2$. By Lemmas \[subloop\] and \[support\], $K_i=C[i]_i\unlhd C$, $K=K_1\times K_2\unlhd X$ and $K\le C$. Let $\gamma:X/K\to (X_1/K_1)\times (X_2/K_2)$ be as in the proof of Proposition \[correspondence\] so that $\pi=\pi_{X_1/K_1}\times\pi_{X_2/K_2} = \gamma\pi_{X/K}$. By the Third Isomorphism Theorem, $B/C\cong (B/K)/(C/K) = \pi_{X/K}(B)/\pi_{X/K}(C)\cong \gamma(\pi_{X/K}(B))/\gamma(\pi_{X/K}(C)) = \pi(B)/\pi(C)$. By Proposition \[correspondence\], $\pi(B)\lesd X_1/K_1 \times X_2/K_2$, $\pi(C) \unlhd \pi(B)$ and $(\pi(C)[i])_i = C[i]_i/K_i = K_i/K_i = K_i$ for $i=1,2$.
We can therefore assume without loss of generality that $C$ is flat. By Goursat’s Lemma, $C={\mathbf G}({\varphi})$ for some isomorphism ${\varphi}\colon X_1\to X_2$, and $B$ is a lifted isomorphism graph in $X_1\times X_2$ such that $C\le B$. By Lemma \[graph-in-graph\], $A\cong B/C$ is isomorphic to $B[1]_1\le Z(X_1)$ and hence it is abelian.
\[construction\] Let $X$ be a loop, $\sim$ an equivalence relation on $\{1,\dots,k\}$ with $\ell$ equivalence classes, and ${\varphi}_i\in{\operatorname{Aut}}(X)$ for every $1\le i\le k$. Then $$S_X^\sim({\varphi}_1,\dots,{\varphi}_k) =
\setof{(x_1,\dots,x_k)\in X^k}{{\varphi}_i(x_i)={\varphi}_j(x_j)
\text{ whenever }i\sim j}$$ is a subdirect product of $X^k$ and it is isomorphic to $X^\ell$.
Let $A = S_X^\sim({\varphi}_1,\dots,{\varphi}_k)$. Suppose that $i\sim j$. If $(x_1,\dots,x_k)$, $(y_1,\dots,y_k)\in A$ then ${\varphi}_i(x_i)={\varphi}_j(x_j)$ and ${\varphi}_i(y_i)={\varphi}_j(y_j)$ imply ${\varphi}_i(x_iy_i) = {\varphi}_j(x_jy_j)$, so $A$ is closed under multiplication. Similarly, $A$ is closed under divisions and hence it is a subloop of $X^k$.
Let $S$ be a complete set of representatives of the equivalence classes of $\sim$ on $X$. For every $i\in S$, choose $x_i\in X$ arbitrarily. Then $(x_1,\dots,x_k)$ belongs to $A$ if and only if for every $j\sim i\in S$ we have $x_j = {\varphi}_j^{-1}{\varphi}_i(x_i)$. Hence the freely chosen tuple $(x_i)_{i\in S}$ uniquely determines an element $(x_1,\dots,x_k)$ of $A$, and $A\cong X^{|S|}$ follows. We can certainly arrange for any $1\le i\le k$ to be in $S$. Thus $A$ is a subdirect product of $X^k$.
When $\sim$ is the equality relation, Lemma \[construction\] implies that $S_X^\sim({\varphi}_1,\dots,{\varphi}_k)\cong X^k$. When $k=2$ and $\sim$ is the full equivalence relation, then the subdirect products $S_X^\sim({\varphi}_1,{\varphi}_2)$ of $X\times X$ are precisely the graphs of automorphisms of $X$.
Subdirect products and normal subloops in $X^k$ for $X$ nonabelian simple {#Sc:SN}
=========================================================================
\[simple-2\] Let $X$ be a nonabelian simple loop, $k\ge 0$, and $Y$ a loop. The normal subloops of $X^k \times Y$ are precisely the loops $M_1\times \dots \times M_k \times N$, where $M_i\in \{\{e\},X\}$ for each $i \in \{1,\dots,k\}$ and $N\unlhd Y$.
Let $A\unlhd X^k\times Y$. We proceed by induction on $k$. The case $k=0$ is clear. Suppose that $k\ge 1$, let $X_1=X$, $X_2=X^{k-1}\times Y$ so that $A\unlhd X_1\times X_2$. We have $p_1(A)\unlhd X_1$ and $p_2(A)\unlhd X_2$. By induction, $p_2(A) = M_2\times\cdots\times M_k\times N$ for some $M_i\in\{\{e\},X\}$ and $N\unlhd Y$. Since $X$ is simple, $p_1(A)\in\{\{e\},X\}$.
If $p_1(A)=\{e\}$ then $A=\{e\}\times p_2(A)$ and we are done. Suppose that $p_1(A)=X$ so that $A\lesd X\times p_2(A)$. Note that $A\unlhd X\times p_2(A)$ because $A\unlhd X\times X_2$. By Goursat’s Lemma, there are $N_1\unlhd X$ and $N_2\unlhd p_2(A)$ such that $X/N_1\cong p_2(A)/N_2$ and $X/N_1$ is abelian. Since $N_1\in\{\{e\},X\}$ and $X$ is not abelian, we must have $N_1=X$. But then $A=X\times p_2(A)$, finishing the proof.
\[subdirs-in-powers\] Let $X$ be a nonabelian simple loop and let $k$ be a positive integer. Then the subdirect products of $X^k$ are precisely the subloops $S_X^\sim({\varphi}_1,\dots,{\varphi}_k)$ of Lemma *\[construction\]*.
We proceed by induction on $k$. The case $k=1$ is trivial. By Proposition \[Goursat\], a subdirect product of $X\times X$ is equal to either $X\times X$ or to ${\mathbf G}({\varphi})$ for some ${\varphi}\in{\operatorname{Aut}}(X)$. By the remark following Lemma \[construction\], these are precisely the subloops $S_X^\sim({\varphi}_1,{\varphi}_2)$. This gives the case $k=2$ and we can assume that $k\ge 3$.
By Lemma \[construction\], every $S_X^\sim({\varphi}_1,\dots,{\varphi}_k)$ is a subdirect product of $X^k$. Conversely, suppose that $A\lesd X^k$ and write $X^k=X_1\times X_2$ with $X_1=X$ and $X_2=X^{k-1}$. For $1\le i\le k$ let $\delta_i$ be the homomorphism $X^k\to X^k$ that replaces the $i$th coordinate with $e$. Then we can regard $B_i=\delta_i(A)$ both a subloop of $X^k$ and as a subloop of $X^{k-1}$ upon forgetting the $ith$ coordinate. Note that every $B_i$ is a subdirect product of $X^{k-1}$. In particular, by the induction assumption, $B_1 = S_X^\sim({\varphi}_2,\dots,{\varphi}_k)$ for some equivalence $\sim$ on $\{2,\dots,k\}$ and some automorphisms ${\varphi}_i$ of $X$.
Suppose first that $\sim$ is not the equality relation and let $2\le r<s\le k$ be such that $r\sim s$. By induction assumption, $B_s=
S_X^\approx(\psi_1,\dots,\psi_{s-1},\psi_{s+1},\dots,\psi_k)$ for some equivalence $\approx$ on $\{1,\dots,k\}\setminus\{s\}$ and some automorphisms $\psi_i$ of $X$. Define a new equivalence relation $\equiv$ on $\{1,\dots,k\}$ by adjoining $s$ to the equivalence class $[r]_\approx$. For $i\ne s$ set $\theta_i = \psi_i$, and let $\theta_s = \psi_r{\varphi}_r^{-1}{\varphi}_s$. We claim that $A=S_X^\equiv(\theta_1,\dots,\theta_k)$. Note that $(x_1,\dots,x_k)\in A$ if and only if $(x_1,\dots,x_{s-1},x_{s+1},\dots,x_k)\in B_s$ and ${\varphi}_r(x_r)={\varphi}_s(x_s)$. If $i$, $j\in\{1,\dots,k\}\setminus\{s\}$ then $(x_1,\dots,x_{s-1},x_{s+1},\dots,x_k)\in B_s$ if and only if $\theta_i(x_i) = \psi_i(x_i) = \psi_j(x_j)=\theta_j(x_j)$. If $i\in [s]_\equiv$ and $i\ne s$ then $\theta_i(x_i)=\theta_s(x_s)$ if and only if $\psi_i(x_i) = \psi_r{\varphi}_r^{-1}{\varphi}_s(x_s) = \psi_r(x_r)$.
Now suppose that $\sim$ is the equality relation so that $B_1=X^{k-1}$ and $A\lesd X_1\times X_2$ with $X_1=X$ and $X_2=X^{k-1}$. If $A=X\times X^{k-1}$, we are done. Otherwise, by Proposition \[Goursat\], $A={\mathbf G}_{X_1/N_1,X_2/N_2}({\varphi})$ for some proper subloops $N_1\unlhd X_1$, $N_2\unlhd X_2=X^{k-1}$ and some isomorphism ${\varphi}\colon X_1/N_1\to X_2/N_2$. By simplicity of $X$, we have $N_1=\{e\}$, $X^{k-1}/N_2\cong X$ and $(x_1,x_2,\dots,x_k)\in A={\mathbf G}_{X/1,X^{k-1}/N_2}({\varphi})$ iff ${\varphi}(x_1) = (x_2,\dots,x_k)N_2$. By the inductive assumption on (ii), we can assume without loss of generality that $N_2=\setof{(e,x_3,\dots,x_k)}{
x_i\in X}$. Define an equivalence $\asymp$ on $\{1,\dots,k\}$ so that $\{1,2\}$ is the only nontrivial equivalence class of $\asymp$. Let $\mu_i=1$ for $i>1$ and set $\mu_1=\rho{\varphi}$, where $\rho((x_2,\dots,x_k)N_2)=x_2$. Then $(x_1,\dots,x_k)\in A$ if and only if $\mu_1(x_1) = \mu_2(x_2)$, so $A=S_X^\asymp(\mu_1,\dots,\mu_k)$.
Varieties {#Sc:Varieties}
=========
\[variety-join\] Suppose that $\mathcal V_1$, $\mathcal V_2$ are varieties of loops, and let $A$ be a nonabelian simple loop. If $A\not\in\mathcal V_1\cup\mathcal V_2$ then $A\not\in\mathcal V_1\lor\mathcal V_2$.
Suppose that $A\in \mathcal V_1\lor\mathcal V_2$. By Lemma \[partition\], $A$ is a homomorphic image of a subdirect product of $X_1\times X_2$, where $X_i\in \mathcal
V_i$. By Lemma \[simple-1\], $A\in\mathcal V_1\cup\mathcal V_2$.
\[variety-proper\] Let $A$ be a nontrivial finite simple loop and let $\mathcal V$ be the variety generated by all proper subloops of $A$. Then $A\notin \mathcal V$.
If $A$ is abelian then $\mathcal V$ is the variety of trivial loops and $A\not\in\mathcal V$. Suppose that $A$ is not abelian and $A\in\mathcal V$. Let $\mathcal X$ be the set of all proper subloops of $A$. Since $A$ is finite, we can assume that $A\in\mathbf H(B)$ for a finitely generated $B\in\mathbf{SP}(\mathcal X)$. Any element of $\mathbf P(\mathcal X)$ is of the form $\prod_{i\in I}X_i$, where each $X_i$ belongs to $\mathcal X$. Since $\mathcal X$ is finite, Lemma \[technical\] applies and we can assume without loss of generality that $I$ is finite. Hence $B\lesd X_1\times\cdots\times X_k$ for suitable $X_i\in\mathcal X$. Let $k$ be as small as possible. Then $k\ge 2$ since $|B|\ge |A| > |X_1|$. By Lemma \[partition\], $A$ is a homomorphic image of $X\times Y$, where $X$ is a subdirect product of $X_1\times \dots \times X_{k-1}$ and $Y=X_k$. By the definition of $k$, $A$ is not a homomorphic image of $X$. By Lemma \[simple-1\], $A$ must be a homomorphic image of $Y$, a contradiction with $|A|>|X_k|$.
\[subdirs-in-powers-Y\] Let $X$ be a nonabelian simple loop, $k$ a positive integer and $\mathcal V$ a variety such that $X\notin \mathcal V$. Suppose that $Y\in\mathcal V$. Then each subdirect product of $\underbrace{X\times \cdots \times X}_k \times Y$ is isomorphic to $X^\ell\times Y$ for some $1\le\ell\le k$.
Let $X_i=X$ for $1\le i\le k$, $X_{k+1}=Y$, and let $A\lesd\prod_{i=1}^{k+1}X_i$. With $I_1=\{1,\dots,k\}$ and $I_2=\{k+1\}$, Lemma \[partition\] implies that $A\lesd A_{I_1}\times A_{I_2}$ and $A_{I_1}\lesd X^k$. By Lemma \[construction\] and Proposition \[subdirs-in-powers\], every subdirect product of $X^k$ is isomorphic to $X^\ell$. Thus $A$ is (isomorphic to) a subdirect product of $X^\ell\times Y$. By Goursat’s Lemma, there are $M\unlhd X^\ell$ and $N\unlhd Y$ such that $X^\ell/M\cong Y/N$. By Lemma \[simple-2\], $M=M_1\times\cdots\times M_\ell$, where each $M_i\in\{\{e\},X\}$. Thus $Y/N\cong X^\ell/M\cong X^r$ for some $0\le r$. If $r>0$ then $X^r\cong Y/N\in \mathbf{HSP}(Y)\subseteq \mathcal V$ and thus $X\in\mathcal V$ (using a projection), a contradiction. Hence $r=0$, $M=X^\ell$, $N=Y$, and $A$ is isomorphic to $X^\ell\times Y$.
\[variety-proper-2\] Let $X$ be a finite nonabelian simple loop and let $\mathcal V$ be the variety generated by all proper subloops of $X$. Then $X\notin \mathcal V$ and each finitely generated loop in $\mathbf{HSP}(X)$ is equal to $X^k\times Y$ for some $k\ge 0$ and some finite $Y\in\mathcal V$.
By Theorem \[variety-proper\], $X\notin \mathcal V$. Let $A$ be a finitely generated loop in $\mathbf{HSP}(X)$. By Lemmas \[support\] and \[technical\], $A$ is a homomorphic image of a subdirect product of $Y_1\times \dots \times Y_n$, where each $Y_i$ is a subloop of $X$. Hence $A$ is a homomorphic image of a subdirect product of $X\times \dots \times X\times Y = X^k \times
Y$, where $k\ge 0$ and $Y$ is a finite loop in $\mathcal V$. By Proposition \[subdirs-in-powers-Y\], $A$ is a homomorphic image of $X^\ell \times Y$, $\ell \le k$. By Lemma \[simple-2\], $A$ is isomorphic to $X^h\times (Y/N)$, where $h\le \ell$ and $N\unlhd Y$.
\[variety-proper-3\] Let $X$ be a finite nonabelian simple loop. Let $\mathcal V_1$ be the variety generated by all proper subloops of $X$ and let $\mathcal V_2$ be a variety of loops not containing $X$. Let $A$ be a finitely generated loop contained in $\mathbf{HSP}(X)\lor\mathcal V_2$. Then there are $k\ge 0$ and a finitely generated loop $Y\in\mathcal V_1\lor\mathcal V_2$ such that $A\cong X^k\times Y$.
By Theorem \[variety-proper\], $X\not\in\mathcal V_1$. Hence $X\not\in\mathcal V_1\cup\mathcal V_2$ and $X\not\in\mathcal V_1\lor\mathcal V_2$ by Lemma \[variety-join\].
Note that $X$ does not belong to $\mathcal V_1\lor\mathcal V_2$ by Lemma \[variety-join\] and [Theorem \[variety-proper-2\]]{}. By the assumption, $A$ is a homomorphic image of a subdirect product of $U\times V$, where $U$ is a finitely generated loop in $\mathbf{HSP}(X)$ and $V\in \mathcal V_2$ is also finitely generated. By Theorem \[variety-proper-2\], $U = X^k \times Y$, where $Y\in \mathcal V_1$ is finite. Hence $A$ is a homomorphic image of $B\lesd Z\times W$, where $Z = X^k$ and $W\in \mathcal V_1\lor\mathcal V_2$ is finitely generated. By Goursat’s Lemma, $B$ is a lifted isomorphism graph of some ${\varphi}:Z/N\to W/M$. By Lemma \[simple-2\], $Z/N\cong X^r$ for some $r\ge 0$. If $r>0$ then $X^r\cong W/M\in\mathcal V_1\lor\mathcal V_2$ implies that $X\in\mathcal V_1\lor\mathcal V_2$, a contradiction. Hence $r=0$, ${\varphi}$ is trivial and $B=X^k\times W$. We are done by Lemma \[simple-2\].
Let us now return to propagation of equations.
\[51\] Let $\mathcal V$ be a variety of loops, and let $X$ be a finite loop such that each $Y\le X$ either belongs to $\mathcal V$ or is nonabelian and simple. If an equation $\eqsymb$ propagates in both $X$ and $\mathcal V$, then it also propagates in the variety $\mathbf{HSP}(X) \lor \mathcal V$.
We proceed by a double induction, with the outer induction on $|X|$. Let $Y_1,\dots,Y_k$ be all the subloops of $X$ listed so that $Y_i\in\mathcal V$ if and only if $1\le i\le\ell$ (for some $\ell\le k$), and $Y_k=X$. If $\ell=k$ then $X\in\mathcal V$, $\mathbf{HSP}(X)\lor\mathcal V = \mathcal V$ and we are done. We can therefore assume that $\ell<k$.
We prove by an inner induction on $\ell\le j\le k$ that $\eqsymb$ propagates in $\mathcal W_j=\mathbf{HSP}(Y_1,\dots,Y_j)\lor\mathcal V$. If $j=\ell$ then again $\mathcal W_j=\mathcal V$, so we can assume that $\ell<j\le k$ and that $\eqsymb$ propagates in $\mathcal W_{j-1}$. Note that $\mathcal W_j = \mathbf{HSP}(Y_j)\lor\mathcal W_{j-1}$ and that every subloop of $Y_j$ is either in $\mathcal W_{j-1}\supseteq\mathcal V$ or nonabelian and simple. If $j<k$ then we are done by the outer induction since $|Y_j|<|X|$. Let us therefore assume that $j=k$. By Lemma \[Lm:PropFinGen\], it suffices to show that $\eqsymb$ propagates in every finitely generated subloop of $\mathcal W_k = \mathbf{HSP}(X)\lor\mathcal W_{k-1}$. If $X\in\mathcal W_{k-1}$, we are done. Else the assumptions of Theorem \[variety-proper-3\] are satisfied with $\mathcal V_2=\mathcal W_{k-1}$, and hence $A\cong X^k\times Y$ for some $Y\in\mathcal W_{k-1}$ (noting that $\mathcal V_1$ of Theorem \[variety-proper-3\] is contained in $\mathcal W_{k-1}$). Then $\eqsymb$ propagates in $A$ by Corollary \[Cr:HS-propagation\].
\[Cr:Main\] Let $\mathcal V$ be a variety of loops. Let $X_1,\dots,X_n$ be finite loops such that every $Y\le X_i$ either belongs to $\mathcal V$ or is nonabelian and simple. If an equation $\eqsymb$ propagates in $X_1,\dots,X_n$ and in $\mathcal V$, then it also propagates in the variety $\mathbf{HSP}(X_1,\dots,X_n)\lor\mathcal V$.
Let $\mathcal V_i=\mathbf{HSP}(X_1,\dots,X_i)\lor\mathcal V$. By Theorem \[51\], $\eqsymb$ propagates in $\mathcal V_1$. If $\eqsymb$ propagates in $\mathcal V_i$, then Theorem \[51\] with $X=X_{i+1}$ and $\mathcal V_i$ implies that $\eqsymb$ propagates in $\mathcal V_{i+1}$.
Steiner loops in which associativity propagates {#Sc:Steiner}
===============================================
In this section we investigate the quasivariety $\mathcal S_{[x(yz)=(xy)z]}$ of Steiner loops in which associativity propagates. We start with two simple observations; the second one follows from [@CEtAl; @DV].
\[Lm:Diassoc\] Every loop in which associativity propagates is diassociative.
Let $X$ be a loop in which associativity propagates and let $x,y\in X$. Since $x(ye)=(xy)e$, the subloop $\langle x,y,e\rangle = \langle x,y\rangle$ is associative.
\[Lm:AntiPasch\] Associativity propagates in every anti-Pasch Steiner loop.
The following example was found by Michael Kinyon using a guided finite-model builder search. It shows that $\mathcal S_{[x(yz)=(xy)z]}$ is not a variety.
\[Ex:AssocDoesNotPropagate\] Let $S$ be the Steiner triple system on $13$ points $\{0,\dots,9,a,b,c\}$ with blocks (in columns) $$\setlength{\arraycolsep}{0pt}
\begin{array}{cccccccccccccccccccccccccc}
0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 1& 1& 1& 1& 1& 2& 2& 2& 2& 2& 3& 3& 3& 4& 4& 4& 5& 5& 6& 6\\
1& 3& 5& 7& 8& 9& 3& 4& 6& 9& a& 3& 4& 5& 7& 8& 7& 9& a& 5& 6& 8& 7& 8& 7& b\\
2& 4& 6& c& b& a& 5& 7& 8& b& c& 6& a& c& b& 9& 8& c& b& b& 9& c& 9& a& a& c\\
\end{array}\ .$$ Let $F$ be the Steiner loop corresponding to $S$, with identity element $e$, and let $f\colon F\times F\to\mathbb Z_2$ be the loop cocycle with nonzero entries only in positions $$\setlength{\arraycolsep}{0pt}
\begin{array}{ccccccccccccccc}
0&0&1&1&1&1&3&3&4&4&5&8&9&a&a\\
5&6&9&a&b&c&a&b&8&c&6&c&b&b&c
\end{array}\ ,$$ where a column with entries $x,y$ indicates that $f(x,y)=f(y,x)=1$. Finally, let $X=\mathrm{Ext}(\mathbb Z_2,F,f)$. Then it can be checked that $X$ is a Steiner loop, $Z(X)=\mathbb Z_2\times\{e\}$, associativity propagates in $X$ (even though $X$ is not anti-Pasch), but associativity does not propagate in $X/Z(X)$.
Let $\mathcal A$ be the variety of abelian groups. As an immediate consequence of Corollary \[Cr:Main\], we have:
\[Cr:SpecialProp\] Let $X_1,\dots,X_n$ be finite loops in which associativity propagates and every $Y\le X_i$ is either an abelian group or a nonabelian simple loop. Then associativity propagates in $\mathbf{HSP}(X_1,\dots,X_n)\lor\mathcal A$.
Corollary \[Cr:SpecialProp\] is a rich source of varieties of loops in which associativity propagates. For instance, both the Steiner loop of order $10$ and the unique anti-Pasch Steiner loop of order $16$ are nonabelian simple loops whose every proper subloop is abelian. More generally:
Call a Steiner loop *minimal* if the corresponding Steiner triple system is minimal in the sense that each of its proper subsystems consists of at most one block.
\[Pr:STS\] Let $S$ be a minimal anti-Pasch Steiner triple system. Then the associated Steiner loop is a nonabelian simple loop whose every proper subloop is abelian.
Let $N$ be a nontrivial normal subloop of $X$. Suppose first that $N=\{e,x\}$ so that $x\in Z(X)$. Let $y,z\in X$ be any nonidentity elements such that $\{x,y,z\}$ is not a block of $S$. Then $x(yz)\ne (xy)z$ because $S$ is anti-Pasch, a contradiction with $x\in Z(X)$. Now suppose that $|N|>2$. Since $S$ is minimal, we must have $|N|=4$ and $|X/N|=4$ as well. By the remarks in the introduction of [@LingEtal], $S$ is then isomorphic to the unique anti-Pasch Steiner triple system of order $15$. An explicit calculation in the `GAP` [@GAP] package `LOOPS` [@LOOPS] shows that $X$ a nonabelian simple loop whose every proper subloop is abelian.
Let $X_1,\dots,X_n$ be Steiner loop associated with minimal anti-Pasch Steiner triple systems. Then associativity propagates in $\mathbf{HSP}(X_1,\dots,X_n)\lor\mathcal A$.
Combine Lemma \[Lm:AntiPasch\], Corollary \[Cr:SpecialProp\] and Proposition \[Pr:STS\].
We conclude the paper with a generalization of a result of Stuhl from [@S], where the following definitions can also be found.
Let $S=(X,\mathcal B)$ denote a Steiner triple system with point set $X$ and blocks $\mathcal B$. A Steiner triple system $(X,\mathcal B)$ is *oriented* if each of its blocks $\{x,y,z\}$ is cyclically ordered, denoted by $(x,y,z)$. We can identify the orientation of an oriented Steiner triple system $(X,\mathcal B)$ with a function $d:(X\times X)\setminus\setof{(x,x)}{x\in X}\to \mathbb Z_2=\{0,1\}$, where $d(x,y)=0$ if $(x,y,z)$ is an oriented block and $d(x,y)=1$ otherwise. In more detail, if $(x,y,z)$ is an oriented block, then $d(x,y)=d(y,z)=d(z,x)=0$ and $d(y,x)=d(z,y)=d(x,z)=1$. Note that a Steiner triple system of order $n$ gives rise to $2^{n(n-1)/6}$ oriented Steiner triple systems.
An *oriented Steiner quasigroup* is a central extension $\mathrm{Ext}(\mathbb Z_2,S,f)$, where $S=(X,\cdot)$ is a Steiner quasigroup with orientation function $d$, and $f:X\times X\to\mathbb Z_2$ is any cocycle such that $f(x,y)=d(x,y)$ if $x\ne y$ and $f(x,x)=f(y,y)$ for all $x,y\in X$. Thus an oriented Steiner triple system gives rise to two oriented Steiner quasigroups, depending on the value of $f(x,x)\in\mathbb Z_2$. Note that an oriented Steiner quasigroup is *not* a Steiner quasigroup. Indeed, we have $(a,x)*(a,x) = (a+a+f(x,x),xx) = (f(x,x),x)$, so either $(0,x)*(0,x)\ne (0,x)$ or $(1,x)*(1,x)\ne (1,x)$.
If $\mathrm{Ext}(\mathbb Z_2,S,f)$ is an oriented Steiner quasigroup and $L$ is the Steiner loop associated with $S$, then $X=\mathrm{Ext}(\mathbb Z_2,L,f)$ will be called an *oriented Steiner loop*, where we extend the domain of the cocycle $f:S\times S\to\mathbb Z_2$ to $L\times L$ by setting $f(x,e)=f(e,x)=0$ for every $x\in L$. If $f(x,x)=0$ for every $x\in S$ then $(a,x)*(a,x) = (a+a+f(x,x),xx)=(0,e)$ and $X$ has exponent $2$. If $f(x,x)=1$ for every $x\in S$ then $(a,x)^4=(0,e)$ no matter how $(a,x)$ is parenthesized, and thus $X$ has exponent $4$.
Stuhl proved in [@S Theorem 1 and Corollary 2] that an oriented Hall loop satisfies Moufang Theorem if and only if it is of exponent $4$. We generalize her result in Theorem \[Th:GenStuhl\].
\[Lm:Assoc\] Let $X=\mathrm{Ext}(\mathbb Z_2,L,f)$ be an oriented anti-Pasch Steiner loop and let $d=f(x,x)$ for some (and hence all) $x\in L\setminus\{e\}$. Then $$(a,x)*((b,y)*(c,z)) = (a,x)*((b,y)*(c,z))$$ if and only if one of the following conditions is satisfied:
- $e\in\{x,y,z\}$,
- $e\ne x=y$ and $d=1$,
- $e\ne y=z$ and $d=1$,
- $x=z$,
- $\{x,y,z\}$ is a block.
We have $(a,x)*((b,y)*(c,z)) = (a,x)*((b,y)*(c,z))$ if and only if both $$\begin{aligned}
xy\cdot z &= x\cdot yz,\label{ca}\\
f(x,y)+f(xy,z) &= f(x,yz)+f(y,z)\label{cb}\end{aligned}$$ hold. If $e\in\{x,y,z\}$ then both conditions hold, so we can assume from now on that $e\not\in\{x,y,z\}$.
If $x=y$ or $y=z$ or $x=z$ then holds. Note that if $x=y=z$ then reduces to $f(x,x)+f(e,x) = f(x,e)+f(x,x)$, i.e., to $d+0=0+d$, so it also holds. Suppose from now on that $|\{x,y,z\}|>1$.
If $x=y$ then becomes $d = f(x,x)+f(e,z) = f(x,xz) + f(x,z)$. Whether $(x,z,xz)$ is a block or $(x,xz,z)$ is a block, the right hand side reduces to $1$, so the three elements associate if and only if $d=1$. Similarly, if $y=z$ then becomes $f(x,y)+f(xy,y) = f(x,e) + f(y,y) = d$ and the left hand side is equal to $1$ whether $(x,y,xy)$ is a block or $(x,xy,y)$ is a block. Finally, if $x=z$ then becomes $f(x,y)+f(xy,x) = f(x,yx) + f(y,x)$, and this holds whether $(x,y,xy)$ is a block or $(x,xy,y)$ is a block.
We can therefore assume that $|\{x,y,z\}|=3$. If $\{x,y,z\}$ is a block then we can take $z=xy$, holds and becomes $f(x,y)+f(xy,xy) = f(x,x)+f(y,xy)$, which holds whether $(x,y,xy)$ is a block or $(x,xy,y)$ is a block. If $\{x,y,z\}$ is not a block then $xy\cdot z\ne x\cdot yz$ because $L$ is anti-Pasch.
\[Th:GenStuhl\] Let $X$ be an oriented anti-Pasch Steiner loop. Then associativity propagates in $X$ if and only if $X$ has exponent $4$.
Let $X=\mathrm{Ext}(\mathbb Z_2,L,f)$ for some anti-Pasch Steiner loop $L$ and let $d=f(x,x)$ for some $x\in L\setminus\{e\}$. Note that if $x\ne y$ are nonidentity elements of $L$, then $\mathbb Z_2\times\{e,x,y,xy\}$ is a group if and only if $d=1$, by Lemma \[Lm:Assoc\].
Suppose now that $((a,x)*(b,y))*(c,z) = (a,x)*((b,y)*(c,z))$ for some elements of $X$. In all five cases of Lemma \[Lm:Assoc\], we can choose $u,v\in L$ so that $\langle (a,x),(b,y),(c,z)\rangle \le \mathbb Z_2\times\{e,u,v,uv\}$. Hence, if $d=1$ then associativity propagates in $X$. If $d=0$, consider any nonidentity elements $x\ne y\in L$. By Lemma \[Lm:Assoc\], $(0,x)*((0,x)*(0,y))\ne ((0,x)*(0,x))*(0,y)$, $X$ is not diassociative, and we are done by Lemma \[Lm:Diassoc\].
Open problems
=============
We start with concrete problems concerning propagation of associativity in Steiner loops. By Example \[Ex:AssocDoesNotPropagate\], there exists a Steiner loop $X$ of order $28$ such that associativity propagates in $X$ but not in $\mathbf{H}(X)$.
What is the smallest order of a Steiner loop $X$ such that associativity propagates in $X$ but not in $\mathbf{H}(X)$?
The same example shows that a Steiner loop in which associativity does not propagate might be a factor of a Steiner loop in which associativity propagates.
\[Pr:HomImageOfProp\] Is it true that for every Steiner loop $F$ (in which associativity does not propagate) there exists a Steiner loop $X$ in which associativity propagates and $F\in\mathbf{H}(X)$?
By Corollary \[Cr:SpecialProp\], if associativity propagates in a Steiner loop $X$ and all subloops of $X$ are either abelian or nonabelian simple, then it propagates in $\mathbf{HSP}(X)$, too.
Characterize the class of Steiner loops $X$ for which associativity propagates in $\mathbf{HSP}(X)$.
The discussion of Sections \[Sc:Basic\]–\[Sc:Varieties\] has been intentionally restricted to loops since we believe that the explicit description of subloops we have presented may be useful in the future. We expect that some of the results in these sections generalize to Mal’cev varieties and possibly to Goursat varieties.
We now turn to more general questions concerning propagation of equations. These can be seen as suggestions for research programs. Recall that $$\mathcal V_{[\eqsymb]}=\setof{X\in\mathcal V}{\eqsymb\text{ propagates in }X}.$$
Given an equation $\eqsymb$ and a variety $\mathcal V$, when is the propagating core $\mathcal V_{[\eqsymb]}$ a variety? If $\mathcal V_{[\eqsymb]}$ is a variety, is it finitely based relative to $\mathcal V$?
If $\eqsymb$ propagates in $X$, under which conditions does $\eqsymb$ propagate in $\mathbf{HSP}(X)$?
Let $\mathcal V_i$, $i\in I$, be varieties in which $\eqsymb$ propagates. Under which conditions does $\eqsymb$ propagate in the join $\bigvee_{i\in I}\mathcal V_i$?
The following question generalizes Problem \[Pr:HomImageOfProp\].
Given an equation $\eqsymb$ and a variety $\mathcal V$, under which conditions is $\mathcal V\subseteq \mathbf{H}(\mathcal V_{[\eqsymb]})$?
\[Qu:last\] Given an equation $\eqsymb$ and a variety $\mathcal V$, is there an algebra $X\in\mathcal V$ such that $\mathbf{H}(X)\subseteq\mathcal V_{[\eqsymb]}$ but $\mathbf{HSP}(X)\not\subseteq\mathcal V_{[\eqsymb]}$?
Answering Question \[Qu:last\] for a given $\eqsymb$ and $\mathcal V$ might not be difficult but it might be technically complicated. A possible strategy is to first find $Y,Z$ such that $Y\in\mathcal V_{[\eqsymb]}$, $Z\in\mathbf{H}(Y)$ but $Z\not\in\mathcal V_{[\eqsymb]}$, and then embed $Y$ into a simple algebra $X\in\mathcal V_{[\eqsymb]}$. Then $\mathbf{H}(X)\subseteq\mathcal V_{[\eqsymb]}$ by simplicity but $Z\in\mathbf{HS}(X)\not\subseteq \mathcal V_{[\eqsymb]}$.
[99]{}
Grace E. Bates and Fred Kiokemeister, *A note on homomorphic mappings of quasigroups into multiplicative systems*, Bull. Amer. Math. Soc. **54** (1948), 1180–1185.
R.H. Bruck, *A survey of binary systems*, Ergebnisse der Mathematik und ihrer Grenzgebiete, Springer Verlag, Berlin-Göttingen-Heidelberg, 1958.
Stanley Burris and H. P. Sankappanavar, A course in universal algebra, Springer-Verlag, 1981.
A. Carboni, G.M. Kelly and M.C. Pedicchio, Some remarks on Mal’tsev and Goursat categories, Applied Categorical Structures **4** (1993), 385–421.
Charles J. Colbourn, Maria De Lourdes Merlini Giuliani, Alexander Rosa and Izabella Stuhl, *Steiner loops satisfying Moufang’s theorem*, Australas. J. Combin. **63** (2015), 170–181.
Charles J. Colbourn and Alexander Rosa, Triple systems. Oxford Mathematical Monographs. The Clarendon Press, Oxford University Press, New York, 1999.
Aleš Drápal, *A simplified proof of Moufang’s theorem*, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. **139** (2011), no. **1**, 93–98.
Aleš Drápal and Petr Vojtěchovský, *A variety of Steiner loops satisfying Moufang’s theorem: A solution to Rajah’s problem*, to appear in Aequat. Math, 2019, `https://doi.org/10.1007/s00010-019-00692-3`
Trevor Evans, *Homomorphisms of non-associative systems*, J. London Math. Soc. **24** (1949), 254–260.
The GAP Group, GAP – Groups, Algorithms, and Programming, Version 4.10.2; 2019. `http://www.gap-system.org`
Édouard Goursat, *Sur les substitutions orthogonales et les divisions régulières de l’espace*, Annales Scientifiques de l’École Normale Supérieure 1889, volume **6**, 9–102.
A.C.H. Ling, C.J. Colbourn, M.J. Grannell and T.S. Griggs, *Construction techniques for anti-Pasch Steiner triple systems*, J. London. Math. Soc. **61** (2000), 641–657.
Ruth Moufang, *Zur Struktur von Alternativkörpern*, Math. Ann. **110** (1935), no. **1**, 416–430.
Gábor P. Nagy and Petr Vojtěchovský, *LOOPS: Computing with quasigroups and loops in GAP*, available at `http://www.math.du.edu/~petr/loops`
Karl Strambach and Izabella Stuhl, *Oriented Steiner loops*, Beitr. Algebra Geom. **54** (2013), no. **1**, 131–145.
Izabella Stuhl, *Moufang’s theorem for non-Moufang loops*, Aequat. Math. **90** (2016), 329–333.
[^1]: Aleš Drápal partially supported by the Czech Republic Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports grant LTAUSA19070. Petr Vojtěchovský partially supported by the 2019 PROF grant of the University of Denver.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'We report on the detection of a pulsating Fe [$\hbox{K}\alpha~$]{}line in the High Mass X-ray Binary (HMXB) GX 301-2, from a 40-ks observation near periastron. The pulsations in the Fe [$\hbox{K}\alpha~$]{}emission appeared only in the first 7 ks of the observation, with a period and phase profile similar to those of the continuum. The presence of pulsed fluorescent lines is an unusual property in HMXBs. After 7 ks, the continuum flux increased by a factor of three, the Fe [$\hbox{K}\alpha~$]{}flux increased only by about 10%, and the pulsating signal in the line disappeared. Finally, in the second half of the observation, both the continuum and the line flux dropped by a similar factor of 2. We suggest that the pulsating component of the Fe [$\hbox{K}\alpha~$]{}line is coming from a transient non-isotropic distribution of dense gas around the neutron star, for example an accretion stream induced by periastron passage, or from the illuminated surface of the donor star.'
author:
- |
Jiren Liu$^{1}$[^1], Roberto Soria$^{2,3,4}$, Erlin Qiao$^{1,2}$, and Jifeng Liu$^{1,2}$\
$^{1}$National Astronomical Observatories, 20A Datun Road, Beijing 100012, China\
$^{2}$College of Astronomy and Space Sciences, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China\
$^{3}$International Centre for Radio Astronomy Research, Curtin University, GPO Box U1987, Perth, WA 6845, Australia\
$^{4}$Sydney Institute for Astronomy, School of Physics A28, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia\
date: 'Accepted XXX. Received YYY; in original form ZZZ'
title: 'Discovery of a pulsating Fe K$\alpha$ line in GX 301-2'
---
\[firstpage\]
pulsars: individual: GX 301-2 - X-rays: binaries
Introduction
============
The classical High Mass X-ray Binary (HMXB) system GX 301-2 consists of a pulsar immersed in a slow ($\approx$300 kms$^{-1}$) and dense stellar wind ($\dot{M}_{\rm w} \sim 10^{-5} M_\odot$yr$^{-1}$), arising from the B1 hypergiant Wray 977 [@Kap06]. The donor star has an estimated mass of $\approx$39–53 $M_\odot$, a radius of $\approx$62 $R_\odot$, and a distance from us of $\approx$3 kpc [@Kap06]. The orbit of the pulsar has a period $P_{\rm orb} = 41.506 \pm 0.003$ d, with reference phase 0 at the Modified Julian Date (MJD) $T_0 = 43,906.06 \pm 0.11$, and an orbital period derivative estimated as $\dot{P}_{\rm orb} = (-3.7 \pm 0.5) \times 10^{-6}$ s s$^{-1}$ [@Dor10]. The system has an eccentricity $e \approx 0.46$, with a periastron distance of $\approx$25 $R_{\odot}$ between the neutron star and the surface of the donor star [@Sat86; @Koh97]. The inclination angle is moderately high, between 44$^{\circ}$–78$^{\circ}$ [@LK08; @Kap06]. The pulsar has a long spin period $P_{\rm s} \approx 680$ s, which showed erratic changes over the last 30 years [e.g. @Dor10; @Eva10]. Such a long pulse period has been attributed to a strong magnetic field [$\sim10^{14}$ G, @Dor10]. The field measured from the cyclotron line is much weaker ($\approx$5 $\times
10^{12}$ G), but the two values can be consistent with each other if the cyclotron line region comes from a tall accretion column of height $\approx$2.5–3 $R_{NS}$ [@Dor10 but also see @IF12].
{width="7.3in"}\
{width="7.3in"}
The X-ray continuum flux of GX 301-2 shows regular orbital modulations and reaches a maximum about 1.4 days before periastron passage [@Sat86]. The flux increase has been explained by a gas stream induced by the neutron star near periastron [@LK08; @IP14 and references therein].
GX 301-2 shows a strong 6.4-keV Fe [$\hbox{K}\alpha~$]{}fluorescent line, as well as many other fluorescent lines [@Sar96; @Fur11; @Suc12]. The Fe [$\hbox{K}\alpha~$]{}fluorescent line is produced when the X-ray emission illuminates the surrounding gas; its intensity and spectral profile are important tools for the study of HMXBs [@Tor10; @Gim15 and reference therein]. For example, from the detection of a spectrally resolved Fe [$\hbox{K}\alpha~$]{}Compton shoulder at periastron, @Wat03 inferred an absorption column density of $\approx$10$^{24}$ cm$^{-2}$ and an electron temperature of $\approx$0.5 eV. The location of the Fe [$\hbox{K}\alpha~$]{}fluorescent region for GX 301-2 is still actively debated. Using spectral data from the [*Advanced Satellite for Cosmology and Astrophysics*]{} ([*ASCA*]{}), @End02 measured a Gaussian $\sigma$ of $\approx$40–80 eV for Fe [$\hbox{K}\alpha~$]{}and inferred an emission region within $\approx$10$^{10}$ cm (0.3 lt-s) of the neutron star. An [*XMM-Newton*]{} study [@Fur11] did not reveal any significant time delays between the observed continuum and the reprocessed line emission, which implies a distance smaller than $\approx$6 $\times 10^{10}$ cm between the two sources of emission. Instead, using [*Suzaku*]{} observations, @Suc12 inferred a distance greater than $\approx$2 $\times 10^{13}$ cm (700 lt-s), based on the relatively flat phase profile of the line compared with that of the continuum. Despite this discrepancy in the proposed size of the line emission region, one thing that appeared well ascertained was that the Fe [$\hbox{K}\alpha~$]{}line was less pulsed compared to the continuum [e.g. @Fur11 and reference therein]. In this paper, based on [*Chandra X-ray Observatory*]{} observations, we show that this is not always true: the Fe [$\hbox{K}\alpha~$]{}line pulsates at times as strongly as the continuum.
X-ray Observations
==================
GX 301-2 has been observed with the High Energy Transmission Grating Spectrometers (HETGs) on board [*Chandra*]{} on three separate occasions between 2000 and 2002. One of those observations occurred around periastron passage (ObsID 2733, 2002 January 13, exposure time of 40 ks, start time at MJD 52,287.375): this is the dataset we are reporting on for this paper. More specifically, using the ephemeris and period derivative of [@Dor10], the start of the observation is at orbital phase $\phi = 0.998 \pm 0.003$; the duration of the observation is $\Delta \phi = 0.011$. Spectral analysis of this dataset has been reported elsewhere [@Wat03], but no timing analysis had been done.
![ Top panel: statistical significance of the pulsation period for the Fe [$\hbox{K}\alpha~$]{}line during different sub-intervals of the [*Chandra*]{} observation; the pulse period is detected only in the first 7 ks. Bottom panel: statistical significance of the pulsation in the continuum. The dashed line shows 4 $\sigma$ detection limit. ](G301pulsFe5.ps "fig:"){width="2.5in"}\
![ Top panel: statistical significance of the pulsation period for the Fe [$\hbox{K}\alpha~$]{}line during different sub-intervals of the [*Chandra*]{} observation; the pulse period is detected only in the first 7 ks. Bottom panel: statistical significance of the pulsation in the continuum. The dashed line shows 4 $\sigma$ detection limit. ](G301pulsCon5.ps "fig:"){width="2.5in"}\
[*Chandra*]{}’s HETGs consist of two sets of gratings: the Medium Energy Grating (MEG) and the High Energy Grating (HEG). We only used HEG data for this work, because of its better spectral resolution and larger collecting area in the Fe [$\hbox{K}\alpha~$]{}band. We downloaded the data from the public archives, and reprocessed them with the Chandra Interactive Analysis of Observations ([ciao]{}) software version 4.8 [@Fru06]. We applied a barycenter correction with the [ciao]{} tool [*axbary*]{}. We extracted the HEG source spectra from a 2$''$ region in the cross-dispersion direction with the [tgcat]{} script [@TG].
In addition, we used one archival observation of GX 301-2 taken with the [*Nuclear Spectroscopic Telescope Array*]{} ([*NuSTAR*]{}) on 2015 October 4 (ObsID 30101042002). The system was observed at a binary phase $\approx$0.9, relatively close to periastron. We extracted the source spectrum from a circle of $1'.5$ radius, and the background spectrum from a blank $4'$ circle, using the [*NuSTAR*]{} Data Analysis Software ([NuSTARDAS]{}[^2]).
We used the [*sitar\_epfold\_rate*]{} and [*sitar\_pfold\_rate*]{} tools within the [sitar]{}[^3] software package for timing analysis. We used the Interactive Spectral Interpretation System [isis]{}[^4] [@ISIS] for spectral analysis of both the [*Chandra*]{} and [*NuSTAR*]{} data.
Main Results
============
Timing results
--------------
To investigate the physical changes in the system, we divided the 40-ks observation into four sub-intervals: 0–7 ks (henceforth labelled as interval A), 7–17 ks (B), 17–24 ks (C), and 24–40 ks (D), based on the flux levels of the Fe [$\hbox{K}\alpha~$]{}line (6.34–6.44 keV) and the continuum (6.5–10 keV). Half of the count rate in the 5.8–6 keV band was used for baseline continuum subtraction from the line flux. The light curves for the continuum-subtracted Fe [$\hbox{K}\alpha~$]{}line and the continuum are plotted in Figure 1, with a time resolution of 68 s $=$ 0.1 times the pulse period.
In the first 7 ks of the observation, the fluxes from both the line and the continuum do not show any long-term trends, but both light curves are characterized by irregular flaring on timescales smaller than the pulse period (Figure 1). After 7 ks, in interval B, the continuum level increases; the average count rate is a factor of 3 higher than in interval A. This mini-flare is not to be confused with the so-called pre-periastron X-ray flare, which peaks at $\phi \approx 0.90$–0.95 with an amplitude 10–20 times that of the quiet epochs [e.g. @IP14] and is one of the hallmarks of this HMXB. The average flux of the Fe [$\hbox{K}\alpha~$]{}line increases only by $\approx$10% between intervals A and B. In intervals C and D, both the continuum and the line flux decreased by similar amounts. Near the end of the observation, the continuum had settled to a level slightly higher than in interval A, while the Fe [$\hbox{K}\alpha~$]{}line was a factor of 2 fainter than in interval A.
We searched for periodicities in the Fe [$\hbox{K}\alpha~$]{}line and the continuum, using the epoch folding method between 100–1000 s with a step-size of 10 s and 10 phase bins for light curve (binned in 10 s) divided into 6.8 ks intervals. The L-statistic as defined in @Dav90 is plotted in Figure 2. It obeys an F distribution with M-1 and N-M degrees of freedom, for N data points binned in M phase bins. The continuum shows the expected pulse periodicity (680 s) during the whole observation, while the Fe [$\hbox{K}\alpha~$]{}line shows significant periodicity (also at 680 s) only during interval A. A second peak at half of the pulsation period (340 s) is also significantly found for the line flux in interval A. The 4 $\sigma$ detection limit (P($F\leq5.22$)=99.99993%, with 9 and 670 degrees of freedom, corrected for 91 searched periods) is shown as dashed line in Figure 2..
We folded the phase profile of line and continuum at different time intervals with 10 phase bins (Figure 3). For clarity the profiles of interval C (similar to those of interval D) are not plotted. We found that the phase profiles of Fe [$\hbox{K}\alpha~$]{}line and continuum look similar during interval A, with broad plateaux. For intervals B and D when no periodic pulsations of Fe [$\hbox{K}\alpha~$]{}line are detected, the folded phase profile of Fe [$\hbox{K}\alpha~$]{}line looks flat, as expected. The phase profiles of the continuum during intervals B and D show a main peak, similar to those reported in the literature [e.g. @Fur11]. Most importantly, the pulsating behaviour of the Fe [$\hbox{K}\alpha~$]{}line during interval A is a new discovery, not seen in previous observations.
The pulsed fractions defined as $f=\frac{max(p)-min(p)}{max(p)+min(p)}$ are listed in Table 1. The pulsed fraction of the Fe [$\hbox{K}\alpha~$]{}line of interval A is larger than those of other intervals and is similar to those of the continuum. We simulated the pulsed fractions arising from intrinsic noise of data assuming a uniform phase profile with a Fe [$\hbox{K}\alpha~$]{}rate as the observed mean rate in the four intervals. The results for $10^4$ runs are listed in Table 1. The fake pulsed fractions are similar to those of interval B, C, and D, but smaller than that of interval A, as expected.
![ Phase profiles of the Fe [$\hbox{K}\alpha~$]{}line and the continuum for sub-intervals A (0–7 ks), B (7–17 ks), and D (24–40 ks). For clarity, the pulse profiles of the Fe [$\hbox{K}\alpha~$]{}line for intervals B and D have been up-shifted by 0.15 and 0.3, respectively; the continuum profile of interval D has also been up-shifted by 0.3. ](G301FoldT6Z20.ps "fig:"){width="3.6in"}\
{width="3.6in"}\
{width="3.4in"}\
{width="3.4in"}\
{width="3.4in"}\
1.5pt
f Interval A Interval B Interval C Interval D
-------------------------------- --------------- --------------- --------------- --------------- --
Fe [$\hbox{K}\alpha~$]{} 0.29$\pm$0.06 0.09$\pm$0.05 0.13$\pm$0.07 0.13$\pm$0.06
Continuum 0.37$\pm$0.06 0.23$\pm$0.04 0.24$\pm$0.06 0.33$\pm$0.04
Faked Fe [$\hbox{K}\alpha~$]{} 0.12$\pm$0.03 0.12$\pm$0.03 0.14$\pm$0.04 0.17$\pm$0.04
: Pulsed fraction for the four observation intervals
Spectral results
----------------
A study of the spectral properties of the same HEG observation was reported by @Wat03; however, the observation was divided simply into two halves of 20 ks each. Thus, the unusual pulsating behaviour of the Fe [$\hbox{K}\alpha~$]{}line in the first 7 ks, and its subsequent sudden disappearance, went unnoticed. We analyzed the spectra of the four intervals A, B, C, and D separately (Figure 5). In all four intervals (but especially in interval A), the spectrum showed a strong Compton shoulder red-ward of the narrow Fe [$\hbox{K}\alpha~$]{}line, which implies a non-negligible contribution of the scattered component to the continuum.
Recent studies [e.g. @Mar17] have shown that stellar winds from massive stars are composed of inhomogeneous clumps. The X-ray spectrum of a source seen through a clumpy medium is very different from that of a source seen through a smooth one [@Liu14]. For a clumpy distribution, there are many lower-density gaps between the clouds, in which low-energy X-ray photons (1–5 keV) can pass without being heavily absorbed. The clumpier the gas, the stronger the scattered low-energy emission. This is likely why the observed low-energy spectra of GX 301-2 have generally been modelled as a partial-covering power-law [e.g. @Fur11]. It is a simple phenomenological model to reproduce the scattered continuum component from a clumpy material; instead, a smooth absorbing medium with the same column density ($\approx$10$^{24}$ cm$^{-2}$) would completely absorb photons below $\approx$3 keV.
1.5pt
[lcccc]{} Parameter& Interval A & Interval B& Interval C & Interval D\
\
$K_{\rm pl} \left({\mathrm{photons~keV}}^{-1} {\mathrm{~cm}}^{-2} {\mathrm{~s}}^{-1} {\mathrm{~at~1~ keV}}\right)$ &3.8$\pm$0.6 & 7.9$\pm$2.0 & 2.4$\pm$0.7 & 1.8$\pm0.3$\
$N^a$ &3.5$\pm$0.6 & 5.8$\pm$0.7 & $>6.8$ & $>6.8$\
$N^{\rm T}_{\rm {H}}$ $\left(10^{24} {\mathrm{~cm}}^{-2}\right)$ &1.5$\pm$0.5 & 1.3$\pm$0.1 & 1.0$\pm$0.1 & 0.9$\pm$0.1\
$N^{\rm R}_{\rm {H}}$ $\left(10^{24} {\mathrm{~cm}}^{-2}\right)$ &1.6$\pm$0.3 & 1.5$\pm$0.1 & 0.9$\pm$0.1 & 0.8$\pm$0.1\
\
$E_1$ (keV) &\
$E_2$ (keV) &\
$\Delta v_{\rm{K}\alpha}$ (km s$^{-1}$) & 180$\pm$60 & 240$\pm$30 & 210$\pm$60 & 240$\pm$60\
$\sigma_1 = \sigma_2$ (eV) & 4.8$\pm$3.1 & 8.7$\pm$1.8 & 7.0$\pm$2.2 & 7.9$\pm$2.0\
$N_{1} + N_2$ $\left(10^{-3} {\mathrm{~photons~cm}}^{-1} {\mathrm{~s}}^{-1}\right)$ & 10.0$\pm$0.6 & 11.2$\pm$0.6 & 8.2$\pm$0.7 & 5.8$\pm$0.3\
EW (keV) & 0.52$\pm$0.03 &0.28$\pm$0.02 &0.38$\pm$0.03 &0.36$\pm$0.02\
\
$E_3$ (keV) &\
$\Delta v_{\rm{K}\beta}$ (km s$^{-1}$) & -180$\pm$180 & -60$\pm$30 & -120$\pm$330 & -150$\pm$240\
$\sigma_3$ (eV) & 19$\pm$8 & 23$\pm$5 & 24$\pm$13 & 26$\pm$8\
$N_3$ $\left(10^{-3} {\mathrm{~photons~cm}}^{-1} {\mathrm{~s}}^{-1}\right)$ & 2.6$\pm$0.4 & 3.1$\pm$0.4 & 2.0$\pm$0.4 & 1.6$\pm$0.3\
\
$E_4$ (keV) & 6.32$\pm$0.01 & 6.30$\pm$0.02 & 6.31$\pm$0.03 & 6.29$\pm$0.01\
$\sigma_4$ (eV) & 63$\pm$10 & 63$\pm$13 & 60$\pm$18 & 37$\pm$12\
$N_4$ $\left(10^{-3} {\mathrm{~photons~cm}}^{-1} {\mathrm{~s}}^{-1}\right)$ & 3.5$\pm$0.6 & 3.6$\pm$0.6 & 2.4$\pm$0.9 & 1.0$\pm$0.3\
\
$E_5$ (keV) & 6.68$\pm$0.01 & 6.66$\pm$0.02 & 6.68$\pm$0.05 & 6.69$\pm$0.10\
$\sigma_5$ (eV) &\
$N_5$ $\left(10^{-3} {\mathrm{~photons~cm}}^{-1} {\mathrm{~s}}^{-1}\right)$ & 0.3$\pm$0.2 & 0.3$\pm$0.2 & 0.1$\pm$0.2 & 0.0$\pm$0.1\
\
$E_6$ (keV) & 6.95$\pm$0.01 & 6.93$\pm$0.02 & 6.95$\pm$0.05 & 6.93$\pm$0.03\
$\sigma_6$ (eV) &\
$N_6$ $\left(10^{-3} {\mathrm{~photons~cm}}^{-1} {\mathrm{~s}}^{-1}\right)$ & 0.4$\pm$0.2 & 0.4$\pm$0.2 & 0.1$\pm$0.3 & 0.2$\pm$0.1\
\
$E_7$ (keV) & 7.47$\pm$0.02 & 7.47$\pm$0.01 & 7.47$\pm$0.01 & 7.47$\pm$0.01\
$\sigma_7$ (eV) &\
$N_7$ $\left(10^{-3} {\mathrm{~photons~cm}}^{-1} {\mathrm{~s}}^{-1}\right)$ & 0.7$\pm$0.3 & 1.0$\pm$0.3 & 0.8$\pm$0.3 & 0.5$\pm$0.2\
$\chi^2_{\nu} \left(\chi^2/{\mathrm{dof}}\right)$ &1.17 (112/96) &1.26 (301/238) &0.93 (98/105) &1.31 (305/233)\
$L_{2-10}^{b}$ $\left(10^{37} {\mathrm{erg~s}}^{-1}\right)$ & 3.1$\pm$0.5 &6.4$\pm$1.6 &1.9$\pm$0.6 &1.5$\pm$0.3\
Notes: $^a$: clumpiness parameter (average number of clouds along any line of sight); $^b$: 2–10 keV de-absorbed luminosity of the intrinsic power-law component; $N_i$ is the normalization for corresponding Gaussian line.
While many HMXBs show photoionization lines, the spectrum of GX 301-2 is quite different. It is highly attenuated and dominated by neutral-like fluorescent lines [e.g. @Fur11]. Such a reprocessing by neutral medium is similar to the process occurring in the clumpy tori of AGN. Therefore, we choose to fit the continuum of GX 301-2 with the “clumpy torus” (Ctorus[^5]) model of @Liu14, which is implemented as a table model in [isis]{}. Ctorus calculates the spectrum of scattered X-ray emission emerging from a clumpy torus, given an input power-law spectrum with a photon index $\Gamma$ between 1.5 and 2.5. The model includes the absorbed intrinsic continuum (transmitted component) and the scattered component. The normalization of the scattered component is determined by the normalization of the input power law ($K_{\rm {pl}}$). The column densities seen by the transmitted and scattered components ($N^{\rm T}_{\rm H}$ and $N^{\rm R}_{\rm H}$, respectively; Table 2) are treated as independent fit parameters, because the absorbing column density along our line of sight may be different from the average column density through the scattering material. The clumpiness is represented by the average cloud number along any line of sight ($N$, ranging between 2 and 10, the smaller the $N$, the more clumpy the gas) and the filling factor (assumed here to be 0.1). The densities and sizes of clumps are determined by $N^{\rm R}_{\rm H}$, $N$, and the filling factor [see @Liu14 for more details]. We assumed an inclination angle of 90$^\circ$ (edge-on) to approximate a spherical geometry.
When fitting the spectra of GX 301-2, we found that the best-fitting photon indices always reach the lower limit of the model, $\Gamma = 1.5$. Therefore, we fixed the photon index to 1.5. To verify that this is a reasonable approximation, we extracted and analysed an archival [*NuSTAR*]{} spectrum taken at an orbital phase of $\approx0.9$ as mentioned in §2. We first fitted the spectrum between 15 and 50 keV using a power-law with a smoothed high-energy cutoff model [eq. 2 in @LaB01]. We found a photon index of $1.39\pm0.08$ with a cutoff energy of $23.9\pm0.4$ keV and a folding energy of $8.7\pm0.3$ keV (blue line in Figure 4). The reduced $\chi^2=1.0$. Then we fitted the spectrum between 5 and 50 keV using an absorbed power-law with high-energy cutoff, plus a Gaussian line around 6.4 keV, and found a photon index of $1.35\pm0.03$ with a cutoff energy of $23.7\pm0.3$ keV, a folding energy of $8.6\pm0.2$ keV, a line with centroid of $6.37\pm0.01$ keV and $\sigma$ of $50^{+30}_{-50}$ eV, and a column density of $1.4\pm0.1\times10^{23}$ cm$^{-2}$ (red line in Figure 4). The reduced $\chi^2=1.1$. The residuals are mainly around 7.1 keV (Fe [$\hbox{K}\beta~$]{}line). Therefore, a photon index of 1.5 is not far from those obtained from data. We note that our main results are not affected by the exact slope of the power-law used to approximate the continuum.
Ctorus model has also a fluorescent component, however, it does not include the Compton shoulder of the Fe [$\hbox{K}\alpha~$]{}line currently. The rest-frame energies adopted for the fluorescent lines also have some discrepancies with those measured in the laboratory [@Bea67], which makes the usage of the fluorescent component not straight forward. Therefore, we use Gaussian to model the emission lines. As the narrow Fe [$\hbox{K}\alpha~$]{}line is very close to 6.4 keV, we use two Gaussian (Table 2) with centroids at 6.404 keV and 6.391 keV, to represent the [$\hbox{K}\alpha~$]{}1 and [$\hbox{K}\alpha~$]{}2 doublet [@Bea67]. The intensity ratio between [$\hbox{K}\alpha~$]{}1 and [$\hbox{K}\alpha~$]{}2 is set to 2:1, and their velocity shifts and Gaussian widths are fixed to be the same for the two components. The neutral Fe [$\hbox{K}\beta~$]{}line is also modelled as a Gaussian (Table 2) centered at 7.058 keV. We add another Gaussian with an energy around 6.3 keV to represent the Compton shoulder. In addition, we find relatively weak line features around 6.7 keV, 6.9 keV, and 7.5 keV, which we interpret as He-like Fe, H-like Fe, and neutral Ni [$\hbox{K}\alpha~$]{}lines. We also modelled them as Gaussian (Table 2) with a fixed width of 1 eV.
First, we fitted the spectrum from interval A (Table 2 and black data points in the top panel of Figure 5). We found that the direct power-law component contributes only $\approx$1/3 of the observed continuum emission around 6.5–9 keV; the rest comes from the scattered continuum. If both the Fe [$\hbox{K}\alpha~$]{}line and the continuum are dominated by photons scattered in Compton-thick gas, this could explain the similarity of their phase profiles; however, the location and geometry of the scattering medium must be such as to preserve the pulsation signal.
For interval B, first we tried freezing the power-law normalization and the scattering column density in Ctorus to the best-fitting values found for interval A, and only allowed the absorbing column density as a free parameter. We wanted to test the scenario that the increase in the observed continuum flux was solely due to a decrease in the absorbing column density. With this assumption, we get a column density of $N^{\rm T}_{\rm H} = (8.9\pm0.1)\times10^{23}$ cm$^{-2}$ and $\chi^2_{\nu} =2.3$. The model does not do a good job of reproducing the continuum at the low- and high-energy ends. We obtain a better fit ($\chi^2_{\nu} =1.26$; green data points in the top panel of Figure 5) when we thaw the normalization of the intrinsic power-law and the reprocessing column density. The power-law normalization is about twice the value in interval A (Table 2); the transmitted component now accounts for about half of the observed continuum flux above 6.5 keV. If the increase of the intrinsic luminosity is real, and no other changes occur in the distribution of the scattering medium, we would expect to see a corresponding increase of the fluxes from the Fe lines; however, all line fluxes are found to be similar between intervals A and B, within the uncertainties (Table 2). What does change in the line properties is the loss of the pulsation signal.
Finally, we fitted the same model to the spectra of intervals C (Figure 5, middle panel) and D (Figure 5, bottom panel). The trend for these late intervals is that the normalization of the intrinsic power-law emission decreases, and the scattering column density also decreases. The ratio between the measured fluxes of the Compton shoulder and of the Fe [$\hbox{K}\alpha~$]{}line is about 35% and 32% for intervals A and B, decreasing to about 29% and 17% for intervals C and D, consistent with the reduced scattering column density. The combined result of both changes is that the contribution of the absorbed intrinsic emission is larger than half of the observed continuum flux above 6.5 keV for intervals C and D. The fluorescence line fluxes also decrease, either because of the reduction in the intrinsic continuum flux, or because of the decrease in the scattering optical depth, or both.
The measured offsets of the Fe [$\hbox{K}\alpha~$]{}line from those of totally neutral Fe are very small; it indicates that the Fe [$\hbox{K}\alpha~$]{}photons are mostly due to nearly neutral Fe ions. This is consistent with the relatively low temperature found by @Wat03. The best-fitting Gaussian width $\sigma$ (defined as $\sigma$ = 1/2.35 of the full-width-half-maximum, FWHM) of the Fe [$\hbox{K}\alpha~$]{}line is around 5–9 eV during the four observational intervals. These values are consistent with those independently reported by @TY18, also based on data. Instead, they are smaller than those reported in previous studies [e.g. @End02; @Fur11], as mentioned in Section 1. The discrepancy is most likely due to the higher spectral resolution of HEG. As the natural width of the Fe [$\hbox{K}\alpha~$]{}line is FWHM $\approx$ 3 eV, the Gaussian widths fitted in our spectral models are consistent with a velocity broadening ($\approx$1/2FWHM) of $\approx$200–400 km s$^{-1}$. The fitted values of $\sigma$ for the Fe [$\hbox{K}\beta~$]{}line are a little higher than those of the Fe [$\hbox{K}\alpha~$]{}line; those measurements may be affected by the Fe absorption edge near 7.1 keV. The inferred equivalent widths (EW) of the Fe [$\hbox{K}\alpha~$]{}line and the absorption-corrected intrinsic power-law luminosities for the four intervals are also listed in Table 2. The smaller EW of interval B is due to the larger continuum level of interval B, compared with interval A.
The fitted $N^{\rm T}_{\rm H}$ and $N^{\rm R}_{\rm H}$ are similar and decrease from interval A to D. The fitted averaged cloud number increases from interval A to D. It seems that from interval A to D, the medium is changing from a clumpy dense region to a less-clumpy less-dense region. We note that the Ctorus model used has some deficiencies, for example, the input powerlaw does not include a high energy cutoff, as is required for GX 301-2; the photon index is limited to 1.5-2.5; the torus geometry may not represent the true cases. Further model developements are needed to obtain more conclusive results.
Discussion and Conclusions
==========================
The key new result of this paper is that we detected a pulsating Fe [$\hbox{K}\alpha~$]{}line with the same period as the continuum, during the first 7 ks (interval A) of a observation of GX 301-2. The phase profile of the Fe [$\hbox{K}\alpha~$]{}line was also similar to that of the continuum. The pulsation signal of the Fe [$\hbox{K}\alpha~$]{}line then disappeared; at that time, the continuum flux increased by a factor of 3 and kept its pulsation profile; the line flux increased only by about 10%.
X-ray fluorescence lines are one of the hallmarks of neutron star HMXBs [[*e.g.*]{}, @LC93; @Bas78; @HM77]; they may be formed in many locations: in the accretion column, on the surface of the donor star or of an accretion disk, in the stellar wind, or in an accretion stream, shell or wake. Usually, the line emission is not pulsed [[*e.g.*]{}, @Ber15; @Suc12; @Wil11; @Lei09; @Pau02]. A few well-studied exceptions, where fluorescent line emission from iron, oxygen and/or neon is pulsed, are 4U1626$-$67 [@Ber15; @Sch01; @Ang95], Hercules X-1 [@Vas13; @Zan04; @Cho94], and GX 1+4 [@Yos17a; @Yos17b; @Kot99].
GX 301-2 was one of the X-ray pulsars in which the pulsed fraction of the Fe [$\hbox{K}\alpha~$]{}line was always absent or much smaller than the pulsed signal in other energy bands; this was explained as the effect of smearing of the pulsed signal in an isotropic line-emitting region around the neutron star [@Tas91; @End02; @Fur11]. Instead, we have now shown that at some epochs, the pulsed fraction of the line is as high as that of the continuum. Thus, the simplest qualitative explanation of this finding is that during those epochs, the pulsating Fe [$\hbox{K}\alpha~$]{}line originates in an anisotropic gas structure, illuminated by the pulsed emission of the neutron star. More remarkably, we have shown that the line pulsation disappears at a phase $\phi = 0.000 \pm 0.003$ (extrapolating from the ephemeris and period derivative solution of @Dor10).
The inferred column density of the scattering medium responsible for the [$\hbox{K}\alpha~$]{}fluorescence lines (inferred from the relative strength of the [$\hbox{K}\alpha~$]{}Compton shoulder), and for the scattered continuum (inferred from broad-band spectral modelling) are similar, that is $\approx1.5\times10^{24}$ cm$^{-2}$. Such a high column density cannot be produced by the quasi-isotropic stellar wind of a super-giant donor, but can be reached in the transient accretion stream formed between the donor star and the neutron star near periastron [@Ste88]. Evidence for the existence of this dense stream flow comes from studies of optical lines [@Kap06], and the recurrent pre-periastron X-ray flare [@LK08 and references therein]. When the neutron star enters and leaves the accretion stream, an anisotropic configuration will be formed. Specifically, the [*Chandra*]{} observation studied in this work was taken shortly after the flare; in the accretion stream scenario, it might correspond to the phase when the neutron star leaves the accretion stream. The illumination of the anisotropic stream distribution would produce the pulsating Fe [$\hbox{K}\alpha~$]{}line. When the neutron star moves further away from the stream, the contribution of the pulsating Fe [$\hbox{K}\alpha~$]{}line becomes less important. Such a scenario also predicts a pulsating Fe [$\hbox{K}\alpha~$]{}line when the neutron star enters the accretion stream, i.e., before the X-ray flare. Moreover, the pulsating behaviour should repeat at similar phases every orbital cycle. Such a scenario can be tested with future observations.
Another possible anisotropic structure is the surface of the donor star. At periastron, the donor star subtends a solid angle $\Omega_{\rm p} \approx 1.88$ sr, that is, it is seen by the neutron star with an apex half-angle $\theta\approx 45^{\circ}$. Thus, for a moderate misalignment between the beam of X-ray emission and the normal to the orbital plane, the beamed X-ray emission of the neutron star could directly illuminate the surface of the donor star, and produce the pulsating Fe [$\hbox{K}\alpha~$]{}line. As the neutron star moves away from periastron, the solid angle subtended by the donor star decreases. At apastron, the subtended solid angle is only $\Omega_{\rm a} \approx 0.22$ sr, corresponding to a half-angle $\theta \approx 15^{\circ}$. In this scenario, we suggest that the disappearance of the pulsating line signal corresponds to the X-ray beam missing the stellar surface. Such scenario predicts that the pulsating phenomenon repeats periodically at periastron, and can also be tested with future observations.
The phase profile of the Fe [$\hbox{K}\alpha~$]{}line of GX 301-2 during interval A is quite different from those reported in the literature for other sources with pulsating line emission. For example, the phase profile of the Fe [$\hbox{K}\alpha~$]{}line from Her X-1 shows a sharp minimum around the continuum peak, which might indicate a hollow cone of the accretion structure [@Vas13]. The line fluxes of 4U 1626$-$67 show a variation stronger than that of the continuum, which could be due to variable illumination of the warped region of an accretion disk [@Ber15]. In contrast, the phase profile of the Fe [$\hbox{K}\alpha~$]{}line of GX 301-2 during interval A is similar to that of the continuum. It indicates that a major part of the observed continuum might come from the Compton-thick medium producing the Fe [$\hbox{K}\alpha~$]{}line, as evidenced by the spectral modelling in §3.2.
In principle, even a homogeneous, spherically symmetric scattering medium illuminated by a central X-ray pulsar can produce a fluorescent signal that appears pulsed to the distant observer, because of the finite-light-speed effect [@Yos17b]. However, the characteristic size of the medium for this effect to be significant is of order of the pulsar spin period times the speed of light. In the case of GX 301-2, that would require a scattering medium with a size $\sim$10$^{13}$ cm, implausibly larger than the binary system itself.
The possibility that the observed continuum could have a significant contribution from reprocessed emission may change the interpretation of the time delays between the line and continuum. Using data, [@Fur11] found no time delays between Fe [$\hbox{K}\alpha~$]{}line and continuum in the time range of 2–5,000 s, and they inferred a fluorescent region smaller than 2 lt-s ($6\times 10^{10}$ cm). However, if a major part of observed continuum come from scattering, far from the neutron star surface, the lack of relative time delays would no longer constrain the size of the region. A reanalysis of data is needed to check this possibility.
Another way to constrain the region of the fluorescent lines is through their velocity broadening. Thanks to the HEG resolution, we have shown that typical velocity broadening of the Fe [$\hbox{K}\alpha~$]{}line is $\approx$200–400 km s$^{-1}$, a few times lower than previously inferred. This is comparable to the typical terminal velocity of the stellar wind and the ballistic motion of an accretion stream. If the broadening is due to gas in virial motion, such velocities would correspond to distances $\sim5\times10^{10}$–$2\times10^{11}$ cm for a neutron star of 1.5 $M_\odot$, similar to the accretion radius of GX 301-2 ($\sim10^{11}$ cm). Such a relatively large scale is consistent with fluorescence lines from cool and nearly neutral Fe ions. We note that it is much larger than the magnetosphere of a neutron star even with a field of $10^{14}$ G ($4\times10^{9}$ cm). On the other hand, the fluorescent region can not be larger than the light travel distance of a significant fraction of the pulse period (e.g., 100 ls), otherwise the pulsation signal would be smeared out. In principle, any temporary anisotropic gas structure on scales of $\sim10^{11}$ cm with enough covering factor, like a torus or a warped accretion disk, could be invoked to explain the pulsating Fe [$\hbox{K}\alpha~$]{}line. Such gas structures are likely caused by the dynamical interaction between the donor star and the neutron star near periastron. Detailed hydrodynamical simulations are needed to test the existence of such structures.
The increase in the observed continuum after the first 7 ks of the observation, accompanied by the non-increase of the line emission and the disappearance of the pulsed line signal remain puzzling, and can be due to a combination of increased intrinsic emission, decreased absorption column density along our line of sight, and decreased column density of the scattering medium. Simultaneous observations in wide X-ray bands are needed to disentangle these effects. Nonetheless, using only the HEG data, we have already shown a decreasing trend in the column density of the scattering medium in the second half of the observation. This is seen both from our broad-band continuum modelling, and from the progressively lower flux ratio between the Compton shoulder and the Fe [$\hbox{K}\alpha~$]{}line.
Acknowledgements {#acknowledgements .unnumbered}
================
We thank our anonymous referee for valuable suggestions that improve the work significantly, and Youjun Lu for helpful discussions. JL is supported by NSFC grant 11203032. This research is based on data obtained from the Data Archive. We made use of software obtained from the High Energy Astrophysics Science Archive Research Center (HEASARC), a service of the Astrophysics Science Division at NASA/GSFC and of the Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory’s High Energy Astrophysics Division.
[199]{}
Angelini L., White N.E., Nagase F., Kallman T.R., Yoshida A., Takeshima T., Becker C., Paerels F., 1995, ApJ, 449, L41
Basko M.M., 1978, ApJ, 223, 268
Bearden J.A., 1967, Rev. Mod. Phys., 39, 78
Beri A., Paul B., Dewangan G.C., 2015, MNRAS, 451, 508
Choi C.S., Nagase F., Makino F., Dotani T., Kitamoto S., Takahama S., 1994, ApJ, 437, 449
Davies S.R., 1990, MNRAS, 244, 93
Doroshenko V., Santangelo A., Suleimanov V., Kreykenbohm I., Staubert R., Ferrigno C., Klochkov D., 2010, A&A, 515, 10
Endo T., Ishida M., Masai K., Kunieda H., Inoue H., Nagase F., 2002, ApJ, 574, 879
Evangelista Y., et al., 2010, ApJ, 708, 1663 Fruscione A., et al. 2006, Proceedings of the SPIE, 6270, 1
Fürst F., et al., 2011, A&A, 535, 9 Giménez-García A., Torrejón J.M., Eikmann W., Martínez-Nunez S., Oskinova L.M., Rodes-Roca J.J., Bernabéu G., 2015, A&A, 576, 108
Göğüş E., Kreykenbohm I., Belloni T.M., 2011, A&A, 525, 6
Goldstein G., Huenemoerder D.P., Blank D., 2004, AJ, 127, 2310
Hatchett S., McCray R., 1977, ApJ, 211, 552
Houck J.C., Denicola L.A., 2000, ASPC, 216, 591
Huenemoerder D.P., et al., 2011, AJ, 141, 129
Ikhsanov N. R., Finger, M. H. 2012, ApJ, 753, 1
Islam N., Paul B., 2014, MNRAS, 441, 2539
Kaastra J.S., Mewe R., 1993, A&AS, 97, 443
Kaper L., van der Meer A., Najarro F., 2006, A&A, 457, 595
Koh D.T., et al., 1997, ApJ, 479, 933
Kotani T., Dotani T., Nagase F., Greenhill J.G., Pravdo S.H., Angelini L., 1999, ApJ, 510, 369
La Barbera, A., Burderi, L., Di Salvo, T., Iaria, R., Robba, N. R., 2001, ApJ, 553, 375 Leahy D.A., Creighton J., 1993, MNRAS, 263, 314
Leahy D.A., Kostka M., 2008, MNRAS, 384, 747
Lei Y.-J., Chen W., Qu J.-L., Song L.-M., Zhang S., Lu Y., Zhang H.-T., Li T.-P., 2009, ApJ, 707, 1016
Liu Y., Li X., 2014, ApJ, 787, 52 Liu J., Liu Y., Li X., Xu W., Gou L., Cheng C., 2016, MNRAS
Martínez-Núñez S., et al., 2017, SSRev, 212, 59
Paul B., Dewangan G.C., Sako M., Kahn S.M., Paerels F., Liedahl D., 2002, Proceedings of the IAU 8th Asian-Pacific Regional Meeting (Tokyo), Eds. S. Ikeuchi, J. Hearnshaw, and T. Hanawa, Vol. 2, p. 355
Saraswat P., et al., 1996, ApJ, 463, 726
Sato N., et al., 1986, ApJ, 304, 241
Schulz N.S., Chakrabarty D., Marshall H.L., Canizares C.R., Lee J.C., Houck J., 2001, ApJ, 563, 941
Stevens I.R., 1988, MNRAS, 232, 199
Suchy S., Fürst F., Pottschmidt K., Caballero I., Kreykenbohm I., Wilms J., Markowitz A., Rothschild R.E., 2012, ApJ, 745, 124
Tashiro M., Makishima K., Ohashi T., Sakao T., Sansom A.E., 1991, MNRAS, 252, 156
Torrejón J.M., Schulz N.S., Nowak M.A., Kallman T.R., 2010, ApJ, 715, 947
Tzanavaris P., Yaqoob T., 2018, arXiv:1801.08544
Vasco D., Staubert R., Klochkov D., Santangelo A., Shakura N., Postnov K., 2013, A&A, 550, 111
Watanabe S., et al., 2003, ApJ, 597, L37 Wilkinson T., Patruno A., Watts A., Uttley P., 2011, MNRAS, 410, 1513
Yoshida Y., Kitamoto S., Hoshino A., 2017, ApJ, 849, 116
Yoshida Y., Kitamoto S., Suzuki H., Hoshino A., Naik S., Jaisawal G.K., 2017, ApJ, 838, 30
Zane S., Ramsay G., Jimenez-Garate M.A., Willem den Herder J., Hailey C.J., 2004, MNRAS, 350, 506
[^1]: E-mail: [email protected]
[^2]: https://heasarc.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/nustar/analysis/
[^3]: http://space.mit.edu/cxc/analysis/SITAR/distrib.html
[^4]: http://space.mit.edu/cxc/isis/
[^5]: https://heasarc.gsfc.nasa.gov/xanadu/xspec/models/Ctorus.html
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'Cosmic-ray anti-nuclei provide a promising discovery channel for the indirect detection of particle dark matter. Hadron showers produced by the pair-annihilation or decay of Galactic dark matter generate anti-nucleons which can in turn form light anti-nuclei. Previous studies have only focused on the spectrum and flux of low energy antideuterons which, although very rarely, are occasionally also produced by cosmic-ray spallation. Heavier elements ($A\geq3$) have instead entirely negligible astrophysical background and a primary yield from dark matter which could be detectable by future experiments. Using a Monte Carlo event generator and an event-by-event phase space analysis, we compute, for the first time, the production spectrum of [$^3\overline{\text{He}}~$]{}and [$^3\overline{\text{H}}~$]{}for dark matter annihilating or decaying to $b\bar{b}$ and ${W^+}{W^-}$ final states. We then employ a semi-analytic model of interstellar and heliospheric propagation to calculate the [$^3\overline{\text{He}}~$]{}flux as well as to provide tools to relate the anti-helium spectrum corresponding to an arbitrary antideuteron spectrum. Finally, we discuss prospects for current and future experiments, including GAPS and AMS-02.'
author:
- Eric Carlson
- Adam Coogan
- Tim Linden
- Stefano Profumo
- Alejandro Ibarra
- Sebastian Wild
bibliography:
- 'antihelium.bib'
---
Introduction {#sec:intro}
============
Within the paradigm of Weakly Interacting Massive Particle (WIMP) dark matter, the pair-annihilation or decay of dark matter particles generically yields high-energy matter and antimatter cosmic rays. While the former are usually buried under large fluxes of cosmic rays of more ordinary astrophysical origin, antimatter is rare enough that a signal from dark matter might be distinguishable and detectable with the current generation of experiments. While astrophysical accelerators of high-energy positrons such as pulsars’ magnetospheres are well-known, observations of cosmic anti-nuclei might provide a unique window into physics beyond the Standard Model and may provide a discovery route to unveil the nature of particle dark matter.
Measurements of the cosmic-ray antiproton spectrum by BESS [@BESS; @BESS2; @BESS3] and PAMELA [@PAMELA_ANTIPROTON] currently provide the best limits on cosmic-ray antiprotons [$\bar{p}~$]{}in excess of the astrophysical background. On a short time-scale, AMS-02 will provide the most accurate cosmic-ray proton and antiproton spectrum to date, placing stringent limits on propagation parameters and excess signals. One well motivated origin for such an excess is the annihilation or decay of WIMPs to hadronic final states – generic to models coupling WIMPs to the weak gauge bosons or quarks (e.g. $W^+ W^-$ or $b\bar{b}$). While large astrophysical backgrounds often prohibit the clean disentanglement of exotic sources, a recent analysis projects that the 1-year AMS-02 data will produce robust constraints on WIMP annihilation to heavy quarks below the thermal-relic cross-section for dark matter masses $30 \leq m_{\chi} \leq 200 $ GeV [@antiproton2].
In addition to antiprotons, Ref. [@donato2000] proposed new physics searches using heavier anti-nuclei such as antideuteron ([$\overline{\text{D}}~$]{}), antihelium-3 ([$^3\overline{\text{He}}~$]{}), or antitritium ([$^3\overline{\text{H}}~$]{}) forming from hadronic neutralino annihilation products. Although such production is of course highly correlated with the antiproton spectrum, the secondary astrophysical background decreases much more rapidly than the expected signal as the atomic number $A$ is increased [@duperray2005]. In particular, secondary antinuclei production from the spallation of high-energy cosmic rays – i.e. the scattering of cosmic-ray protons off of cold interstellar hydrogen and helium – quickly becomes kinematically suppressed for heavier nuclei for three reasons:
\(i) the constituent nucleons must lie in a small volume of phase space in order to form anti-nuclei, leading to a production suppression of roughly $10^{2A}-10^{3A}$. While this is the case for both primary (e.g. dark matter) and secondary anti-nuclei, the secondary background is further suppressed by the rapid falloff of cosmic-ray protons at high energies. The dominant spallation processes which generate [$\bar{p}~$]{}, $\overline{\text{D}}$, and [$^3\overline{\text{He}}~$]{}/[$^3\overline{\text{H}}~$]{}have production thresholds of $7m_p$, $17m_p$, and $30m_p$ respectively while the proton flux above 10 GeV falls as $\phi_p \propto E^{-2.82}$ [@2011Sci].
\(ii) because of the high production threshold, the spallation products are typically highly boosted, carrying kinetic energies above 5 GeV/n (GeV per nucleon). For dark matter, the spectrum peaks instead below 1 GeV/n for annihilation channels where the hadronization frame is not boosted (e.g. $q\bar{q}$ or near threshold $W^+W^-$).
\(iii) finally, in contrast to $\bar{p}$, [$\overline{\text{D}}~$]{}and [$^3\overline{\text{He}}~$]{}easily fragment as they undergo inelastic collisions (due to their low binding energies). This prevents efficient energy loss during interstellar transport which would otherwise redistribute the higher-energy background spectrum toward lower energies.
These three factors lead to precipitous decline in the secondary [$\overline{\text{D}}~$]{}and [$^3\overline{\text{He}}~$]{}backgrounds below $\sim 5$ GeV/n, enhancing the signal to background by several orders of magnitude for each increase in atomic number. Proposed anti-nuclei searches exploit this point and are designed to observe below 1 GeV/n where the secondary/primary ratio for [$^3\overline{\text{He}}~$]{}is $\lesssim 10^{-5}$. This provides a truly zero-background channel for $A\geq 3$ at the expense of a significantly lower signal flux and it is precisely this feature which motivates dark matter searches using anti-nuclei.
Dark matter production of antideuterons and the observational prospects at AMS-02 and GAPS have been thoroughly investigated (see e.g. [@donato2000; @profumo2005; @cui2010; @ibarraMC2013; @kadastik; @fornengo2013; @ibarra2013]). For an optimistic scenario of $\sim$100 GeV thermal WIMPs annihilating to $b \bar{b}$, the latter two state-of-the-art analyses predict $\mathcal{O}(0.1-10)$ [$\overline{\text{D}}~$]{}signal events – with backgrounds a factor $\mathcal{O}(10-50)$ smaller – to be measured by a GAPS Long Duration Balloon flight (LDB+). It is thus naively expected that the extremely low [$^3\overline{\text{He}}~$]{}flux will be difficult to observe. While this is likely to be true for upcoming experiments, a future satellite based mission could potentially probe this zero-background channel.
The outline of this letter is as follows. In Section \[sec:production\] we discuss the coalescence model for the production of [$^3\overline{\text{He}}~$]{}and calculate its formation rate relative to [$\overline{\text{D}}~$]{}. In Section \[sec:propagation\] we employ a simple diffusion model in order to calculate the expected flux of [$^3\overline{\text{He}}~$]{}at the solar position, and the penetration of [$^3\overline{\text{He}}~$]{}into the heliosphere. In Section \[sec:experiments\] we discuss flux scaling relations, calculate the flux, and discuss the possibility for [$^3\overline{\text{He}}~$]{}observation in both the current and upcoming AMS-02 and GAPS-LDB(+) experiments, as well as a future GAPS satellite mission. Finally in Section \[sec:conclusions\] we discuss the significance of our results to the current search for cosmic-ray anti-nucleons and conclude.
Dark Matter Production of Antihelium {#sec:production}
====================================
We consider a fermionic Majorana dark matter candidate of mass $m_{\chi}$ annihilating into the colored or color-neutral final states $b\bar{b}$ and $W^+W^-$ through a generic, spin-0, $s$-channel resonance. In the absence of an analytic description of atomic nuclei formation, we employ the coalescence model as a simple, single-parameter phenomenological approach to describe the formation of light elements from the distributions of protons and neutrons in high energy collisions [@coal1; @coal2]. In the antideuteron case, the coalescence model assumes that nucleons with a relative invariant four-momenta $(k_n-k_p)^2=(\Delta \vec{k})^2 - (\Delta E)^2$ less than a coalescence momentum $p_0$, will bind together and form a nucleus.
Early computations of the resulting antideuteron spectrum employed a fully factorized coalescence prescription in which the $\bar{p}$ and $\bar{n}$ momentum distributions were assumed to be uncorrelated and isotropic. However, as demonstrated in Ref. [@kadastik], angular correlations introduced by jet structure play a crucial role in the formation of anti-nuclei, especially for heavy dark matter masses where the parton showers become increasingly focused. Following more recent studies, we abandon the isotropic model and instead use the `PYTHIA 8.156` [@pythia6; @pythia8] event generator to simulate the parton shower and subsequent hadronization. Using the phase space information from `PYTHIA`, we apply the coalescence prescription on an event-by-event basis, allowing for a full reconstruction of the nucleon distribution functions. In our Monte Carlo study, we also exclude contributions from baryons which are not spatially localized on the scale of the antidueteron’s wave function (which spans $\sim2$ fm). This is implemented by stabilizing particles with lifetime $\tau\gtrsim 2$ fm/c and, physically, stabilizes long-lived hadrons which decay weakly. While this simultaneous localization in position and momentum space is of order the Heisenberg limit our results are insensitive to several order-of-magnitude variations of $\tau$, which is held fixed throughout this analysis. This results from the significant gap between hadronic and weak decay timescales.
The coalescence function has a single parameter, the coalescence momentum $p_0$, which must be fit to available collider data. Following the approach of Refs. [@ibarra2013; @fornengo2013; @cui2010], we use $e^+e^- \to$ [$\overline{\text{D}}~$]{}measurements from ALEPH at the $Z^0$ resonance, finding $(5.9\pm 1.8 \pm .5) \times 10^{-6}$ antideuterons per hadronic $Z^0$-decay with [$\overline{\text{D}}~$]{}momenta 0.62-1.03 GeV/c and polar angle $|\cos{\theta}|<0.95$ ([@aleph]). Consistent with Refs. [@ibarra2013] and [@fornengo2013], our Monte Carlo simulations reproduce this rate for a coalescence momentum $p_0^{A=2}=0.192\pm .030$ GeV/c.
For antihelium, the coalescence prescription is nearly identical. When more than three particles are involved there are two obvious ways to define the coalescence mechanism. One can either require that each of the relative momenta lie within a ‘minimum bounding momentum-sphere’ of diameter $p_0^{A=3}$ (dubbed MBS here), or we can require that the relative invariant 4-momenta of each particle-pair is less than $p_0^{A=3}$ (dubbed particle-pairing or PP here). If we consider a triangle with sides equal to the relative momenta of two particles, the two methods coincide for obtuse and right triangles. For acute triangles, however, the value of $p_0^{A=3}$ required to form a nucleus can be up to 15% larger than the PP case. The MBS prescription also avoids unnatural kinks in the required value of $p_0^{A=3}$ as the inclusive angle of this triangle is varied. We therefore choose MBS which *always* underestimates the yield with respect to the particle-pairing method for identical values of $p_0^{A=3}$. From a simple Monte-Carlo which assumes an isotropic distribution of nucleon momenta, we estimate that MBS produces only approximately 6% fewer antihelium, although this difference becomes compounded exponentially for heavier elements. Without an understanding of the strong dynamics of nuclear formation, it is not important to consider one method as ‘more accurate than another’, but the difference should be kept in mind when comparing results between studies.
For nuclei of atomic number $A$, the coalescence model predicts a production rate $R(A) \propto p_0^{3(A-1)}$, making [$^3\overline{\text{He}}~$]{}predictions particularly sensitive to nuclear physics uncertainties. The choice of coalescence momentum is known to have significant dependence on the details of the underlying scattering process and is measured to be larger for $A=3$ than $A=2$ [@heavyion]. While heavy-ion collisions provide the only available constraints on [$^3\overline{\text{He}}~$]{}production, they do not resemble the dynamics of dark matter annihilation. In an attempt to bracket the effect of this uncertainty on the resulting [$^3\overline{\text{He}}~$]{}spectrum, we derive values for the $A=3$ coalescence momentum, $p_0^{A=3}$, using two different methods. In the first method, we choose to scale the antideuteron coalescence momentum, $p^{A=2}_0$, up to $p_0^{A=3}$ following the theoretically motivated scaling of Ref. [@salati1997], in which $p_0 \sim \sqrt{B}$ for total nuclear binding energy $B$: $$\begin{aligned}
p_0^{A=3}=\sqrt{B_{^3\overline{He}}/B_{\bar{D}}}\ p_0^{A=2}=0.357\pm 0.059 \text{ GeV/c.}\end{aligned}$$ As a second method, we use heavy-ion results from the Berkeley Bevalac collider which fit [$\overline{\text{D}}~$]{}, [$^3\overline{\text{H}}~$]{}, and [$^3\overline{\text{He}}~$]{}coalescence momenta for several collision species (C+C up to Ar+Pb) at incident energies from 0.4-2.1 GeV/n [@heavyion]. Averaging the measured $p^{A=3}_0/p^{A=2}_0$ (molecular targets excluded) we infer the relation $$\begin{aligned}
p^{A=3}_0 = 1.28~p^{A=2}_0 = 0.246 \pm 0.038~\text{GeV/c}.\end{aligned}$$ Without parton-level production rates, such as $pp \to$ [$^3\overline{\text{He}}~$]{}at the LHC we need to rely on the outlined ad-hoc schemes, which yield the largest systematic uncertainty on the final flux. In the remainder of this analysis, we use the binding energies to determine $p_0^{A=3}$.
Formation of antihelium-3 proceeds through two channels: directly through coalescence of $\bar{p}\bar{p}\bar{n}$, and through the formation and decay of tritium $(\bar{p}\bar{n}\bar{n})$. As noted in Ref. [@cosmic_antimatter], the former channel is suppressed by the Coulomb repulsion of the antiprotons, while the tritium channel is not. Although it is not clear what this suppression factor is, a conservative approach ignores the direct antihelium-3 channel completely. Tritium is stable on collider timescales, and therefore we can directly study the relative production rates. Data from the Bevalac [@heavyion] and CERN-SPS [@heavyion2] heavy-ion collisions indicates that the ratio of tritium to antihelium-3 production rates $\epsilon = R_{\rm H3}/R_{\rm He3}$ varies between 0 and 1, perhaps as an increasing function the center of mass energy with efficiency near unity around $\mathcal{O}$(50 GeV). For the rest of this analysis we choose $\epsilon=1$, but one may simply rescale dN/dE (or the final flux presented later) by a factor $(1+\epsilon)/2$ to regain full generality. We note that this uncertainty is small compared to the weakly constrained coalescence momentum.
In Figure \[fig:ratios\] we show ratios of the [$^3\overline{\text{He}}~$]{}to [$\overline{\text{D}}~$]{}injection spectra integrated over the energy band 0.1-0.25 GeV/n relevant for the upcoming GAPS Long Duration Balloon Flights (LDB and LDB+) as a function of the $A=2$ and $A=3$ coalescence momenta, for four different combinations of the dark matter pair-annihilation final state ($b\bar b$ in the left panels, $WW$ in the right panels) and mass (10, 1000 and 2000 GeV). The GAPS energy bands are quoted for kinetic energies at the top of Earth’s atmosphere, after the particle momenta have been shifted by propagation through the heliosphere. Solar modulation will be discussed in detail in Section \[sec:propagation\], but for concreteness, we integrate the [$^3\overline{\text{He}}~$]{}and [$\overline{\text{D}}~$]{}yields over bands shifted according to a Fisk potential of 500 MV in Figure \[fig:ratios\].
The uncertainties on the coalescence momentum for $A=2$ are represented by the vertical shaded bands. For $A=3$ coalescence momenta, the two horizontal lines in each panel represent scaling with the binding energy (blue-dashed line) and heavy-ion collisions (black dot-dashed). Regions with no visible contours produced no antihelium in the $2\times 10^{10}$ annihilation events simulated while the ‘wavy’ lines are due to limited Monte Carlo statistics. We see that for most masses and final states that are potentially detectable (see discussion in Section \[sec:experiments\]) one should expect $10^{-3}-10^{-2}$ antihelium for each detected antideuteron. In the case of 10 GeV annihilation to b-quarks, the ratio is slightly lower as antihelium with a GAPS detectable kinetic energy requires a total energy of around 4.5 GeV. However, this quickly increases toward the higher mass results as the dark matter mass is increased away from this threshold. The effects induced by propagation of [$\overline{\text{D}}~$]{}relative to [$^3\overline{\text{He}}~$]{}are explored in the next section, but are sub-dominant compared with the nuclear physics uncertainties here. In Sec. \[sec:experiments\] we compute the actual flux and determine the detection prospects for future experiments.
Astrophysical Production and Propagation of Antihelium {#sec:propagation}
======================================================
The Dark Matter Source Term
---------------------------
In order to create a Galactic model for dark matter annihilation throughout the galaxy which will allow us to map the [$^3\overline{\text{He}}~$]{}injection spectrum to the flux at Earth, we must assume a dark matter halo model, a WIMP annihilation cross-section and a model of cosmic-ray transport. As a benchmark model, we choose a Navarro-Frenk-White (NFW) dark matter density profile, noting that Einasto and cored-isothermal profiles produce nearly identical results for the [$\overline{\text{D}}~$]{}case [see the discussion in @ibarra2013]: $$\begin{aligned}
\rho_{\text{DM}}(r) = \rho_0 \left( \frac{r_s}{r} \right)^\alpha \frac{1}{(1+r/r_s)^{\alpha+1}}\end{aligned}$$ with inner-slope $\alpha=1$, scale radius $r_s = 24.42$ kpc, and $\rho_0$ chosen to reproduce the dark matter density $\rho_{\odot} = 0.39$ GeV/cm$^3$ at the solar radius $r = 8.5$ kpc [@2010JCAP...08..004C]. For dark matter annihilation at a position $\vec{r}$, the source term for antihelium may then be written as $$\begin{aligned}
Q_{\overline{\text{He}}}(T, \vec{r})=\frac{1}{2}\frac{\rho^2_{\text{DM}}(\vec{r})}{m_{\chi}^2} \langle \sigma v \rangle (1+\epsilon)\frac{dN_{\overline{\text{H3}}}}{dT},\end{aligned}$$ where the $dN/dT$ term is the injection spectrum for tritium found in Section \[sec:production\], $\epsilon$ is the ratio of the production rates of antihelium to tritium (we take $\epsilon$=1 as discussed earlier), and $\langle \sigma v \rangle$ is the thermal annihilation cross-section. The source term must then be propagated from the site of annihilation to Earth. This is typically broken down into two components: (i) interstellar propagation in which the cosmic-rays interact with turbulent Galactic magnetic fields, the interstellar hydrogen and helium, and Galactic winds, and (ii) propagation through the heliosphere, which can significantly deplete the low energy flux as the solar wind deflects charged particles.
Propagation Models
------------------
Interstellar propagation can be implemented via the well known stationary, cylindrically symmetric, two-zone diffusion model identical to the setup used for [$\overline{\text{D}}~$]{}in Ibarra & Wild [@ibarra2013] with the exception of obvious replacements including the [$^3\overline{\text{He}}~$]{}cross-sections, charge, and atomic mass. We assume a diffusion zone of radius 20 kpc and variable height $L$ with a thin, Galactic disk of half-height $h=100$ pc containing the interstellar medium. The model is parametrized by an additional three components: an energy dependent diffusion constant $K(T)=K_0 ~ \beta ~\mathcal{R}^\delta$ with spectral index $\delta$, $\beta=v/c$ and rigidity $\mathcal{R}\equiv p(\text{GeV})/Z$ where Z is proton number, and $V_c$, which characterizes Galactic wind convection. It is then possible to write the propagation in terms of the following transport equation: $$\begin{aligned}
\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:transport}
\begin{split}
0=\frac{\partial n}{\partial t}=\nabla \cdot (K(T,\vec{r})~\nabla n) -\nabla\cdot (V_c ~\text{sign}(z)~\vec{k}~n) \\ -
2~h~\delta(z)~\Gamma_{\text{int}}~n + Q_{\overline{\text{He}}}(T,\vec{r}).
\end{split}
\end{aligned}\end{aligned}$$
Here $n(T,\vec{r})$ is the antihelium number density and $\Gamma_{\mathrm{int}}$ is the interaction rate for antihelium within the ISM, described thoroughly in § \[subsec:cross-sections\].
The four parameters $L, K_0, \delta,$ and $V_c$ are then varied over the space consistent with the measured ratio of boron to carbon, with values producing the MIN/MED/MAX flux tabulated in Ref. [@prop_model]. The resulting uncertainty in the flux spans three orders of magnitude. However, the [$\overline{\text{D}}~$]{}and [$^3\overline{\text{He}}~$]{}fluxes are tightly correlated to [$\bar{p}~$]{}whose flux is well measured by PAMELA. The propagation uncertainty on the *maximal* [$\overline{\text{D}}~$]{}(and [$^3\overline{\text{He}}~$]{}) flux allowed by the measured $p$/[$\bar{p}~$]{}ratio is then reduced to within a factor 4 of the MED model [@ibarra2013][^1]. Upcoming antiproton results from AMS-02 will tighten this upper-limit and the large nuclear physics will certainly dominate in the case of antihelium. In particular, the [$^3\overline{\text{He}}~$]{}flux is sensitive to the sixth power of $p_0^{A=3}$, making updated collider production rates for [$\overline{\text{D}}~$]{}and [$^3\overline{\text{He}}~$]{}a crucial factor in *any* estimate of an anti-nucleon flux.
The flux at the solar system is found by numerically integrating the dark matter annihilation rates over the dark matter halo and solving the transport equation analytically. For local dark matter density $\rho_\odot$, dark matter mass $m_\chi$, and thermal cross-section $\langle \sigma v \rangle$, the antihelium flux at the boundary of the solar system is given by $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:pnum}
\begin{split}
\Phi^{\mathrm{IS}}_{\overline{He}} (T)= \left(\frac{\rho_0}{0.39~\mathrm{GeV cm}^{-2}}\right)^2 \left(\frac{100~\mathrm{GeV}}{m_\chi}\right)^2\\
\times \left(\frac{\langle \sigma v\rangle}{3\times 10^{-26} \mathrm{cm}^3/\mathrm{s}}\right) \cdot P_{\mathrm{num}}(T) \cdot \frac{dN(T)}{dT},
\end{split}\end{aligned}$$ where $P_{\mathrm{num}}(T)$ is the energy dependent numerical output of the propagation code and dN/dT is the [$^3\overline{\text{He}}~$]{}injection spectrum from Sec. \[sec:production\].
In Figure \[fig:propagation\] we show the ratio $P_{\mathrm{num}}^{\mathrm{\overline{He}}}/P_{\mathrm{num}}^{\mathrm{\overline{D}}}$ for the MIN/MED/MAX propagation models and two values of the interaction rate, $\Gamma_{\mathrm{int}}$. As we will discuss in § \[subsec:cross-sections\], uncertainty in the antihelium cross-section with interstellar gas can lead to a $\sim$25% enhancement or suppression of the antihelium flux relative to that of antideuterons. Of mild importance is the higher nuclear binding energy of [$^3\overline{\text{He}}~$]{}compared to the very weakly bound [$\overline{\text{D}}~$]{}case. While this can more efficiently deplete the higher energy population where the non-annihilating inelastic cross-section dominates, the low energies of interest here are not significantly enhanced by tertiary contributions which are ignored in our treatment.
In-fact, the two-zone diffusion model neglects all diffusion in momentum space, the most important of which may be a proper treatment of interstellar re-acceleration. Several of these schemes, including diffusive re-acceleration, have been applied to the propagation of elements in more sophisticated numerical codes. While these attempts have been successful in reproducing otherwise anomalous peaks in the secondary to primary ratios of heavy elements such as B/C, they encounter problems for light elements. In particular, diffusive re-acceleration results in a spectral bump near 2 GeV/n for p and He which is not observed and the primary injection spectra must be artificially broken to compensate. This leads to an overestimate of the primary p and He flux by a factor $\sim$2 [@moskalenko2001_2]. As we are concerned with light & low energy nuclei, and no consensus on re-acceleration has been reached for this regime, we proceed without incorporating any re-acceleration mechanism. This results in a primary spectrum within 20% of measurements at low energies [@moskalenko2001_2].
The second phase of propagation is through the heliosphere and is computed using the Force Field Approximation of Gleeson & Axford [@forcefield]. The flux at the top of the atmosphere is given by $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:solar}
\Phi^{\text{TOA}}_{\text{A,Z}} (T_{\text{TOA}}) = \left( \frac{2 m_A A~ T_{\text{TOA}} + A^2~ T_{\text{TOA}}^2}{2 m_A A~T_{\text{IS}} + A^2~ T_{\text{IS}}^2} \right)\Phi^{\text{IS}}_{A,Z}(T_{\text{IS}}),\end{aligned}$$ where $m_A$ is the nucleus’ mass, $T_{\text{IS}}$ is the kinetic energy per nucleon at the boundary of the solar system, $T_{\text{TOA}}$ is kinetic energy per nucleon at the top of Earth’s atmosphere, and $T_{\text{IS}}=T_{\text{TOA}} + (e\phi_F |Z|/A)$. The Fisk potential $\phi_F$ describes the strength of the solar modulation and varies over an 11 year cycle. Here we take $\phi_F=500$ MV corresponding to the most optimistic detection scenario. The ratio of the [$^3\overline{\text{He}}~$]{}to [$\overline{\text{D}}~$]{}case is shown in Figure \[fig:propagation\]. The lowered rigidity of [$^3\overline{\text{He}}~$]{}causes a $\sim$50% suppression at low energies relative to the [$\overline{\text{D}}~$]{}modulation factor. It has been shown that at GAPS energies, the Force Field Approximation is within a factor 2 of the minimum and maximum values computed in a full numerical treatment of heliospheric [$\overline{\text{D}}~$]{}transport [@fornengo2013]. Much of the discrepancy between analytic and numerical models should disappear when taking the ratio of modulation between antihelium and antideuterons as the first order rigidity modifications are already captured by the Force-Field Model.
Interaction Cross Sections {#subsec:cross-sections}
--------------------------
In this subsection we discuss [$^3\overline{\text{He}}~$]{}interaction rates with the ISM and compare them to the [$\overline{\text{D}}~$]{}case. $\Gamma_{\mathrm{int}}$ in Eq. (\[eq:transport\]) is given by: $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:gamma_int}
\Gamma_{\text{int}}= (n_\text{H} + 4^{2/3} n_{\text{He}})~ v~ \sigma_{\overline{\text{He}},p}\end{aligned}$$ where we have assumed the H and He gas cross-sections are related by a geometrical factor $4^{2/3}.$ For the Galactic Disk’s interstellar hydrogen and helium densities we use $n_{\text{H}}= 1 ~\text{cm}^{-3}$ and $n_{\text{He}} = 0.07 n_{\text{H}} $. $v$ is the antihelium velocity through the ISM, and $\sigma_{\overline{\text{He}},p}$ is interaction cross-section of antihelium with protons.
Direct measurements of the antihelium-proton annihilation and inelastic cross-sections needed in Eq. (\[eq:gamma\_int\]) are not available. Instead, we use the parameterizations in from Moskalenko, Strong, & Ormes [@moskalenko2001] for the total inelastic, non-annihilating inelastic, and annihilation cross sections. For an atomic nucleus ($A,|Z|$) impingent on a stationary proton with kinetic energy per nucleon $T$, these are given in mb by $$\begin{gathered}
\begin{split}
\sigma^{\mathrm{tot}}_{\bar{p}A} = A^{2/3} [48.2+19 T^{-0.55} &+ (0.1-0.18T^{-1.2})Z \\
&+0.0012 T^{-1.5}Z^2]
\end{split}\\
\sigma^{\mathrm{ann}}_{\bar{p}A} = \sigma^{\mathrm{tot}}_{\bar{p}A}-\sigma^{\mathrm{non-ann}}_{\bar{p}A}\\
\sigma^{\mathrm{non-ann}}_{\bar{p}A} = \sigma^{\mathrm{inel}}_{pA}\end{gathered}$$ In the last equation, we assume that the non-annihilating inelastic cross-section for an antiproton-nucleus interaction is the same as the proton-nucleus interaction which can be well-approximated by $$\begin{aligned}
\begin{split}
\sigma_{pA}^{\mathrm{inel}} &=45 A^{0.7} \left[1+0.016 \sin(5.3-2.63\ln A)\right] \\
&\times \left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
1-0.62 e^{-T/0.2} \sin\left[\frac{10.9}{(10^3T)^{0.28}}\right], & T \leq 3;\\
1, & T > 3;
\end{array} \right.\nonumber\\
\end{split}\end{aligned}$$
In Figure \[fig:cross-sections\] we plot the three cross-sections for antihelium and antideuterons as a function of the kinetic energy per nucleon. For the special case of [$\overline{\text{D}}~$]{}, we take the parameterization from Tan & Ng [@tan1983] for total-inelastic cross-section, and an empirically determined non-annihilating inelastic cross-section which is very small due to the exceptionally low binding energy of [$\overline{\text{D}}~$]{}[@duperray2005]. Peaking at approximately 4 mb, this leads to a much higher probability of annihilation during inelastic scattering than the antihelium case. We see that antihelium posesses an inelastic cross-section roughly 2 times larger than antideuterons at 1 GeV/n, while the opposite is true of the annihilation cross-sections. In principle this implies a proportionally larger tertiary contribution for antihelium, where nuclear excitations remove kinetic energy during scattering. In order to determine the relevance of this, one must also estimate the typical number of scatterings during propagation. Assuming a cosmic-ray residence time $\tau_{\mathrm{res}} \approx 5\times10^6 ~\mathrm{yr}$ [@res_time](which is only a weak function of rigidity, scaling at most as $\mathcal{R}^{-0.6}$) [@res_time], a mean hydrogen density $n_H=1$ cm$^{-2}$, and a typical interaction cross-section $\sigma\approx 100$ mb, the number of scatters can be found by comparing the residence path length $c~\tau_{\mathrm{res}}$ with the mean free path $\lambda$:
$$\begin{aligned}
N_{\mathrm{scatters}} = \frac{c \tau_{\mathrm{res}}}{\lambda}=c \tau_{\mathrm{res}}~n_H \sigma\approx 0.2.\end{aligned}$$
With only a 20% chance of scattering, and given the small amount of energy removed during the inelastic process, we ignore all tertiary contributions in our semi-analytic treatment of interstellar propagation.
To bracket the impact of uncertainty in the anti-nucleus – proton cross-section, we use two methods: MethodANN and MethodINN which use the annihilation and total-inelastic cross-sections respectively in Eq. (\[eq:gamma\_int\]). For [$^3\overline{\text{He}}~$]{}, MethodINN leads to roughly a 40% lower flux than MethodANN, while for [$\overline{\text{D}}~$]{}, the results are nearly indistinguishable because of nearly identical total-inelastic and annihilation cross-sections. When examining the ratio of the resulting [$^3\overline{\text{He}}~$]{}to [$\overline{\text{D}}~$]{}flux, we see in Fig. \[fig:propagation\], an enhancement (suppression) of order $25\%$ when using the annihilation (total-inelastic) cross-sections.
Now that the dark matter properties and propagation models have been fixed and the transport equation solved, we can translate the injection spectra calculated in Sec. \[sec:production\] into detectable fluxes at the top of the Earth’s atmosphere.
[$^3\overline{\text{He}}~$]{}Flux and Detection Prospects for Current and Future Experiments {#sec:experiments}
============================================================================================
We have calculated injection spectra and propagation functions for [$^3\overline{\text{He}}~$]{}, discussed the most important differences with respect to [$\overline{\text{D}}~$]{}, and presented ratios for the conversion of [$\overline{\text{D}}~$]{}spectrum into [$^3\overline{\text{He}}~$]{}. For concreteness, we reiterate the procedure here and show the most important scaling relations.
With an antideuteron flux (or event rate) $\Phi_{\overline{D}}$ calculated within the coalescence framework described in Sec. \[sec:production\], the antihelium flux is related through the following equation: $$\begin{split}
\Phi_{\overline{He}} (T_{\mathrm{TOA}}) = R_{\textrm{IS}}(T_{\mathrm{IS}}) \cdot R_{\textrm{solar}}(T_{\mathrm{IS}})\left(\frac{p_0^{A=3}}{\overline{p}_{A=3} }\right)^6 \times \\
\times \left(\frac{{\overline{p}_{A=2}}}{p_0^{A=2}} \right)^3 \cdot R_{\text{PP}}(T_{\mathrm{IS}},m_\chi,f) \cdot \Phi_{\overline{D}} (T_{\mathrm{IS}}-e\phi_F/2),
\end{split}$$
where $\overline{p}_{A=3}$ = 0.357 GeV/c and $\overline{p}_{A=2}$ = 0.192 GeV/c. Here, $T_{\mathrm{IS}}=T_{\mathrm{TOA}}+(2/3)~e\phi_F$. $R_{\mathrm{PP}}$ is the particle production ratio, shown for GAPS energies from Fig. \[fig:ratios\] for the benchmark coalescence momenta. It is only a weak function of energy for the low energies relevant to these studies. $R_{\mathrm{IS}}(T_{\mathrm{IS}})$ and $R_{\mathrm{solar}}(T_{\mathrm{IS}})$ are interstellar propagation ratios and the shifted solar ratios shown in Fig. \[fig:propagation\]. This expression allows one to easily take more detailed analyses of [$\overline{\text{D}}~$]{}spectra, rates or counts (as found in, for example, Refs. [@ibarra2013; @fornengo2013]) and scale them to the [$^3\overline{\text{He}}~$]{}case, as well as incorporate new coalescence momentum measurements when they become available.
We then compute the flux at the top of Earth’s atmosphere for a set of benchmark cases using the same dark matter models we considered in Sec. \[sec:production\] and the propagation setup described in Sec. \[sec:propagation\]. In particular, we adopt $p_0^{A=2}=0.192, p_0^{A=3}=0.357$, MED propagation parameters, and use the slightly more optimistic “MethodANN” value for the antihelium interaction cross-section with the ISM.
In Figure \[fig:flux\] we present the flux at the top of the Earth’s atmosphere for dark matter annihilating to $W^+W^-$ and $b\bar{b}$ final states with a thermally-averaged pair annihilation cross section $\langle\sigma v\rangle=3\times10^{-26}\ {\rm cm}^3/{\rm s}$ as well as propagation uncertainties. Also shown are the latest sensitivities for AMS-02, GAPS(LDB/LDB+) [@snowmass2013] and a GAPS(SAT) mission as proposed in Ref. [@GAPS_first]. We note that the propagation uncertainties largely cancel after applying [$\bar{p}~$]{}constraints from PAMELA while the uncertainty in the $A=3$ coalescence momentum leads to a flux uncertainty of 1-3 orders of magnitude (not-shown), independent of [$\bar{p}~$]{}constraints. The astrophysical [$^3\overline{\text{He}}~$]{}background peaks with a flux of $10^{-12}$ \[m$^2$ s sr GeV/n\]$^{-1}$ at approximately 20 GeV/n [@duperray2005]. This is off-scale over all energies shown and rapidly declines at lower energies. By 1 GeV/n the flux has already dropped by another factor $10^2$. Over the low energies covered by GAPS it can be considered zero relative to the primaries.
For the case of decaying dark matter, the flux can be easily estimated from the annihilation case by modifying terms in Eq. (\[eq:pnum\]). First, the squared terms become linear as the reaction rate now traces the dark matter density $\rho_{\rm DM}$ rather than $\rho_{\rm DM}^2$. The numerical factor and thermal cross-section can then be replaced by finding an ‘equivalent lifetime’, $\tau$, which provides an average flux equal to the annihilation case (for $\langle \sigma v \rangle=3 \times 10^{-26} {\rm cm}^3/{\rm s}$). The term containing $\langle \sigma v \rangle$ is then replaced by $(\tau_0/\tau)$. As benchmarks, for dark matter decaying to $b\bar{b}$ with mass $m_{\chi}^{\rm dec}=20$ GeV we find $\tau_0 \approx 7.5 \times 10^{26} s$, while for dark matter decaying to $W^+W^-$ with mass $m_{\chi}^{\rm dec}=200$ GeV, $\tau_0 \approx 7.5 \times 10^{27} s$. Here we note that $m_{\chi}^{\rm dec} = 2m_{\chi}$.
In the case of annihilation to heavy quarks, the very recent analysis of Ref. [@antiproton2] has updated antiproton constraints on WIMP annihilation to heavy quarks. Specifically, a thermal WIMP annihilating to heavy quarks is ruled out by current Fermi and PAMELA measurements up to approximately 30 GeV while AMS-02 should probe a thermal cross-section up to $\sim$200 GeV very soon. The antiproton flux is a very important indicator which is directly correlated to the production of heavier anti-nuclei. However, the coalescence momentum for [$\overline{\text{D}}~$]{}and [$^3\overline{\text{He}}~$]{}can float independently of such measurements and it is therefore not unreasonable that a [$\overline{\text{D}}~$]{}excess could be observed in-spite of an expected exclusion from antiprotons. For antihelium, an antiproton constraints are even less direct than the case of [$\overline{\text{D}}~$]{}due to the unconstrained coalescence momentum.
It is clear that the current generation of experiments is very unlikely to be sensitive to primary antihelium from dark matter annihilation. Future generation satellite born experiments using a GAPS(SAT) detector, as initially proposed in Ref. [@GAPS_first], could potentially be sensitive to WIMPs annihilating to $W^+W^-$ near threshold and $b\bar{b}$ at $\lesssim 10$ GeV. Unfortunately, higher masses quickly become undetectable, particularly in the $W^+W^-$ case. If a convincing [$\overline{\text{D}}~$]{}signal is observed at GAPS or AMS-02, follow-up [$^3\overline{\text{He}}~$]{}observations may be needed to confidently rule out misidentified astrophysical secondaries.
There are two important technical instrumental differences in [$^3\overline{\text{He}}~$]{}detection compared to [$\overline{\text{D}}~$]{}which are not incorporated into our analysis. GAPS works by measuring X-ray cascades emitted during the formation of exotic atoms from antimatter and the gas target. This technique requires the particle to stop completely inside the detector, and the large volume and weight required could be prohibitive for satellite based missions. This also reduces the high-energy acceptance for heavier nuclei such as helium. Finally, searches at even lower energies increase the importance of geomagnetic field effects and would require a satellite very close to the geomagnetic poles.
Discussion and Conclusions {#sec:conclusions}
==========================
Due to the low production rate of cosmic-ray anti-nuclei in interstellar proton-gas interactions, the observation of such particles remains an intriguing avenue for a positive signal from dark matter annihilation. We have, for the first time, modeled the production rates of $A=3$ cosmic-ray antinuclei by employing the [PYTHIA]{} event generator to reconstruct the angular distribution of baryons on an event-by-event basis. Noting that the larger binding energy of [$^3\overline{\text{He}}~$]{}compared to [$\overline{\text{D}}~$]{}theoretically motivates a larger coalescence momentum for [$^3\overline{\text{He}}~$]{}, we have shown that the expected [$^3\overline{\text{He}}~$]{}flux at the solar position lies significantly above the “four order of magnitude” suppression of $A=3$ anti-nuclei compared to $A=2$ anti-nuclei, which is naively expected by the coalescence model. While it is still likely that [$\overline{\text{D}}~$]{}would be discovered well before [$^3\overline{\text{He}}~$]{}, this analysis shows that observations of [$^3\overline{\text{He}}~$]{}are both technically feasible for future experiments, and may be essential to confirm that any [$\overline{\text{D}}~$]{}observation does, in fact, correspond to the discovery of a dark matter particle.
Using the known instrumental configurations of current experiments, we have also shown that [$^3\overline{\text{He}}~$]{}is not detectable by AMS-02, or the current configuration of GAPS LDB+. However, the signal can possibly be detected by a future GAPS satellite mission. Moreover, an observation of [$\overline{\text{D}}~$]{}during either of the earlier missions will greatly constrain the parameter space of astrophysical propagation models, allowing for a more accurate forecast of the instrumental qualities necessary in order to detect the [$^3\overline{\text{He}}~$]{}signal with a future satellite mission.
SP is partly supported by the US Department of Energy under contract DE-FG02-04ER41268. The simulations for this research were carried out on the UCSC supercomputer Hyades, which is supported by National Science Foundation (award number AST-1229745) and UCSC. TL is supported by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration through Einstein Postdoctoral Fellowship Award Number PF3-140110. AI and SW were partially supported by the DFG cluster of excellence “Origin and Structure of the Universe,” the TUM Graduate School and the Studienstiftung des Deutschen Volkes.
[^1]: We emphasize that propagation parameters are still fit using B/C and *not* to the measured $p$/[$\bar{p}~$]{}ratio which is only used to constrain the maximal propagation model.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'Let $C$ be an extremal Type III or IV code and $D_{w}$ be the support design of $C$ for a weight $w$. We introduce the two numbers $\delta(C)$ and $s(C)$: $\delta(C)$ is the largest integer $t$ such that, for all wight, $D_{w}$ is a $t$-design; $s(C)$ denotes the largest integer $t$ such that there exists a $w$ such that $D_{w}$ is a $t$-design. In the present paper, we consider the possible values of $\delta(C)$ and $s(C)$.'
author:
- 'Tsuyoshi Miezaki[^1] and Hiroyuki Nakasora[^2]'
title: 'An upper bound of the value of $t$ of the support $t$-designs of extremal Type III and IV codes'
---
#### Keywords:
self-dual codes, $t$-designs, Assmus–Mattson theorem, harmonic weight enumerators.
#### 2010 MSC:
Primary 94B05; Secondary 05B05.
Introduction
============
Let $D_{w}$ be the support design of a code $C$ for a weight $w$. Then it is known from the Assmus–Mattson theorem [@assmus-mattson] that, if $C$ is an extremal Type III (resp. Type IV) code, for all $w$, $D_{w}$ is a $5$-, $3$- and $1$-design for $n=12m$ (resp. $n=6m$), $12m+4$ (resp. $n=6m+2$) and $12m+8$ (resp. $n=6m+4$), respectively.
Let $$\begin{aligned}
\delta(C)&:=\max\{t\in \mathbb{N}\mid \forall w,
D_{w} \mbox{ is a } t\mbox{-design}\},\\
s(C)&:=\max\{t\in \mathbb{N}\mid \exists w \mbox{ s.t.~}
D_{w} \mbox{ is a } t\mbox{-design}\}.\end{aligned}$$ Note that $\delta(C) \leq s(C)$. In our previous papers , we considered the following problems.
\[problem:1\] Find an upper bound of $s(C)$.
\[problem:2\] Does the case where $\delta(C) < s(C)$ occur?
For Problem \[problem:1\], there is no known example of a $6$-design obtained from the Assmus–Mattson theorem. For Problem \[problem:2\], if $C$ is an extremal Type II code, there is no known example of $\delta(C)<s(C)$ [@extremal; @design2; @M-N]. In [@support; @design; @triply; @even; @code; @48; @M-N], we gave examples of $\delta(C)<s(C)$ for non self-dual codes.
In the present paper, we consider extremal Type III and IV codes. Let $C$ be an extremal Type III or IV code of length $n$. In 1999, it was shown by Zhang [@Zhang(1999)] that $C$ does not exist if for Type III and $$n=
\left\{
\begin{array}{l}
12m\ (m \geq 70), \\
12m+4\ (m \geq 75), \\
12m+8\ (m \geq 78),
\end{array}
\right.$$ for Type IV and $$n=
\left\{
\begin{array}{l}
6m\ (m \geq 17), \\
6m+2\ (m \geq 20), \\
6m+4\ (m \geq 22).
\end{array}
\right.$$
The main results of the present paper are the following theorems.
\[thm:main upper bound III\] Let $C$ be an extremal Type III code of length $n$.
1. Assume that $n=12m$.
1. If $m \notin \{15,38,43,64\}$, $\delta(C)=s(C)=5$.
2. If $m \in \{15,38,43,64\}$, $\delta(C)=s(C)=5$ or $7$.
2. Assume that $n=12m+4$.
1. If $m \notin \{11,18,21,25,32,39,43,46,49,54,60,65,67,68,74 \}$, $\delta(C)=s(C)=3$.
2. If $m \in \{11,18,21,25,32,39,43,46,49,54,60,65,68,74 \}$, $\delta(C)=s(C)=3$ or $5$.
3. If $m=67$, $\delta(C)=s(C)=3,5$ or $6$.
3. Assume that $n=12m+8$.
1. If $m \notin \{ 14,37,42,63 \}$, $\delta(C)=s(C)=1$.
2. If $m \in \{ 14,37,42 \}$, $\delta(C)=s(C)=1$ or $3$.
3. If $m=63$, $\delta(C)=s(C)=1$ or $\delta(C)=3$, $4 \leq s(C) \leq 6$.
\[thm:main upper bound IV\] Let $C$ be an extremal Type IV code of length $n$.
1. Assume that $n=6m$ $(m \neq 1,2)$.
1. If $m \notin \{10,15\}$, $\delta(C)=s(C)=5$.
2. If $m \in \{10,15\}$, $\delta(C)=s(C)=5$ or $7$.
2. Assume that $n=6m+2$.
1. If $m \neq 11$, $\delta(C)=s(C)=3$.
2. If $m=11$, $\delta(C)=s(C)=3, 5, 6$ or $7$.
3. Assume that $n=6m+4$.
1. If $m \in \{1,2,4,13\}$, $\delta(C)=s(C)=1$.
2. If $m\in \{3,5,6,7,8,10,11,12,15,16,17,18,20,21\}$, $\delta(C)=s(C)=1$ or $3$.
3. If $m=9$, $\delta(C)=s(C)=1,3$ or $4$.
4. If $m \in \{ 14,19 \}$, $\delta(C)=s(C)=1,3,4$ or $5$.
For Problem \[problem:1\], we conclude that $s(C) \leq 7$ for any extremal Type III or IV code $C$. For Problem \[problem:2\], we have the following proposition.
Let $C$ be an extremal Type III or IV code. If the case $\delta(C) < s(C)$ occurs, then $C$ is an extremal Type III $[764,382,192]$ code which has $\delta(C)=3$ and $s(C)=4,5$ or $6$.
This paper is organized as follows. In Section \[sec:pre\], we give definitions and some basic properties of self-dual codes and $t$-designs and review the concept of harmonic weight enumerators and some lemmas which are used in the proof of the main results. In Section \[sec: proof of thm1.3\] and \[sec: proof of thm1.4\], we give proofs of Theorem \[thm:main upper bound III\] and \[thm:main upper bound IV\], respectively.
All computer calculations in this paper were done with the help of Mathematica [@Mathematica].
Preliminaries {#sec:pre}
=============
Codes and the support $t$-designs
---------------------------------
Let ${{\mathbb F}}_q$ be the finite field of $q$ elements. A linear code $C$ of length $n$ is a linear subspace of ${{\mathbb F}}_{q}^{n}$. For $q=3$, an inner product $({x},{y})$ on ${{\mathbb F}}_q^n$ is given by $$(x,y)=\sum_{i=1}^nx_iy_i,$$ where $x,y\in {{\mathbb F}}_q^n$ with $x=(x_1,x_2,\ldots, x_n)$ and $y=(y_1,y_2,\ldots, y_n)$. The Hermitian inner product $({x},{y})$ on ${{\mathbb F}}_4^n$ is given by $$(x,y)_H=\sum_{i=1}^nx_iy_i^2,$$ where $x,y\in {{\mathbb F}}_4^n$ with $x=(x_1,x_2,\ldots, x_n)$ and $y=(y_1,y_2,\ldots, y_n)$. The dual of a linear code $C$ is defined as follows: for $q=3$, $$C^{\perp}=\{{y}\in {{\mathbb F}}_{q}^{n}\ | \ ({x},{y}) =0\ \mbox{ for all }{x}\in C\},$$ for $q=4$, $$C^{\perp,H}=\{{y}\in {{\mathbb F}}_{q}^{n}\ | \ ({x},{y})_H =0\ \mbox{ for all }{x}\in C\}.$$ A linear code $C$ is called self-dual if $C=C^{\perp}$ for $q=3$ and if $C=C^{\perp,H}$ for $q=4$. For $x \in{{\mathbb F}}_q^n$, the weight ${{\rm wt}}(x)$ is the number of its nonzero components. The minimum distance of a code $C$ is $\min\{{{\rm wt}}( x)\mid x \in C, x \neq 0 \}$. A linear code of length $n$, dimension $k$, and minimum distance $d$ is called an $[n,k,d]$ code. In this paper, we consider the following self-dual codes [@CS]:
Type III: A code is defined over ${{\mathbb F}}_{3}^{n}$ with all weights divisible by $3$,\
Type IV: A code is defined over ${{\mathbb F}}_{4}^{n}$ with all weights divisible by $2$.
A $t$-$(v,k,{\lambda})$ design (or $t$-design for short) is a pair $\mathcal{D}=(X,\mathcal{B})$, where $X$ is a set of points of cardinality $v$, and $\mathcal{B}$ a collection of $k$-element subsets of $X$ called blocks, with the property that any $t$ points are contained in precisely $\lambda$ blocks.
The support of a nonzero vector $ x:=(x_{1}, \dots, x_{n})$, $x_{i} \in {{\mathbb F}}_{q} = \{ 0,1, \dots, q-1 \}$ is the set of indices of its nonzero coordinates: ${\rm supp} ( x) = \{ i \mid x_{i} \neq 0 \}$. The support design of a code of length $n$ for a given nonzero weight $w$ is the design with $n$ points of coordinate indices, and blocks the supports of all codewords of weight $w$.
The following lemma is easily seen.
\[lem: divisible\] Let $\lambda(S)$ be the number of blocks containing a given set $S$ of $s$ points in a $t$-$(v,k,\lambda)$ design, where $0\leq s\leq t$. Then $$\lambda(S)\binom{k-s}{t-s}
=
\lambda\binom{v-s}{t-s}.$$ In particular, the number of blocks is $$\frac{v(v-1)\cdots(v-t+1)}{k(k-1)\cdots(k-t+1)}\lambda.$$
Harmonic weight enumerators {#sec:Har}
---------------------------
In this section, we extend a method of the harmonic weight enumerators which were used by Bachoc [@Bachoc] and Bannai et al. [@Bannai-Koike-Shinohara-Tagami]. For the readers convenience we quote from [@Bachoc; @Delsarte] the definitions and properties of discrete harmonic functions (for more information the reader is referred to [@Bachoc; @Delsarte]).
Let $\Omega=\{1, 2,\ldots,n\}$ be a finite set (which will be the set of coordinates of the code) and let $X$ be the set of its subsets, while, for all $k= 0,1, \ldots, n$, $X_{k}$ is the set of its $k$-subsets. We denote by ${{\mathbb R}}X$, ${{\mathbb R}}X_k$ the free real vector spaces spanned by respectively the elements of $X$, $X_{k}$. An element of ${{\mathbb R}}X_k$ is denoted by $$f=\sum_{z\in X_k}f(z)z$$ and is identified with the real-valued function on $X_{k}$ given by $z \mapsto f(z)$. Such an element $f\in {{\mathbb R}}X_k$ can be extended to an element $\widetilde{f}\in {{\mathbb R}}X$ by setting, for all $u \in X$, $$\widetilde{f}(u)=\sum_{z\in X_k, z\subset u}f(z).$$ If an element $g \in {{\mathbb R}}X$ is equal to some $\widetilde{f}$, for $f \in {{\mathbb R}}X_{k}$, we say that $g$ has degree $k$. The differentiation $\gamma$ is the operator defined by linearity from $$\gamma(z) =\sum_{y\in X_{k-1},y\subset z}y$$ for all $z\in X_k$ and for all $k=0,1, \ldots n$, and $\operatorname{Harm}_{k}$ is the kernel of $\gamma$: $$\operatorname{Harm}_k =\ker(\gamma|_{{{\mathbb R}}X_k}).$$
\[thm:design\] A set $\mathcal{B} \subset X_{m}$, where $m \leq n$, of blocks is a $t$-design if and only if $\sum_{b\in \mathcal{B}}\widetilde{f}(b)=0$ for all $f\in \operatorname{Harm}_k$, $1\leq k\leq t$.
In [@Bachoc], the harmonic weight enumerator associated to a linear code $C$ was defined as follows:
Let $C$ be a linear code of length $n$ and let $f\in\operatorname{Harm}_{k}$. The harmonic weight enumerator associated to $C$ and $f$ is $$W_{C,f}(x,y)=\sum_{c\in C}\widetilde{f}(c)x^{n-{{\rm wt}}(c)}y^{{{\rm wt}}(c)}.$$
Then the structure of these invariant rings is described as follows:
\[thm:invariant\]
1. Let $C$ be a Type III code of length $n$, and let $f \in \operatorname{Harm}_{k}$. Then we have $W_{C,f}(x,y) =(xy)^{k} Z_{C,f} (x,y)$. Moreover, the polynomial $Z_{C,f} (x,y)$ is degree of $n-2k$ and is in $I_{G_3, \chi_{u,v}}$, where $u\equiv k\pmod{2}$ and $v\equiv -k\pmod{3}$, $$\begin{aligned}
I_{G_3,\chi_{u,v}}=
\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
\langle g_4,g_{12}\rangle &\mbox{ if }(u,v)=(0,0),\\
p_{4}\langle g_4,g_{12}\rangle &\mbox{ if }(u,v)=(0,1),\\
p_{4}^2\langle g_4,g_{12}\rangle &\mbox{ if }(u,v)=(0,2),\\
p_{6}\langle g_4,g_{12}\rangle &\mbox{ if }(u,v)=(1,0),\\
p_{4}p_6\langle g_4,g_{12}\rangle &\mbox{ if }(u,v)=(1,1),\\
p_{4}^2p_6\langle g_4,g_{12}\rangle &\mbox{ if }(u,v)=(1,2),
\end{array}
\right. \end{aligned}$$ and $$\begin{aligned}
\left\{
\begin{array}{l}
p_{4}=y(x^3-y^3), \\
p_{6}=x^6-20x^3y^3-8y^6, \\
g_{4}=x^4+8xy^3, \\
g_{12}=y^3(x^3-y^3)^3.
\end{array}
\right. \end{aligned}$$
2. Let $C$ be a Type IV code of length $n$, and let $f \in \operatorname{Harm}_{k}$. Then we have $W_{C,f}(x,y) =(xy)^{k} Z_{C,f} (x,y)$. Moreover, the polynomial $Z_{C,f} (x,y)$ is degree of $n-2k$ and is in $I_{G_4, \chi_{u,v}}$, where $u\equiv k\pmod{2}$ and $v\equiv k\pmod{2}$, $$\begin{aligned}
I_{G_4,\chi_{u,v}}=
\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
\langle h_2,h_{6}\rangle &\mbox{ if }(u,v)=(0,0),\\
q_{3}r_3\langle h_2,h_{6}\rangle &\mbox{ if }(u,v)=(1,1),
\end{array}
\right. \end{aligned}$$ and $$\begin{aligned}
\left\{
\begin{array}{l}
h_{2}=x^2+3y^2, \\
h_{6}=y^2(x^2-y^2)^2, \\
q_{3}=y(x^2-y^2), \\
r_{3}=x^3-9xy^2.
\end{array}
\right. \end{aligned}$$
We recall the slightly more general definition of the notion of a $T$-design, for a subset $T$ of $\{ 1,2, \ldots, n \}$: a set $\mathcal{B}$ of blocks is called a $T$-design if and only if $\sum_{b\in \mathcal{B}}\tilde{f}(b)=0$ for all $f\in \operatorname{Harm}_k$ and for all $k \in T$. By Theorem \[thm:design\], a $t$-design is a $T= \{1, \ldots, t \}$-design. Let $W_{C,f}=\sum_{i=0}^{n}c_f(i)x^{n-i}y^i$. Then we note that $D_w$ is a $T$-design if and only if $c_f(w)=0$ for all $f\in \mbox{Harm}_j$ with $j\in T$.
\[thm:[Calderbank-Delsarte]{}\]
1. Let $D_{w}$ be the support design of weight $w$ of an extremal Type III code of length $n$ $($$n \geq 12$$)$.
- If $n \equiv 0 \pmod{12}$, $D_{w}$ is a $\{1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7\}$-design.
- If $n \equiv 4 \pmod{12}$, $D_{w}$ is a $\{1, 2, 3, 5\}$-design.
- If $n \equiv 8 \pmod{12}$, $D_{w}$ is a $\{1, 3\}$-design.
2. Let $D_{w}$ be the support design of weight $w$ of an extremal Type IV code of length $n$.
- If $n \equiv 0 \pmod{6}$ $($$n \geq 18$$)$, $D_{w}$ is a $\{1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7\}$-design.
- If $n \equiv 2 \pmod{6}$, $D_{w}$ is a $\{1, 2, 3, 5\}$-design.
- If $n \equiv 4 \pmod{6}$, $D_{w}$ is a $\{1, 3\}$-design.
Coefficients of the harmonic weight enumerators of extremal Type III and Type IV codes
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As we mentioned in Section \[sec:Har\], it is important for the support designs of a code $C$ whether the coefficients of $W_{C,f}(x,y)$ are zero or not. Therefore, we investigate it and show the following lemmas, where the binomial coefficient is defined by $$\binom{n}{k}=0$$ if $n<k$.
\[lem:poly. zero 1\]
1. Let $Q_{1}=(x^{4}+8xy^{3})(x^{3}-y^{3})^{\alpha}$. If the coefficients of $x^{3\alpha+4-3i}y^{3i}$ in $Q_{1}$ are equal to $0$ for $0 \leq i \leq \alpha+1$, then $\alpha=9i-1$.
2. Let $Q_{2}=(x^{6}-20x^{3}y^{3}-8y^{6})(x^{3}-y^{3})^{\alpha}$. Then the coefficients of $x^{3\alpha+6-3i}y^{3i}$ in $Q_{2}$ are not equal to $0$.
\(1) We have $$\begin{aligned}
Q_{1}&=(x^{4}+8xy^{3})(x^{3}-y^{3})^{\alpha} \\
&=\sum_{i=0}^{\alpha+1} (-1)^{i} \left( \binom{\alpha}{i}-8\binom{\alpha}{i-1} \right)x^{3\alpha+4-3i}y^{3i}.\end{aligned}$$ If the coefficients of $x^{3\alpha+4-3i}y^{3i}$ in $Q_{1}$ are equal to $0$, $$\binom{\alpha}{i}-8\binom{\alpha}{i-1}=0.$$ Then we have $$\begin{aligned}
&\frac{\alpha !}{i !(\alpha-i)!}-8\frac{\alpha !}{(i-1) !(\alpha-i+1)!}=0 \\
\Leftrightarrow\ &\alpha-i+1-8i=0 \\
\Leftrightarrow\ &\alpha=9i-1.\end{aligned}$$
(2)We have $$\begin{aligned}
Q_{2}&=(x^{6}-20x^{3}y^{3}-8y^{6})(x^{3}-y^{3})^{\alpha} \\
&=\sum_{i=0}^{\alpha+2} (-1)^{i} \left( \binom{\alpha}{i}+20\binom{\alpha}{i-1}-8\binom{\alpha}{i-2} \right)x^{3\alpha+6-3i}y^{3i}.\end{aligned}$$ If the coefficients of $x^{3\alpha+6-3i}y^{3i}$ in $Q_{2}$ are equal to $0$, $$\binom{\alpha}{i}+20\binom{\alpha}{i-1}-8\binom{\alpha}{i-2}=0.$$ Then we have $$\begin{aligned}
&\frac{\alpha !}{i !(\alpha-i)!}+20\frac{\alpha !}{(i-1) !(\alpha-i+1)!}-8\frac{\alpha !}{(i-2) !(\alpha-i+2)!}=0 \\
\Leftrightarrow\ &(\alpha-i+2)(\alpha-i+1)+20i(\alpha-i+2)-8i(i-1)=0 \\
\Leftrightarrow\ &\alpha^{2}+(18i+3)\alpha-27i^{2}+45i+2=0.\end{aligned}$$ We have $$\alpha=\frac{-18i-3 \pm \sqrt{432i^{2}-72i+1}}{2}.$$ Since $432i^{2}-72i+1$ is not a square number for $i>0$, $\alpha$ is not a positive integer, a contradiction. Thus the coefficients of $x^{3\alpha+6-3i}y^{3i}$ in $Q_{2}$ are not equal to $0$.
\[lem:poly. zero 2\]
1. Let $R_{1}=(x^{2}+3y^{2})(x^{2}-y^{2})^{\alpha}$. If the coefficients of $x^{2\alpha+2-2i}y^{2i}$ in $R_{1}$ are equal to $0$ for $0 \leq i \leq \alpha+1$, then $\alpha=4i-1$.
2. Let $R_{2}=(x^{3}-9xy^{2})(x^{2}-y^{2})^{\alpha}$. If the coefficients of $x^{2\alpha+3-2i}y^{2i}$ in $R_{2}$ are not equal to $0$.
3. Let $R_{3}=(x^{2}+3y^{2})^{2}(x^{2}-y^{2})^{\alpha}$. If the coefficients of $x^{2\alpha+4-2i}y^{2i}$ in $R_{3}$ are equal to $0$ for $0 \leq i \leq \alpha+2$, then $48\alpha+112$ is a square number.
\(1) We have $$\begin{aligned}
R_{1}&=(x^{2}+3y^{2})(x^{2}-y^{2})^{\alpha} \\
&=\sum_{i=0}^{\alpha+1} (-1)^{i} \left( \binom{\alpha}{i}-3\binom{\alpha}{i-1} \right)x^{2\alpha+2-2i}y^{2i}.\end{aligned}$$ If the coefficients of $x^{2\alpha+2-2i}y^{2i}$ in $R_{1}$ are equal to $0$, $$\binom{\alpha}{i}-3\binom{\alpha}{i-1}=0.$$ Then we have $$\begin{aligned}
&\frac{\alpha !}{i !(\alpha-i)!}-3\frac{\alpha !}{(i-1) !(\alpha-i+1)!}=0 \\
\Leftrightarrow\ &\alpha-i+1-3i=0 \\
\Leftrightarrow\ &\alpha=4i-1.\end{aligned}$$
\(2) We have $$\begin{aligned}
R_{2}&=(x^{3}-9xy^{2})(x^{2}-y^{2})^{\alpha} \\
&=\sum_{i=0}^{\alpha+1} (-1)^{i} \left( \binom{\alpha}{i}+9\binom{\alpha}{i-1} \right)x^{2\alpha+3-2i}y^{2i}.\end{aligned}$$ If the coefficients of $x^{2\alpha+3-2i}y^{2i}$ in $R_{2}$ are equal to $0$, $$\binom{\alpha}{i}+9\binom{\alpha}{i-1}=0.$$ Then we have $$\begin{aligned}
&\frac{\alpha !}{i !(\alpha-i)!}+9\frac{\alpha !}{(i-1) !(\alpha-i+1)!}=0 \\
\Leftrightarrow\ &\alpha-i+1+9i=0 \\
\Leftrightarrow\ &\alpha=-8i-1<0.\end{aligned}$$ Thus the coefficients of $x^{2\alpha+3-2i}y^{2i}$ in $R_{2}$ are not equal to $0$.
\(3) We have $$\begin{aligned}
R_{3}&=(x^{2}+3y^{2})^{2}(x^{2}-y^{2})^{\alpha} \\
&=\sum_{i=0}^{\alpha+1} (-1)^{i} \left( \binom{\alpha}{i}-6\binom{\alpha}{i-1}+9\binom{\alpha}{i-2} \right)x^{2\alpha+4-2i}y^{2i}.\end{aligned}$$ If the coefficients of $x^{2\alpha+4-2i}y^{2i}$ in $R_{3}$ are equal to $0$, $$\binom{\alpha}{i}-6\binom{\alpha}{i-1}+9\binom{\alpha}{i-2}=0.$$ Then we have $$\begin{aligned}
&\frac{\alpha !}{i !(\alpha-i)!}-6\frac{\alpha !}{(i-1) !(\alpha-i+1)!}+9\frac{\alpha !}{(i-2) !(\alpha-i+2)!}=0 \\
\Leftrightarrow\ &(\alpha-i+2)(\alpha-i+1)-6i(\alpha-i+2)+9i(i-1)=0 \\
\Leftrightarrow\ &16i^{2}-(8\alpha+24)i+\alpha^{2}+3\alpha+2=0.\end{aligned}$$ We have $$i=\frac{4\alpha+12 \pm \sqrt{48\alpha+112}}{16}.$$ Since $i$ is an integer, $48\alpha+112$ is a square number.
Proof of Theorem \[thm:main upper bound III\] {#sec: proof of thm1.3}
=============================================
Case for $n=12m$ {#sec: case for n=12m}
----------------
In this section, we consider the case of extremal Type III $[12m,6m,3m+3]$ codes ($m \leq 69$). Let $C$ be an extremal Type III $[12m,6m,3m+3]$ code, $D_{3m+3}^{12m}$ be the support (with duplicates omitted) design of the minimum weight of $C$. By [@mallows-sloane Theorem 2], the number of codewords of minimum nonzero weight of $C$ is equal to $$2\binom{12m}{5}\binom{4m-2}{m-1}\left/\binom{3m+3}{5}.\right.$$ Therefore, by the Assmus–Mattson theorem, $D_{3m+3}^{12m}$ is a $5$-design with parameters $$\left(12m,3m+3,\binom{4m-2}{m-1} \right).$$
\[prop:type3 12m not 8-design\]
1. If $t \geq 6$, then $D_{3m+3}^{12m}$ is a $7$-design and $m$ must be in the set $\{15,38,43,64 \}$.
2. $D_{3m+3}^{12m}$ is never an $8$-design.
\(1) By Theorem \[thm:[Calderbank-Delsarte]{}\] (1), $D_{3m+3}^{12m}$ is a $7$-design if $t \geq 6$. If $D_{3m+3}^{12m}$ is a $7$-design, by Lemma \[lem: divisible\], $$\lambda_{6}=\frac{3m-2}{12m-5}\binom{4m-2}{m-1}\ {\rm and}\
\lambda_{7}=\frac{(3m-2)(3m-3)}{(12m-5)(12m-6)}\binom{4m-2}{m-1}$$ are positive integers. By a computation for $m \leq 69$, if $\lambda_{6}$ and $\lambda_{7}$ are positive integers, we have $m \in \{15,38,43,64 \}$.
\(2) We have checked that $$\lambda_{8}=\frac{(3m-2)(3m-3)(3m-4)}{(12m-5)(12m-6)(12m-7)}\binom{4m-2}{m-1}$$ is not a positive integer for $m \in \{15,38,43,64 \}$. Therefore, by Lemma \[lem: divisible\], $D_{3m+3}^{12m}$ is never an $8$-design.
For $t=8$, we give the following proposition.
\[prop:type3 12m harm\] Let $D_{w}^{12m}$ be the support $t$-design of weight $w$ of an extremal Type III code of length $n=12m$. Then all $D_{w}^{12m}$ are $8$-designs simultaneously, or none of $D_{w}^{12m}$ is an $8$-design.
Let us assume that $t=8$, and $C$ is an extremal Type III $[12m,6m,3m+3]$ code. Then by the Theorem \[thm:invariant\] (1) we have $W_{C,f}(x,y) =c(f) (xy)^{8} Z_{C,f} (x,y)$, where $c(f)$ is a linear function from Harm$_{t}$ to ${{\mathbb R}}$ and $Z_{C,f} (x,y) \in I_{G_{3},\chi_{0,1}}$. By Theorem \[thm:invariant\] (1), $Z_{C,f} (x,y)$ can be written in the following form: $$Z_{C,f}(x,y) = p_{4} \sum_{i=0}^{m}a_{i}g_{4}^{3(m-i)-5} g_{12}^{i}.$$ Since the minimum weight of $C$ is $3m+3$, we have $a_{i}=0$ for $i \neq m-2$. Therefore, $W_{C,f}(x,y)$ can be written in the following form: $$\begin{aligned}
W_{C,f}(x,y) &=c(f) (xy)^{8} p_{4}g_{4} g_{12}^{m-2} \\
& =c(f) (xy)^{8} y^{3m-5} (x^{4}+8xy^{3}) (x^{3}-y^{3})^{3m-5}. \end{aligned}$$
By Lemma \[lem:poly. zero 1\] (1), the coefficients of $x^{9m-11-3i}y^{3i}$ in $(x^{4}+8xy^{3}) (x^{3}-y^{3})^{3m-5}$ are not equal to $0$ for $0 \leq i \leq 3m-4$ since $3m-5 \neq 9i-1$. Therefore, all $D_{w}^{12m}$ are $8$-designs simultaneously, or none of $D_{w}^{12m}$ is an $8$-design.
By Proposition \[prop:type3 12m not 8-design\] and \[prop:type3 12m harm\], we obtain the following theorem.
\[thm:main thm 12m\]
If $D_{w}^{12m}$ becomes a $7$-design for any $w$, then $m$ must be in the set $\{15,38,43,64 \}$.
$D_{w}^{12m}$ is never an $8$-design for any $w$.
Thus the proof of Theorem \[thm:main upper bound III\] (1) is completed.
Case for $12m+4$ {#sec: case for n=12m+4}
----------------
In this section, we consider the case of extremal Type III $[12m+4,6m+2,3m+3]$ codes ($m \leq 74$). Let $C$ be an extremal Type III $[12m+4,6m+2,3m+3]$ code, and $D_{3m+3}^{12m+4}$ be the support (with duplicates omitted) design of the minimum weight of $C$. By [@mallows-sloane Theorem 2], the number of codewords of minimum nonzero weight of $C$ is equal to $$2(12m+4)(12m+3)(12m+2)\frac{(4m)!}{m!(3m+3)!}.$$ Therefore, by the Assmus–Mattson theorem, $D_{3m+3}^{12m+4}$ is a $3$-design with parameters $$\left(12m+4,3m+3,\binom{4m}{m} \right).$$
\[prop:type3 12m+4 not 7-design\] Let $D_{3m+3}^{12m+4}$ be the support $t$-design of the minimum weight of an extremal Type III code of length $n=12m+4$.
1. If $t \geq 4$, then $D_{3m+3}^{12m+4}$ is a $5$-design and $m$ must be in the set\
$\{11,18,21,25,32,39,43,46,49,54,60,65,67,68,74 \}$.
2. If $D_{3m+3}^{12m+4}$ is a $6$-design, $m$ must be $67$.
3. $D_{3m+3}^{12m+4}$ is never a $7$-design.
\(1) By Theorem \[thm:[Calderbank-Delsarte]{}\] (1), $D_{3m+3}^{12m+4}$ is a $5$-design if $t \geq 4$. If $D_{3m+3}^{12m+4}$ is a $5$-design, by Lemma \[lem: divisible\], $$\lambda_{4}=\frac{3m}{12m+1}\binom{4m}{m} \mbox{ and }
\lambda_{5}=\frac{3m(3m-1)}{(12m+1)12m}\binom{4m}{m}$$ are positive integers. By a computation for $m \leq 74$, if $\lambda_{4}$ and $\lambda_{5}$ are positive integers, then we have $$m \in \{11,18,21,25,32,39,43,46,49,54,60,65,67,68,74 \}.$$
(2)If $D_{3m+3}^{12m+4}$ is a $6$-design, by Lemma \[lem: divisible\], $$\lambda_{6}=\frac{3m(3m-1)(3m-2)}{(12m+1)12m(12m-1)}\binom{4m}{m}$$ is a positive integer. Then we have $m=67$.
\(3) We have checked that $$\lambda_{7}=\frac{3m(3m-1)(3m-2)(3m-3)}{(12m+1)12m(12m-1)(12m-2)}\binom{4m}{m}$$ is not a positive integer for $m=67$. Therefore, by Lemma \[lem: divisible\], $D_{3m+3}^{12m+4}$ is never a $7$-design.
For $t \geq 6$, we give the following proposition.
\[prop:type3 12m+4 harm\] Let $D_{w}^{12m+4}$ be the support $t$-design of weight $w$ of an extremal Type III code of length $n=12m+4$.
1. All $D_{w}^{12m+4}$ are $6$-designs simultaneously, or none of $D_{w}^{12m+4}$ is a $6$-design.
2. All $D_{w}^{12m+4}$ are $7$-designs simultaneously, or none of $D_{w}^{12m+4}$ is a $7$-design.
Let $C$ be an extremal Type III $[12m+4,6m+2,3m+3]$ code.
\(1) Let us assume that $t=6$. Then by the Theorem \[thm:invariant\] (1) we have $W_{C,f}(x,y) =c(f) (xy)^{6} Z_{C,f} (x,y)$, where $c(f)$ is a linear function from Harm$_{t}$ to ${{\mathbb R}}$ and $Z_{C,f} (x,y) \in I_{G_{3},\chi_{0,0}}$. By Theorem \[thm:invariant\] (1), $Z_{C,f} (x,y)$ can be written in the following form: $$Z_{C,f}(x,y) = \sum_{i=0}^{m}a_{i}g_{4}^{3(m-i)-2} g_{12}^{i}.$$ Since the minimum weight of $C$ is $3m+3$, we have $a_{i}=0$ for $i \neq m-1$. Therefore, $W_{C,f}(x,y)$ can be written in the following form: $$\begin{aligned}
W_{C,f}(x,y) &=c(f) (xy)^{6} g_{4} g_{12}^{m-1} \\
& =c(f) (xy)^{6} y^{3m-3} (x^{4}+8xy^{3}) (x^{3}-y^{3})^{3m-3}. \end{aligned}$$
By Lemma \[lem:poly. zero 1\] (1), the coefficients of $x^{9m-5-3i}y^{3i}$ in $(x^{4}+8xy^{3}) (x^{3}-y^{3})^{3m-3}$ are not equal to $0$ for $0 \leq i \leq 3m-2$ since $3m-3 \neq 9i-1$. Therefore, all $D_{w}^{12m+4}$ are $6$-designs simultaneously, or none of $D_{w}^{12m+4}$ is a $6$-design.
\(2) Let us assume that $t=7$. Then by the Theorem \[thm:invariant\] (1) we have $W_{C,f}(x,y) =c(f) (xy)^{7} Z_{C,f} (x,y)$, where $c(f)$ is a linear function from Harm$_{t}$ to ${{\mathbb R}}$ and $Z_{C,f} (x,y) \in I_{G_{3},\chi_{1,2}}$. By Theorem \[thm:invariant\] (1), $Z_{C,f} (x,y)$ can be written in the following form: $$Z_{C,f}(x,y) = p_{4}^{2}p_{6} \sum_{i=0}^{m}a_{i}g_{4}^{3(m-i)-6} g_{12}^{i}.$$ Since the minimum weight of $C$ is $3m+3$, we have $a_{i}=0$ for $i \neq m-2$. Therefore, $W_{C,f}(x,y)$ can be written in the following form: $$\begin{aligned}
W_{C,f}(x,y) &=c(f) (xy)^{7}p_{4}^{2}p_{6} g_{12}^{m-2} \\
& =c(f) (xy)^{7} y^{3m-4} (x^{6}-20x^{3}y^{3}-8y^{6}) (x^{3}-y^{3})^{3m-4}. \end{aligned}$$
By Lemma \[lem:poly. zero 1\] (2), the coefficients of $x^{9m-6-3i}y^{3i}$ in $(x^{6}-20x^{3}y^{3}-8y^{6}) (x^{3}-y^{3})^{3m-4}$ are not equal to $0$ for $0 \leq i \leq 3m-2$. Therefore, all $D_{w}^{12m+4}$ are $7$-designs simultaneously, or none of $D_{w}^{12m+4}$ is a $7$-design.
By Proposition \[prop:type3 12m+4 not 7-design\] and \[prop:type3 12m+4 harm\], we obtain the following theorem.
\[thm:main thm 12m+4\] Let $D_{w}^{12m+4}$ be the support $t$-design of weight $w$ of an extremal Type III code of length $n=12m+4$ $($$m \leq 74$$)$.
1. If $D_{w}^{12m+4}$ becomes a $5$-design for any $w$, then $m$ must be in the set\
$\{11,18,21,25,32,39,43,46,49,54,60,65,67,68,74 \}$.
2. If $D_{w}^{12m+4}$ becomes a $6$-design for any $w$, then $m$ must be $67$.
3. In the case $m=67$, $D_{w}^{808}$ is a $3,5$ or $6$-design for any $w$.
4. $D_{w}^{12m+4}$ is never a $7$-design for any $w$.
Thus the proof of Theorem \[thm:main upper bound III\] (2) is completed.
Case for $12m+8$ {#sec: case for n=12m+8}
----------------
In this section, we consider the case of extremal Type III $[12m+8,6m+4,3m+3]$ codes ($m \leq 77$). Let $C$ be an extremal Type III $[12m+8,6m+4,3m+3]$ code, and $D_{3m+3}^{12m+8}$ be the support (with duplicates omitted) design of the minimum weight of $C$. By [@mallows-sloane Theorem 2], the number of codewords of minimum nonzero weight of $C$ is equal to $$6(12m+8)\frac{(4m+2)!}{m!(3m+3)!}.$$ Therefore, by the Assmus–Mattson theorem, $D_{3m+3}^{12m+8}$ is a $1$-design with parameters $$\left(12m+8,3m+3,3\binom{4m+2}{m} \right).$$
\[prop:type3 12m+8 not 4-design\] Let $D_{3m+3}^{12m+8}$ be the support $t$-design of the minimum weight of an extremal Type III code of length $n=12m+8$.
1. If $t \geq 2$, then $D_{3m+3}^{12m+8}$ is a $3$-design and $m$ must be in the set $\{ 14,37,42,63 \}$.
2. $D_{3m+3}^{12m+8}$ is never a $4$-design.
\(1) By Theorem \[thm:[Calderbank-Delsarte]{}\] (1), $D_{3m+3}^{12m+8}$ is a $3$-design if $t \geq 2$. If $D_{3m+3}^{12m+8}$ is a $3$-design, by Lemma \[lem: divisible\], $$\lambda_{2}=\frac{3m+2}{12m+7}3\binom{4m+2}{m}\ {\rm and}\
\lambda_{3}=\frac{(3m+2)(3m+1)}{(12m+7)(12m+6)}3\binom{4m+2}{m}$$ are positive integers. By a computation for $m \leq 77$, if $\lambda_{2}$ and $\lambda_{3}$ are positive integers, then we have $m \in \{ 14,37,42,63 \}$.
\(2) We have checked that $$\lambda_{4}=\frac{(3m+2)(3m+1)3m}{(12m+7)(12m+6)(12m+5)}3\binom{4m+2}{m}$$ is not a positive integer for $m \in \{ 14,37,42,63 \}$. Therefore, by Lemma \[lem: divisible\], $D_{3m+3}^{12m+8}$ is never a $4$-design.
We have the following proposition.
\[prop:type3 12m+8 harm\] Let $D_{w}^{12m+8}$ be the support $t$-design of weight $w$ of an extremal Type III code of length $n=12m+8$.
1. If $m \not\equiv 0 \pmod 3$, all $D_{w}^{12m+8}$ are $4$-designs simultaneously, or none of $D_{w}^{12m+8}$ is a $4$-design.
2. Assume that $m \equiv 0 \pmod 3$. If $w \neq 4m+3$, then all $D_{w}^{12m+8}$ are $4$-designs simultaneously, or none of $D_{w}^{12m+8}$ is a $4$-design. In the case $w=4m+3$, $D_{4m+3}^{12m+8}$ is a $\{1,3,4 \}$-design.
3. In the case $m=63$ and $w=255$, $D_{255}^{764}$ is not a $7$-design.
Let $C$ be an extremal Type III $[12m+8,6m+4,3m+3]$ code. Let us assume that $t=4$. Then by the Theorem \[thm:invariant\] (1) we have $W_{C,f}(x,y) =c(f) (xy)^{4} Z_{C,f} (x,y)$, where $c(f)$ is a linear function from Harm$_{t}$ to ${{\mathbb R}}$ and $Z_{C,f} (x,y) \in I_{G_{3},\chi_{0,2}}$. By Theorem \[thm:invariant\] (1), $Z_{C,f} (x,y)$ can be written in the following form: $$Z_{C,f}(x,y) = p_{4}^{2}\sum_{i=0}^{m}a_{i}g_{4}^{3(m-i)-2} g_{12}^{i}.$$ Since the minimum weight of $C$ is $3m+3$, we have $a_{i}=0$ for $i \neq m-1$. Therefore, $W_{C,f}(x,y)$ can be written in the following form: $$\begin{aligned}
W_{C,f}(x,y) &=c(f) (xy)^{4} p_{4}^{2}g_{4} g_{12}^{m-1} \\
& =c(f) (xy)^{4} y^{3m-1} (x^{4}+8xy^{3}) (x^{3}-y^{3})^{3m-1}. \end{aligned}$$
\(1) By Lemma \[lem:poly. zero 1\] (1), if $m \not\equiv 0 \pmod 3$, the coefficients of $x^{9m+1-3i}y^{3i}$ in $(x^{4}+8xy^{3}) (x^{3}-y^{3})^{3m-1}$ are not equal to $0$ for $0 \leq i \leq 3m$ since $3m-3 \neq 9i-1$. Therefore, all $D_{w}^{12m+8}$ are $4$-designs simultaneously, or none of $D_{w}^{12m+8}$ is a $4$-design for $m \not\equiv 0 \pmod 3$.
\(2) Assume that $m \equiv 0 \pmod 3$. By Lemma \[lem:poly. zero 1\] (1), if the coefficients of $x^{9m+1-3i}y^{3i}$ in $(x^{4}+8xy^{3}) (x^{3}-y^{3})^{3m-1}$ are equal to $0$ for $0 \leq i \leq 3m$, then $m=3i$. Hence the coefficients of $x^{8m+5}y^{4m+3}$ in $W_{C,f}(x,y) $ are equal to $0$. Therefore, $D_{4m+3}^{12m+8}$ is a $\{1,3,4 \}$-design. If $w \neq 4m+3$, then all $D_{w}^{12m+8}$ are $4$-designs simultaneously, or none of $D_{w}^{12m+8}$ is a $4$-design.
\(3) Let $C'$ be an extremal Type III $[764,382,192]$ code and $C'_{255}$ be the set of codewords of weight 255 of $C'$. By [@mallows-sloane], we have $$\begin{aligned}
|C'_{255}|=& 57722041604247479907056082274041845325097239194558706847\\
& 5581740325339465514100889807420805771366809484288.\end{aligned}$$ Let $D_{255}^{764}$ be a $t$-$(764,255,\lambda_{t})$ design. Then we have $$\lambda_{t}=\frac{255\cdot254\cdots(255-t+1)}{764\cdot763\cdots(764-t+1)}|C'_{255}|.$$ We have checked that $\lambda_{t}$ is a positive integer for $t=1,2,\ldots, 6$ and $\lambda_{7}$ is not a positive integer. Thus $D_{255}^{764}$ is not a $7$-design.
By Proposition \[prop:type3 12m+8 not 4-design\] and \[prop:type3 12m+8 harm\], we obtain the following theorem.
\[thm:main thm 12m+8\] Let $D_{w}^{12m+8}$ be the support $t$-design of weight $w$ of an extremal Type III code of length $n=12m+8$ $($$m \leq 77$$)$.
1. If $D_{w}^{12m+8}$ becomes a $3$-design for any $w$, then $m$ must be in the set $\{ 14,37,42,63 \}$.
2. In the case $m \in \{ 14,37,42 \}$, $D_{w}^{12m+8}$ is a $1$ or $3$-design for any $w$.
3. Assume that $m=63$. If $w \neq 255$, $D_{w}^{764}$ is a $1$ or $3$-design and $D_{255}^{764}$ is a $1, 4, 5$ or $6$-design.
4. $D_{w}^{12m+8}$ is never a $7$-design for any $w$.
Thus the proof of Theorem \[thm:main upper bound III\] (3) is completed.
Proof of Theorem \[thm:main upper bound IV\] {#sec: proof of thm1.4}
============================================
Case for $n=6m$ {#sec: case for n=6m}
---------------
In this section, we consider the case of extremal Type IV $[6m,3m,2m+2]$ codes ($3 \leq m \leq 16$). Let $C$ be an extremal Type IV $[6m,3m,2m+2]$ code, and $D_{2m+2}^{6m}$ be the support (with duplicates omitted) design of the minimum weight of $C$. By [@MOSW1978 Theorem 18], $D_{2m+2}^{6m}$ is a $$5\mbox{-}\left(6m,2m+2,\binom{3m-3}{m-2} \right)\mbox{ design}.$$
\[prop:type4 6m not 8-design\] Let $D_{2m+2}^{6m}$ be the support $t$-design of the minimum weight of an extremal Type IV code of length $n=6m$.
1. If $t \geq 6$, then $D_{2m+2}^{6m}$ is a $7$-design and $m$ must be in the set $\{10,15 \}$.
2. $D_{2m+2}^{6m}$ is never an $8$-design.
\(1) If $D_{2m+2}^{6m}$ is a $7$-design, by Lemma \[lem: divisible\], $$\lambda_{6}=\frac{2m-3}{6m-5}\binom{3m-3}{m-2} \mbox{ and }
\lambda_{7}=\frac{(2m-3)(2m-4)}{(6m-5)(6m-6)}\binom{3m-3}{m-2}$$ are positive integers. By a computation for $m \leq 16$, if $\lambda_{6}$ and $\lambda_{7}$ are positive integers, we have $m \in \{10,15 \}$.
\(2) We have checked that $$\lambda_{8}=\frac{(2m-3)(2m-4)(2m-5)}{(6m-5)(6m-6)(6m-7)}\binom{3m-3}{m-2}$$ is not a positive integer for $m \in \{10,15 \}$. Therefore, by Lemma \[lem: divisible\], $D_{2m+2}^{6m}$ is never an $8$-design.
For $t \geq 8$, we give the following proposition.
\[prop:type4 6m harm\] Let $D_{w}^{6m}$ be the support $t$-design of weight $w$ of an extremal Type IV code of length $n=6m$. Then all $D_{w}^{6m}$ are $8$-designs simultaneously, or none of $D_{w}^{6m}$ is an $8$-design.
Let $C$ be an extremal Type IV $[6m,3m,2m+2]$ code. Let us assume that $t=8$. Then by the Theorem \[thm:invariant\] (2) we have $W_{C,f}(x,y) =c(f) (xy)^{8} Z_{C,f} (x,y)$, where $c(f)$ is a linear function from Harm$_{t}$ to ${{\mathbb R}}$ and $Z_{C,f} (x,y) \in I_{G_{4},\chi_{0,0}}$. By Theorem \[thm:invariant\] (2), $Z_{C,f} (x,y)$ can be written in the following form: $$Z_{C,f}(x,y) = \sum_{i=0}^{m}a_{i}h_{2}^{3(m-i)-8} h_{6}^{i}.$$ Since the minimum weight of $C$ is $2m+2$, we have $a_{i}=0$ for $i \neq m-3$. Therefore, $W_{C,f}(x,y)$ can be written in the following form: $$\begin{aligned}
W_{C,f}(x,y) &=c(f) (xy)^{8} h_{2} h_{6}^{m-3} \\
& =c(f) (xy)^{8} y^{2m-6} (x^{2}+3y^{2}) (x^{2}-y^{2})^{2m-6}. \end{aligned}$$
By Lemma \[lem:poly. zero 2\] (1), the coefficients of $x^{4m-10-2i}y^{2i}$ in $(x^{2}+3y^{2}) (x^{2}-y^{2})^{2m-6}$ are not equal to $0$ for $0 \leq i \leq 2m-5$ since $2m-6 \neq 4i-1$. Therefore, all $D_{w}^{6m}$ are $8$-designs simultaneously, or none of $D_{w}^{6m}$ is an $8$-design.
By Proposition \[prop:type4 6m not 8-design\] and \[prop:type4 6m harm\], we obtain the following theorem.
\[thm:main thm 6m\]
If $D_{w}^{6m}$ becomes a $7$-design for any $w$, then $m$ must be in the set $\{10,15 \}$.
$D_{w}^{6m}$ is never an $8$-design for any $w$.
Thus the proof of Theorem \[thm:main upper bound IV\] (1) is completed.
Case for $n=6m+2$ {#sec: case for n=6m+2}
-----------------
In this section, we consider the case of extremal Type IV $[6m+2,3m+1,2m+2]$ codes ($m \leq 19$). Let $C$ be an extremal Type IV $[6m+2,3m+1,2m+2]$ code, and $D_{2m+2}^{6m+2}$ be the support (with duplicates omitted) design of the minimum weight of $C$. By [@MOSW1978 Theorem 14], the number of codewords of minimum nonzero weight of $C$ is equal to $$\frac{3(6m+1)}{m+1}\binom{3m+1}{m}.$$ Therefore, by the Assmus–Mattson theorem, $D_{2m+2}^{6m+2}$ is a $3$-design with parameters $$\left(6m+2,2m+2,\frac{1}{3}\binom{3m}{m} \right).$$
\[prop:type4 6m+2 not 8-design\] Let $D_{2m+2}^{6m+2}$ be the support $t$-design of the minimum weight of an extremal Type IV code of length $n=6m+2$.
1. If $t \geq 4$, then $D_{2m+2}^{6m+2}$ is a $5$-design and $m$ must be $11$.
2. $D_{2m+2}^{6m+2}$ is never an $8$-design.
\(1) By Theorem \[thm:[Calderbank-Delsarte]{}\] (2), $D_{2m+2}^{6m+2}$ is a $5$-design if $t \geq 4$. If $D_{2m+2}^{6m+2}$ is a $5$-design, by Lemma \[lem: divisible\], $$\lambda_{4}=\frac{2m-1}{6m-1}\frac{1}{3}\binom{3m}{m} \mbox{ and }
\lambda_{5}=\frac{(2m-1)(2m-2)}{(6m-1)(6m-2)}\frac{1}{3}\binom{3m}{m}$$ are positive integers. By a computation for $m \leq 19$, if $\lambda_{4}$ and $\lambda_{5}$ are positive integers, then we have $m=11$.
\(2) For $m=11$, we have checked that $$\begin{aligned}
\lambda_{6}&=\frac{(2m-1)(2m-2)(2m-3)}{(6m-1)(6m-2)(6m-3)}\frac{1}{3}\binom{3m}{m},\mbox{ and }\\
\lambda_{7}&=\frac{(2m-1)(2m-2)(2m-3)(2m-4)}{(6m-1)(6m-2)(6m-3)(6m-4)}\frac{1}{3}\binom{3m}{m}\end{aligned}$$ are positive integers and $$\lambda_{8}=\frac{(2m-1)(2m-2)(2m-3)(2m-4)(2m-5)}{(6m-1)(6m-2)(6m-3)(6m-4)(6m-5)}\frac{1}{3}\binom{3m}{m}$$ is not a positive integer. Therefore, by Lemma \[lem: divisible\], $D_{2m+2}^{6m+2}$ is never an $8$-design.
For $t \geq 6$, we give the following proposition.
\[prop:type4 6m+2 harm\] Let $D_{w}^{6m+2}$ be the support $t$-design of weight $w$ of an extremal Type IV code of length $n=6m+2$.
1. All $D_{w}^{6m+2}$ are $6$-designs simultaneously, or none of $D_{w}^{6m+2}$ is a $6$-design.
2. All $D_{w}^{6m+2}$ are $7$-designs simultaneously, or none of $D_{w}^{6m+2}$ is a $7$-design.
3. In the case $m=11$. All $D_{w}^{68}$ are $8$-designs simultaneously, or none of $D_{w}^{68}$ is an $8$-design.
Let $C$ be an extremal Type IV $[6m+2,3m+1,2m+2]$ code.
\(1) Let us assume that $t=6$. Then by the Theorem \[thm:invariant\] (2) we have $W_{C,f}(x,y) =c(f) (xy)^{6} Z_{C,f} (x,y)$, where $c(f)$ is a linear function from Harm$_{t}$ to ${{\mathbb R}}$ and $Z_{C,f} (x,y) \in I_{G_{4},\chi_{0,0}}$. By Theorem \[thm:invariant\] (2), $Z_{C,f} (x,y)$ can be written in the following form: $$Z_{C,f}(x,y) = \sum_{i=0}^{m}a_{i}h_{2}^{3(m-i)-5} h_{6}^{i}.$$ Since the minimum weight of $C$ is $2m+2$, we have $a_{i}=0$ for $i \neq m-2$. Therefore, $W_{C,f}(x,y)$ can be written in the following form: $$\begin{aligned}
W_{C,f}(x,y) &=c(f) (xy)^{6} h_{2} h_{6}^{m-2} \\
& =c(f) (xy)^{6} y^{2m-4} (x^{2}+3y^{2}) (x^{2}-y^{2})^{2m-4}. \end{aligned}$$
By Lemma \[lem:poly. zero 2\] (1), the coefficients of $x^{4m-6-2i}y^{2i}$ in $(x^{2}+3y^{2}) (x^{2}-y^{2})^{2m-4}$ are not equal to $0$ for $0 \leq i \leq 2m-3$ since $2m-4 \neq 4i-1$. Therefore, all $D_{w}^{6m+2}$ are $6$-designs simultaneously, or none of $D_{w}^{6m+2}$ is a $6$-design.
\(2) Let us assume that $t=7$. Then by the Theorem \[thm:invariant\] (2) we have $W_{C,f}(x,y) =c(f) (xy)^{7} Z_{C,f} (x,y)$, where $c(f)$ is a linear function from Harm$_{t}$ to ${{\mathbb R}}$ and $Z_{C,f} (x,y) \in I_{G_{4},\chi_{1,1}}$. By Theorem \[thm:invariant\] (2), $Z_{C,f} (x,y)$ can be written in the following form: $$Z_{C,f}(x,y) = q_{3}r_{3}\sum_{i=0}^{m}a_{i}h_{2}^{3(m-i)-9} h_{6}^{i}.$$ Since the minimum weight of $C$ is $2m+2$, we have $a_{i}=0$ for $i \neq m-3$. Therefore, $W_{C,f}(x,y)$ can be written in the following form: $$\begin{aligned}
W_{C,f}(x,y) &=c(f) (xy)^{7} q_{3}r_{3} h_{6}^{m-3} \\
& =c(f) (xy)^{7} y^{2m-5} (x^{3}-9xy^{2}) (x^{2}-y^{2})^{2m-5}. \end{aligned}$$
By Lemma \[lem:poly. zero 2\] (2), the coefficients of $x^{4m-7-2i}y^{2i}$ in $(x^{3}-9xy^{2}) (x^{2}-y^{2})^{2m-5}$ are not equal to $0$ for $0 \leq i \leq 2m-4$. Therefore, all $D_{w}^{6m+2}$ are $7$-designs simultaneously, or none of $D_{w}^{6m+2}$ is a $7$-design.
\(3) Let us assume that $t=8$. Then by the Theorem \[thm:invariant\] (2) we have $W_{C,f}(x,y) =c(f) (xy)^{8} Z_{C,f} (x,y)$, where $c(f)$ is a linear function from Harm$_{t}$ to ${{\mathbb R}}$ and $Z_{C,f} (x,y) \in I_{G_{4},\chi_{0,0}}$. By Theorem \[thm:invariant\] (2), $Z_{C,f} (x,y)$ can be written in the following form: $$Z_{C,f}(x,y) = \sum_{i=0}^{m}a_{i}h_{2}^{3(m-i)-7} h_{6}^{i}.$$ Since the minimum weight of $C$ is $2m+2$, we have $a_{i}=0$ for $i \neq m-3$. Therefore, $W_{C,f}(x,y)$ can be written in the following form: $$\begin{aligned}
W_{C,f}(x,y) &=c(f) (xy)^{8} h_{2}^{2} h_{6}^{m-3} \\
& =c(f) (xy)^{8} y^{2m-6} (x^{2}+3y^{2})^{2} (x^{2}-y^{2})^{2m-6}. \end{aligned}$$
By Lemma \[lem:poly. zero 2\] (3), if the coefficients of $x^{4m-8-2i}y^{2i}$ in $(x^{2}+3y^{2})^{2} (x^{2}-y^{2})^{2m-6}$ are equal to $0$, then $48(2m-6)+112$ is a square number. In the case $m=11$, $48(2m-6)+112=880$ is not a square number. Therefore, all $D_{w}^{68}$ are $8$-designs simultaneously, or none of $D_{w}^{68}$ is an $8$-design.
By Proposition \[prop:type4 6m+2 not 8-design\] and \[prop:type4 6m+2 harm\], we obtain the following theorem.
\[thm:main thm 6m+2\] Let $D_{w}^{6m+2}$ be the support $t$-design of weight $w$ of an extremal Type IV code of length $n=6m+2$ $($$m \leq 19$$)$.
1. If $D_{w}^{6m+2}$ becomes a $5$-design for any $w$, then $m$ must be $11$.
2. In the case $m=11$, $D_{w}^{68}$ is a $3,5,6$ or $7$-design for any $w$.
3. $D_{w}^{6m+2}$ is never an $8$-design for any $w$.
Thus the proof of Theorem \[thm:main upper bound IV\] (2) is completed.
Case for $n=6m+4$ {#sec: case for n=6m+4}
-----------------
In this section, we consider the case of extremal Type IV $[6m+4,3m+2,2m+2]$ codes ($m \leq 21$). Let $C$ be an extremal Type IV $[6m+4,3m+2,2m+2]$ code, and $D_{2m+2}^{6m+4}$ be the support (with duplicates omitted) design of the minimum weight of $C$. By [@MOSW1978 Theorem 14], the number of codewords of minimum nonzero weight of $C$ is equal to $$3\binom{3m+2}{m+1}.$$ Therefore, by the Assmus–Mattson theorem, $D_{2m+2}^{6m+4}$ is a $1$-design with parameters $$\left(6m+4,2m+2,\binom{3m+1}{m} \right).$$
\[prop:type4 6m+4 not 6-design\] Let $D_{2m+2}^{6m+4}$ be the support $t$-design of the minimum weight of an extremal Type IV code of length $n=6m+4$.
1. \[[(1)]{}\] If $D_{2m+2}^{6m+4}$ is a $3$-design, then $m$ must be in the set\
$\{3,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21\}$.
2. If $D_{2m+2}^{6m+4}$ is a $4$-design, then $m$ must be in the set $\{ 9,14,19 \}$.
3. \[[(3)]{}\] If $D_{2m+2}^{6m+4}$ is a $5$-design, then $m$ must be in the set $\{ 14,19 \}$.
4. \[[(4)]{}\] $D_{2m+2}^{6m+4}$ is never a $6$-design.
\(1) By Theorem \[thm:[Calderbank-Delsarte]{}\] (2), $D_{2m+2}^{6m+4}$ is a $3$-design if $t \geq 2$. If $m \in \{1,2,4,13\}$, then $D_{2m+2}^{6m+4}$ is not a $3$-design.
For $m\in \{1,4,13\}$. we have checked that both $$\lambda_{2}=\frac{2m+1}{6m+3}\binom{3m+1}{m} \mbox{ or }
\lambda_{3}=\frac{(2m+1)2m}{(6m+3)(6m+2)}\binom{3m+1}{m}$$ are not positive integers.
For $m=2$, it is known that there is no $3$-$(16,6,2)$ design by [@Brouwer1977].
\(2) If $D_{2m+2}^{6m+4}$ is a $4$-design, $$\lambda_{4}=\frac{(2m+1)2m(2m-1)}{(6m+3)(6m+2)(6m+1)}\binom{3m+1}{m}$$ is a positive integer. By a computation for $m \leq 21$, if $\lambda_{4}$ is a positive integer, then we have $m \in \{ 9,14,19 \}$.
\(3) For $m \in \{ 9,14,19 \}$, if $$\lambda_{5}=\frac{(2m+1)2m(2m-1)(2m-2)}{(6m+3)(6m+2)(6m+1)6m}\binom{3m+1}{m}$$ is a positive integer, then $m \in \{ 14,19 \}$.
\(4) We have checked that $$\lambda_{6}=\frac{(2m+1)2m(2m-1)(2m-2)(2m-3)}{(6m+3)(6m+2)(6m+1)6m(6m-1)}\binom{3m+1}{m}$$ is not a positive integer for $m \in \{ 14,19 \}$.
For $t \geq 4$, we give the following proposition.
\[prop:type4 6m+4 harm\] Let $D_{w}^{6m+4}$ be the support $t$-design of weight $w$ of an extremal Type IV code of length $n=6m+4$.
1. All $D_{w}^{6m+4}$ are $4$-designs simultaneously, or none of $D_{w}^{6m+4}$ is a $4$-design.
2. All $D_{w}^{6m+4}$ are $5$-designs simultaneously, or none of $D_{w}^{6m+4}$ is a $5$-design.
3. If $m\in \{ 14,19 \}$, all $D_{w}^{6m+4}$ are $6$-designs simultaneously, or none of $D_{w}^{6m+4}$ is a $6$-design.
Let $C$ be an extremal Type IV $[6m+4,3m+2,2m+2]$ code.
\(1) Let us assume that $t=4$. Then by the Theorem \[thm:invariant\] (2) we have $W_{C,f}(x,y) =c(f) (xy)^{4} Z_{C,f} (x,y)$, where $c(f)$ is a linear function from Harm$_{t}$ to ${{\mathbb R}}$ and $Z_{C,f} (x,y) \in I_{G_{4},\chi_{0,0}}$. By Theorem \[thm:invariant\] (2), $Z_{C,f} (x,y)$ can be written in the following form: $$Z_{C,f}(x,y) = \sum_{i=0}^{m}a_{i}h_{2}^{3(m-i)-2} h_{6}^{i}.$$ Since the minimum weight of $C$ is $2m+2$, we have $a_{i}=0$ for $i \neq m-1$. Therefore, $W_{C,f}(x,y)$ can be written in the following form: $$\begin{aligned}
W_{C,f}(x,y) &=c(f) (xy)^{4} h_{2} h_{6}^{m-1} \\
& =c(f) (xy)^{4} y^{2m-2} (x^{2}+3y^{2}) (x^{2}-y^{2})^{2m-2}. \end{aligned}$$
By Lemma \[lem:poly. zero 2\] (1), the coefficients of $x^{4m-2-2i}y^{2i}$ in $(x^{2}+3y^{2}) (x^{2}-y^{2})^{2m-2}$ are not equal to $0$ for $0 \leq i \leq 2m-1$ since $2m-2 \neq 4i-1$. Therefore, all $D_{w}^{6m+4}$ are $4$-designs simultaneously, or none of $D_{w}^{6m+4}$ is a $4$-design.
\(2) Let us assume that $t=5$. Then by the Theorem \[thm:invariant\] (2) we have $W_{C,f}(x,y) =c(f) (xy)^{5} Z_{C,f} (x,y)$, where $c(f)$ is a linear function from Harm$_{t}$ to ${{\mathbb R}}$ and $Z_{C,f} (x,y) \in I_{G_{4},\chi_{1,1}}$. By Theorem \[thm:invariant\] (2), $Z_{C,f} (x,y)$ can be written in the following form: $$Z_{C,f}(x,y) = q_{3}r_{3}\sum_{i=0}^{m}a_{i}h_{2}^{3(m-i)-6} h_{6}^{i}.$$ Since the minimum weight of $C$ is $2m+2$, we have $a_{i}=0$ for $i \neq m-2$. Therefore, $W_{C,f}(x,y)$ can be written in the following form: $$\begin{aligned}
W_{C,f}(x,y) &=c(f) (xy)^{5} q_{3}r_{3} h_{6}^{m-2} \\
& =c(f) (xy)^{5} y^{2m-3} (x^{3}-9xy^{2}) (x^{2}-y^{2})^{2m-3}. \end{aligned}$$
By Lemma \[lem:poly. zero 2\] (2), the coefficients of $x^{4m-3-2i}y^{2i}$ in $(x^{3}-9xy^{2}) (x^{2}-y^{2})^{2m-3}$ are not equal to $0$ for $0 \leq i \leq 2m-2$. Therefore, all $D_{w}^{6m+4}$ are $5$-designs simultaneously, or none of $D_{w}^{6m+4}$ is a $5$-design.
\(3) Let us assume that $t=6$. Then by the Theorem \[thm:invariant\] (2) we have $W_{C,f}(x,y) =c(f) (xy)^{6} Z_{C,f} (x,y)$, where $c(f)$ is a linear function from Harm$_{t}$ to ${{\mathbb R}}$ and $Z_{C,f} (x,y) \in I_{G_{4},\chi_{0,0}}$. By Theorem \[thm:invariant\] (2), $Z_{C,f} (x,y)$ can be written in the following form: $$Z_{C,f}(x,y) = \sum_{i=0}^{m}a_{i}h_{2}^{3(m-i)-4} h_{6}^{i}.$$ Since the minimum weight of $C$ is $2m+2$, we have $a_{i}=0$ for $i \neq m-2$. Therefore, $W_{C,f}(x,y)$ can be written in the following form: $$\begin{aligned}
W_{C,f}(x,y) &=c(f) (xy)^{6} h_{2}^{2} h_{6}^{m-2} \\
& =c(f) (xy)^{6} y^{2m-4} (x^{2}+3y^{2})^{2} (x^{2}-y^{2})^{2m-4}. \end{aligned}$$
By Lemma \[lem:poly. zero 2\] (3), if the coefficients of $x^{4m-4-2i}y^{2i}$ in $(x^{2}+3y^{2})^{2} (x^{2}-y^{2})^{2m-4}$ are equal to $0$, then $48(2m-4)+112$ is a square number. If $m=14$ or $19$, $48(2m-4)+112=1264$ or $48(2m-4)+112=1744$ is not a square number. Therefore, if $m\in \{ 14,19 \}$, all $D_{w}^{6m+4}$ are $6$-designs simultaneously, or none of $D_{w}^{6m+4}$ is a $6$-design.
By Proposition \[prop:type4 6m+4 not 6-design\] and \[prop:type4 6m+4 harm\], we obtain the following theorem.
\[thm:main thm 6m+4\] Let $D_{w}^{6m+4}$ be the support $t$-design of weight $w$ of an extremal Type IV code of length $n=6m+4$ $($$m \leq 21$$)$.
1. If $D_{w}^{6m+4}$ becomes a $3$-design for any $w$, then $m$ must be in the set\
$\{3,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21\}$.
2. If $D_{w}^{6m+4}$ becomes a $4$-design for any $w$, then $m$ must be in the set $\{ 9,14,19 \}$.
3. In the case $m=9$, $D_{w}^{58}$ is a $1,3$ or $4$-design for any $w$. If $m \in \{ 14,19 \}$, $D_{w}^{6m+4}$ is a $1,3,4$ or $5$-design for any $w$.
4. $D_{w}^{6m+4}$ is never a $6$-design for any $w$.
Thus the proof of Theorem \[thm:main upper bound IV\] (3) is completed.
Acknowledgments {#acknowledgments .unnumbered}
===============
The authors are supported by JSPS KAKENHI (18K03217).
[999]{}
E.F. Assmus, Jr. and H.F. Mattson, Jr., New $5$-designs, [*J. Combin. Theory*]{} [**6**]{} (1969), 122–151.
C. Bachoc, On harmonic weight enumerators of binary codes, [*Des. Codes Cryptogr.*]{} [**18**]{} (1999), no. 1-3, 11–28.
C. Bachoc, Harmonic weight enumerators of nonbinary codes and MacWilliams identities, [*Codes and association schemes*]{} (Piscataway, NJ, 1999), 1–23, DIMACS Ser. Discrete Math. Theoret. Comput. Sci., 56, Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI, 2001.
E. Bannai, M. Koike, M. Shinohara and M. Tagami, Spherical designs attached to extremal lattices and the modulo $p$ property of Fourier coefficients of extremal modular forms, [*Mosc. Math. J.*]{} [**6**]{} (2006), 225–264.
A.E. Brouwer, The $t$-designs with $v < 18$, Math. Centr. report ZN76, Amsterdam (Aug. 1977).
A.R. Calderbank, and P. Delsarte, On error-correcting codes and invariant linear forms, *SIAM J. Disc. Math.* [**6**]{} (1993), No.1, 1–23.
P.J. Cameron, J.H. van Lint, [*Designs, graphs, codes and their links*]{}, London Mathematical Society Student Texts, 22. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1991.
J.H. Conway, N.J.A. Sloane, [*Sphere Packings Lattices and Groups*]{}, third edition, Springer, New York, 1999.
P. Delsarte, [Hahn polynomials, discrete harmonics, and $t$-designs]{}, [*SIAM J. Appl. Math.*]{} [**34**]{} (1978), no. 1, 157–166.
N. Horiguchi, T. Miezaki and H. Nakasora, On the support designs of extremal binary doubly even self-dual codes, *Des. Codes Cryptogr.*, [**72**]{} (2014), 529–537.
F.J. MacWilliams, A.M. Odlyzko, N.J.A. Sloane and H.N. Ward, Self-dual codes over $GF(4)$, *J. Combin. Theory Ser. A* [**25**]{} (1978), 288–318
C.L. Mallows and N.J.A. Sloane, An upper bound for self-dual codes, *Inform. Control* [**22**]{} (1973), 188–200.
T. Miezaki, A. Munemasa and H. Nakasora, A note on Assmus–Mattson type theorems, in preparation.
T. Miezaki and H. Nakasora, An upper bound of the value of $t$ of the support $t$-designs of extremal binary doubly even self-dual codes, *Des. Codes Cryptogr.*, [**79**]{} (2016), 37–46.
T. Miezaki and H. Nakasora, The support designs of the triply even binary codes of length $48$, *J. Combin. Designs*, [**27**]{} (2019), 673–681.
Wolfram Research, Inc., Mathematica, Version 11.2, Champaign, IL (2017).
S. Zhang, On the nonexistence of extremal self-dual codes, [*Discrete Appl. Math.*]{} [**91**]{} (1999), 277–286.
[^1]: Faculty of Education, University of the Ryukyus, Okinawa 903–0213, Japan, E-mail: [email protected] (Corresponding author)
[^2]: Institute for Promotion of Higher Education, Kobe Gakuin University, Kobe 651–2180, Japan, E-mail: [email protected]
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'Critical observability is a property of cyber-physical systems to detect whether the current state belongs to a set of critical states. In safety-critical applications, critical states model operations that may be unsafe or of a particular interest. De Santis et al. introduced critical observability for linear switching systems, and Pola et al. adapted it for discrete-event systems, focusing on algorithmic complexity. We study the computational complexity of deciding critical observability for systems modeled as (networks of) finite-state automata and Petri nets. We show that deciding critical observability is (i) NL-complete for finite automata, that is, it is efficiently verifiable on parallel computers, (ii) PSPACE-complete for networks of finite automata, that is, it is very unlikely solvable in polynomial time, and (iii) undecidable for labeled Petri nets, but becoming decidable if the set of critical states (markings) is finite or co-finite, in which case the problem is as hard as the non-reachability problem for Petri nets.'
author:
- 'Tom['' a]{}[š]{} Masopust[^1]'
bibliography:
- 'mybib.bib'
title: Critical Observability for Automata and Petri Nets
---
Discrete-event systems; Critical observability; Finite automata; Networks of finite automata; Petri nets; Complexity.
Introduction
============
The state estimation problem is one of the central problems in cyber-physical systems that is of importance, e.g., in safety-critical applications where we need to estimate the current state of a system in the case we have an incomplete information of its behavior. Eminent examples of the state estimation problem are, for example, [*fault diagnosability*]{} [@SantisB17; @ZaytoonL13; @YinLafortune17] asking whether a fault event has occurred and whether its occurrence can be detected within a finite delay, [*opacity*]{} [@JacobLF16; @TongLSG17; @Badouel2007; @Lin2011; @Bryans2005; @SabooriHadjicostis2007; @WuLafortune2013], a property related to the privacy and security analysis, asking whether the system reveals its secret to a passive observer (an intruder), [*detectability*]{} [@ShuLin2011; @ShuLin2013; @Zhang17] asking whether the current and subsequent states can be determined based on observations, [*marking observability*]{} [@GiuaS02] concerning the estimation of the marking of a Petri net, and [*predictability*]{} [@Fiore2018; @GencL09] concerning the future occurrence of a state or of an event.
We study the verification complexity of such a property called [*critical observability*]{} asking whether the current state of the system, determined based on incomplete observations, is critical. De Santis et al. [@DeSantis2006] introduced the problem for linear switching systems, and Pola et al. [@PolaSBP17] adapted it for (networks of) finite automata. Critical states are of particular interest in safety-critical applications to model operations that may be unsafe or of a specific interest, where, for instance, the prompt recovery of human errors and device failures are of importance to ensure safety of the system, such as the air traffic management systems [@DiBenedetto2005; @DeSantis2006; @SantisB17].
Pola et al. focused on the algorithmic complexity of checking critical observability for systems modeled as networks of finite automata, using the techniques of decentralization and bisimulation. We investigate the computational complexity of this problem for (networks of) finite automata and for labeled Petri nets. Our contributions are as follows.
We show that the problem of deciding critical observability of finite automata is NL-complete, which means that it can be efficiently verified on a parallel computer [@AroraBarak2009]. Pola et al. showed that critical observability and strong detectability of Shu et al. [@ShuLinYing2007] are different properties. Our result reveals that they are equivalent under the deterministic logarithmic-space reduction [@masopust2018], that is, critical observability can be reduced to strong detectability by a deterministic algorithm working in logarithmic space, and vice versa. Therefore, any abstraction technique or approximation algorithm for strong detectability can be used for critical observability as well, and vice versa.
For systems modeled as a network of finite automata, we show that deciding critical observability is PSPACE-complete, and hence there is very unlikely a polynomial-time algorithm solving the problem.
Finally, we show that critical observability is undecidable for systems modeled by labeled Petri nets, but that it becomes decidable if the set of critical states (markings) is finite or co-finite (a set is co-finite if its complement is finite). We show that, in this case, the problem is as hard as the non-reachability problem for Petri nets. The complexity of reachability for Petri nets has recently been shown to be non-elementary [@WojtekNotElem].
Preliminaries and Definitions
=============================
For a set $A$, $|A|$ denotes its cardinality and $2^{A}$ its power set. An alphabet $\Sigma$ is a finite nonempty set of events. A word over $\Sigma$ is a finite sequence of events; $\varepsilon$ denotes the empty word. Let $\Sigma^*$ be the set of all words over $\Sigma$. The alphabet $\Sigma$ is partitioned into two disjoint subsets $\Sigma_o$ of [*observable*]{} and $\Sigma_{uo}=\Sigma\setminus\Sigma_o$ of [*unobservable*]{} events. The partitioning induces a projection $P\colon \Sigma^* \to \Sigma_o^*$, which is a morphism defined by $P(a) = \varepsilon$ for $a\in \Sigma\setminus \Sigma_o$, and $P(a)= a$ for $a\in \Sigma_o$. The action of $P$ on a word $\sigma_1\sigma_2\cdots\sigma_n$ is to erase all events that do not belong to $\Sigma_o$, i.e., $P(\sigma_1\sigma_2\cdots\sigma_n)=P(\sigma_1) P(\sigma_2) \cdots P(\sigma_n)$.
We now briefly review the necessary notions of complexity theory and refer the reader to the literature for details [@AroraBarak2009; @sipser]. A [*(decision) problem*]{} is a yes-no question. A problem is [*decidable*]{} if there is an algorithm that solves it. Complexity theory classifies decidable problems into classes based on time or space an algorithm needs to solve the problem. We consider NL, NP, PSPACE, and EXPSPACE denoting the classes of problems solvable by nondeterministic logarithmic-space, nondeterministic polynomial-time, deterministic polynomial-space, and deterministic exponential-space algorithms, respectively. A problem is NL-complete if it belongs to NL and every problem from NL can be reduced to it in deterministic logarithmic space. Similarly, for $X$ denoting NP, PSPACE, or EXPSPACE, a problem is X-complete if (i) it belongs to X and (ii) every problem from X can be reduced to it in deterministic polynomial time. Condition (i) is known as [*membership*]{} and (ii) as [*hardness*]{}. By the space hierarchy theorem [@StearnsHL65], NL is a strict subclass of PSPACE and PSPACE is a strict subclass of EXPSPACE. Moreover, NL is the class of problems efficiently solvable on parallel computers [@AroraBarak2009]. For an EXPSPACE-complete problem, there is neither a polynomial-space nor a polynomial-time algorithm. It is believed that there are no polynomial-time algorithms for NP-complete problems.
Critical Observability for Automata
===================================
We assume that the reader is familiar with the basic notions and concepts of automata theory [@sipser; @Lbook].
A [*nondeterministic finite automaton*]{} (NFA) is a quintuple $G = (Q,\Sigma,\delta,I,F)$, where $Q$ is a finite set of states, $I\subseteq Q$ is a nonempty set of initial states, $F \subseteq Q$ is a set of marked states, and $\delta \colon Q\times\Sigma \to 2^Q$ is a transition function that can be extended to the domain $2^Q\times\Sigma^*$ by induction. The [*language generated by $G$*]{} is the set $L(G) = \{w\in \Sigma^* \mid \delta(I,w)\neq\emptyset\}$ and the [*language marked by $G$*]{} is the set $L_m(G) = \{w\in \Sigma^* \mid \delta(I,w)\cap F \neq\emptyset\}$. The NFA $G$ is [*deterministic*]{} (DFA) if it has a unique initial state ($|I|=1$) and no nondeterministic transitions ($|\delta(q,a)|\le 1$ for every $q\in Q$ and $a \in \Sigma$). We say that a DFA is [*total*]{} if its transition function is total, that is, $|\delta(q,a)|=1$ for every $q\in Q$ and $a\in\Sigma$.
Given an NFA $G=(Q,\Sigma,\delta,I,F)$ and a set of critical states $C\subseteq Q$. Pola et al. [@PolaSBP17] define $G$ to be critically observable with respect to $C$ if $\delta(i,w) \subseteq C$ or $\delta(i,w) \subseteq Q\setminus C$ for any initial state $i \in I$ and any $w \in L(G)$. They further assume that $I\subseteq C$ or $I\subseteq Q\setminus C$, justifying this assumption by the claim that if $G$ has an initial state that is critical and another initial state that is not critical, then $G$ is never critically observable with respect to $C$. This is misleading as illustrated in Fig. \[fig01\].
\(a) [$0$]{}; (aa) \[right of=a\] [$1$]{};
To fix this inconsistency, we can either assume, without loss of generality, that NFAs possess a single initial state, or restate the definition so that $G$ is critically observable with respect to $C$ if $\delta(I,w) \subseteq C$ or $\delta(I,w) \subseteq Q\setminus C$ for any $w \in L(G)$. Then the claim holds and we may assume that $I \subseteq C$ or $I \subseteq Q\setminus C$.
Pola et al. [@PolaSBP17] also assume that $I\neq C$ and claim that if $I=C$, then $G$ ”is critically observable and no further analysis for the detection of critical states is needed.“ This claim is again misleading as illustrated in Fig. \[fig02\], and hence we drop this assumption in our paper.
\(a) [$0$]{}; (aa) \[right of=a\] [$1$]{}; (a) edge\[loop above\] node[$a$]{} (a) (a) edge node[$a$]{} (aa);
We further point out that Pola et al. [@PolaSBP17] investigated NFAs with full observation, which includes NFAs with partial observation under the fact that every NFA with partial observation can be transformed to an NFA with full observation. Although it is correct for a single NFA, requiring some computational (polynomial) effort, and hence not suitable for our complexity analysis, it causes serious troubles for networks of automata as we discuss in Section \[section\_networks\]. Therefore, we do not use this simplification and extend the definition to systems with partial observation.
Let $G=(Q,\Sigma,\delta,I,F)$ be an NFA, $\Sigma_o\subseteq\Sigma$ be the set of observable events, and $C\subseteq Q$ be a set of critical states. Let $P\colon \Sigma^* \to \Sigma_o^*$ denote the induced projection. System $G$ is [*critically observable*]{} with respect to $\Sigma_o$ and $C$ if $\delta(I,P^{-1}P(w)) \subseteq C$ or $\delta(I,P^{-1}P(w)) \subseteq Q\setminus C$ for any $w \in L(G)$, where $\delta(I,P^{-1}P(w))= \cup_{v\in P^{-1}P(w)} \delta(I,v)$. If $P$ is an identity, that is, all events are observable, we simply say that $G$ is critically observable with respect to $C$.
Single NFA Models
-----------------
We first characterize critical observability in terms of reachability in a composition of two copies of the NFA, and then use this characterization to check critical observability in nondeterministic logarithmic space. Our result reveals that the algorithmic complexity of deciding critical observability is at most quadratic in the number of states.
Let $G=(Q,\Sigma,\delta,I,F)$ be an NFA and $\Sigma_o\subseteq\Sigma$ be the set of observable events. We define a modified parallel composition of two copies of $G$, denoted by $G\interleave G$, as the classical parallel composition where observable events behave as shared events and unobservable events as private events. Formally, $G \interleave G$ is the accessible part of NFA $(Q\times Q, \Sigma, f, I\times I, F\times F)$, where $$f((x,y),e) =
\left\{
\begin{array}{l@{\ }l@{}}
\delta(x,e) \times \delta(y,e) & \text{if } e\in \Sigma_o\\
(\delta(x,e)\times \{y\}) \cup (\{x\} \times \delta(y,e)) & \text{if } e\notin \Sigma_o
\end{array}
\right.$$
Unlike the classical parallel composition [@Lbook], if $G$ is a DFA, the composition $G\interleave G$ is not necessarily a DFA.
We now formulate a lemma relating critical observability to reachability in $G\interleave G$.
\[lemma3\] Let $G=(Q,\Sigma,\delta,I,F)$ be an NFA, $\Sigma_o\subseteq\Sigma$ be the set of observable events, and $C\subseteq Q$ be a set of critical states. Then $G$ is not critically observable with respect to $\Sigma_o$ and $C$ iff there is a reachable state in $G\interleave G$ that belongs to the set $C\times (Q\setminus C)$.
Let $P$ denote the induced projection from $\Sigma$ to $\Sigma_o$. If $G$ is not critically observable, then there are $w\in L(G)$, $x\in C$, and $y\in Q\setminus C$ such that $\{x,y\}\subseteq \delta(I,P^{-1}P(w))$. By the definition of $\interleave$, state $(x,y)$ is reachable in $G\interleave G$.
For the opposite, we assume that $(x,y)\in C\times (Q\setminus C)$ is reachable in $G\interleave G$. Then, there are $w_1,w_2\in L(G)$ such that $x\in \delta(I,w_1)$, $y\in \delta(I,w_2)$, and $P(w_1)=P(w_2)$. Since $w_1,w_2\in P^{-1}P(w_2)$, we have that $\{x,y\}\subseteq \delta(I,P^{-1}P(w_2))$, which shows that $G$ is not critically observable.
The use of $G \interleave G$ in Lemma \[lemma3\] suggests an algorithm deciding critical observability in time quadratic in the number of states of the NFA.
We now prove our main result for finite-automata models.
\[thm4\] Deciding critical observability for systems modeled by NFAs is NL-complete. It remains NL-hard even if the NFAs are with full observation over a unary alphabet and the set of critical states is a singleton.
Let $G=(Q,\Sigma,\delta,I,F)$ be an NFA and $\Sigma_o\subseteq\Sigma$ be a set of observable events. By Lemma \[lemma3\], $G$ is not critically observable iff there is a reachable state in $G\interleave G$ of the form $C\times (Q\setminus C)$. The nondeterministic algorithm first guesses a state of $C\times (Q\setminus C)$ and then verifies, using the nondeterministic search strategy, that the guessed state is reachable in $G\interleave G$. In this strategy, the algorithm stores only the current state of $G\interleave G$, which in binary requires logarithmic space, and hence the algorithm runs in logarithmic space; cf. the literature for details how to check reachability in NL [@AroraBarak2009; @Masopust2018nb]. Thus, deciding whether $G$ is not critically observable belongs to NL. Since NL is closed under complement [@Immerman88; @Szelepcsenyi87], deciding critical observability belongs to NL as well.
\(1) [$s$]{}; (2) \[above of=1,node distance=.8cm\] [$p$]{}; (5) \[right of=2,label=[right:$D$]{}\] [$q$]{}; (3) \[right of=1,node distance=2.7cm\] [$t$]{}; (4) \[right of=3,node distance=1.7cm\] [$r$]{}; (2) edge node\[sloped,above\] [$a$]{} (5) (3) edge node\[pos=0.5,sloped,above\] [$a$]{} (4) (3) edge\[loop above\] node [$a$]{} (3) (1) edge\[style=[decorate, decoration=[snake,amplitude=.4mm,segment length=1.7mm,post length=1.3mm]{}]{}\] node[?]{} (3) ; ;
[background]{} (2.north -| 3.east) + (0.1,0.1) node (a) ; (1.south -| 1.west) + (-0.3,-0.1) node (b) ; (a) rectangle (b);
To show NL-hardness, we reduce [*DAG non-reachability*]{} [@ChoH91]: Given a directed acyclic graph $D=(V,E)$ and nodes $s,t\in V$, is $t$ not reachable from $s$? From $D$, we construct the NFA $G=(Q,\{a\},\delta,s,Q)$, where $Q=V\cup\{r\}$, $r\notin V$ is a new state, and $a$ is an observable event. For every $(p,q)\in E$, we add the transition $(p,a,q)$ to $\delta$. Then, we add the transitions $(t,a,t)$ and $(t,a,r)$ to $\delta$, cf. Fig. \[fig1\]. We show that $t$ is not reachable from $s$ in $D$ iff $G$ is critically observable with respect to $\{a\}$ and $\{t\}$. If $t$ is not reachable from $s$ in $D$, then, for every $w\in\{a\}^*$, $t\notin \delta(s,w)$, which means that $\delta(s,w) \subseteq Q\setminus \{t\}$, and hence $G$ is critically observable. If $t$ is reachable from $s$, let $w$ be such that $t\in \delta(s,w)$. Then $\{t,r\} \subseteq \delta(s,wa)$, and hence $G$ is not critically observable.
If, in the NL-hardness proof, we do not add the transition $(t,a,t)$, replace the transition $(t,a,r)$ by a transition $(t,u,r)$, where $u$ is unobservable, and label every other transition with a fresh new observable event, then the construction results in a DFA and we have the following corollary.
Deciding critical observability for DFAs is NL-complete even if the DFA has a single unobservable event and the set of critical states is a singleton.
The unobservable event is unavoidable because any DFA with full observation is always in a unique state, and hence trivially critically observable.
Networks of Automata Models {#section_networks}
---------------------------
Large-scale systems are often modeled as a composition of local modules $\{G_1,G_2,\dots,G_n\}$ for $n\ge 2$, where $G_i$ is an NFA, i.e., the overall system behaves as $G_1\parallel G_2\parallel \cdots\parallel G_n$. We call such a system a [*network of NFAs*]{}.
Pola et al. [@PolaSBP17] used observers for checking critical observability. They showed that a decentralized observer for networks of NFAs is isomorphic (denoted by $\approx$) to the composition of local observers. In other words, they showed that $$\begin{aligned}
\label{polaeq}
Obs(G_1 \parallel \ldots \parallel G_n) \approx Obs(G_1) \parallel \ldots \parallel Obs(G_n)
\end{aligned}$$ where $Obs(G)$ denotes the observer of $G$ [@Lbook; @PolaSBP17]. This leads to the decrease of complexity, and Pola et al. [@PolaSBP17 Table 1] showed that the algorithmic complexity of deciding critical observability for networks of NFAs with full observations is single exponential in time and space.
To explain why holds in their setting, notice that they use NFAs with full observations. Therefore, the computation of the observer reduces to the determinisation of an NFA.
However, it is known that does not hold for networks of NFAs with partial observation. This is equivalent to the fact that for two languages $L_1$ and $L_2$ and a projection $P$, we only have $P(L_1\parallel L_2) \subseteq P(L_1) \parallel P(L_2)$ [@wm17]. Therefore, for networks of NFAs with partial observation, considering only NFAs with full observation as in the settings of Pola et al. [@PolaSBP17] oversimplifies the situation as illustrated in Fig. \[fig03\].
[.24]{}
\(1) \[label=[\[anchor=south\]above:$G_1$]{}\] [$0$]{}; (2) \[right of=1\] [$1$]{}; (3) \[right of=2\] [$2$]{}; (1) edge node [$a$]{} (2) (2) edge node [$b$]{} (3) ;
[.24]{}
\(1) \[label=[above:$G_2$]{}\] [$0$]{}; (2) \[right of=1\] [$1$]{}; (3) \[right of=2\] [$2$]{}; (1) edge node [$c$]{} (2) (2) edge node [$a$]{} (3) ;
[0.24]{}
\(1) \[label=[\[anchor=south\]above:$Obs(G_1\parallel G_2)$]{}\] [$0$]{}; (2) \[right of=1\] [$1$]{}; (3) \[right of=2\] [$2$]{}; (1) edge node [$c$]{} (2) (2) edge node [$b$]{} (3) ;
[0.24]{}
\(1) [$0$]{}; (2) \[label=[above:$Obs(G_1)\parallel Obs(G_2)$]{},above right=.1cm and .8cm of 1\] [$1$]{}; (4) \[right of=1,node distance=2.5cm\] [$3$]{}; (3) \[below=.4cm of 2\] [$2$]{}; (1) edge node [$b$]{} (2) (1) edge node [$c$]{} (3) (2) edge node [$c$]{} (4) (3) edge node [$b$]{} (4) ;
Considering automata with partial observation may make the complexity infeasible. For instance, we have shown that deciding detectability, opacity, and A-diagnosability for networks of automata is EXPSPACE-complete [@MasopustYin2017arxiv]. The space hierarchy theorem [@StearnsHL65] then implies that there is neither a polynomial-time nor a polynomial-space algorithm for checking these problems for networks of NFAs.
However, we show that deciding critical observability for networks of NFAs is PSPACE-complete, and hence solvable in polynomial space. Our result thus further generalizes and improves the results of Pola et al. [@PolaSBP17 Table 1], who suggested algorithms that are exponential with respect to both time and space.
\[thm6\] Deciding critical observability for networks of NFAs is PSPACE-complete. It remains PSPACE-hard even if the automata are binary NFAs with full observation, and the set of critical states is a singleton.
Let $\{G_1,G_2,\ldots,G_n\}$ be a network of NFAs where $G_i=(Q_i,\Sigma_i,\delta_i,I_i,F_i)$, and let $C\subseteq Q_1\times\cdots\times Q_n$ be a set of critical states. A nondeterministic polynomial-space algorithm deciding critical observability generalizes that of Theorem \[thm4\] for a single NFA; namely, we consider $G\interleave G$, where $G= \|_{i=1}^{n} G_i$, and the nondeterministic algorithm keeps track of the current state of $G\interleave G$, which in binary requires a polynomial space to store the two $n$-tuples of states, without computing $G$ and $G\interleave G$. Again, the algorithm guesses a state of $C\times (Q\setminus C)$ and uses the nondeterministic search strategy to check that the guessed state is reachable. Since NPSPACE and PSPACE coincide [@Savitch70] and PSPACE is closed under complement, deciding critical observability is in PSPACE.
To show PSPACE-hardness, we reduce the DFA intersection problem [@Kozen77]: Given total DFAs $A_1,\ldots, A_n$ over $\{0,1\}$, is $\cap_{i=1}^{n} L_m(A_i) = \emptyset$? From $A_i=(Q_i,\{0,1\},\delta_i,q_0^i,F_i)$, we construct another DFA $G_i=(Q_i \cup\{s_i\},\{0,1\},\delta_i,q_0^i,F_i)$ by adding a new state $s_i$ and the transition $(p,1,s_i)$ to $\delta_i$ for every $p\in F_i$. We show that $\cap_{i=1}^{n} L_m(A_i)=\emptyset$ iff $G=\|_{i=1}^{n} G_i$ is critically observable with respect to the set $\{(s_1,\ldots,s_n)\}$. If $w\in \cap_{i=1}^{n} L_m(A_i)$, then $s_i\in \delta_i(q_0^i,w1)$, and since $A_i$ is total, $|\delta_i(q_0^i,w1)|\ge 2$, for $i=1,\ldots,n$. Hence $G$ is not critically observable. If $\cap_{i=1}^{n} L_m(A_i)=\emptyset$, then $G$ never reaches a marked state, neither the critical state, and hence $G$ is critically observable.
Actually, PSPACE-hardness holds even if the automata are ternary DFAs with a single unobservable event.
\[cor7\] Deciding critical observability for networks of automata is PSPACE-complete even if the automata are DFAs with three events, one of which is unobservable, and the set of critical states is a singleton.
Membership in PSPACE was shown above. To show PSPACE-hardness, we reduce the DFA intersection problem. Let $A_1,\ldots, A_n$ be total DFAs over $\{0,1\}$. From $A_i=(Q_i,\{0,1\},\delta_i,q_0^i,F_i)$, we construct another DFA $G_i=(Q_i \cup\{s_i\},\{0,1,u\},\delta_i,q_0^i,F_i)$ by adding a new state $s_i$ and the transition $(p,u,s_i)$ to $\delta_i$ for every $p\in F_i$. We show that $\cap_{i=1}^{n} L_m(A_i)=\emptyset$ iff $G=\|_{i=1}^{n} G_i$ is critically observable with respect to $\{(s_1,\ldots,s_n)\}$. If $w\in \cap_{i=1}^{n} L_m(A_i)$, then $s_i\in \delta_i(q_0^i,P^{-1}P(wu))$ and $|\delta_i(q_0^i,P^{-1}P(wu))|\ge 2$, for $i=1,\ldots,n$, because $w\in P^{-1}P(wu)$ and $A_i$ is total, and hence $G$ is not critically observable. If $\cap_{i=1}^{n} L_m(A_i)=\emptyset$, then $G$ never reaches a marked state, neither the critical state, implying that $G$ is critically observable.
The unobservable event used in the previous corollary is unavoidable because any network of DFAs with all events observable is always in a unique state, and hence trivially critically observable.
We now show that two observable events used in Theorem \[thm6\] and Corollary \[cor7\] are necessary to obtain PSPACE-hardness. As shown in Theorem \[thm7\] below, having a single observable event decreases the complexity of the problem.
\[thm7\] Deciding critical observability for a network of unary NFAs is coNP-complete.
Since coNP is the class of problems the complement of which belongs to NP, we prove the claim by showing that the problem whether a system is [*not*]{} critically observable is NP-complete.
To show membership in NP, assume that the system consists of $n$ unary NFAs, each of which has at most $k$ states. Then the parallel composition of the NFAs has at most $2^{kn}$ states. If the system is not critically observable, then there is $0\le\ell\le 2^{kn}$ such that $0^{\ell}$ leads the system to two states one of which is critical and the other is not. A nondeterministic polynomial-time algorithm can guess $\ell$ in binary, which is of polynomial length $O(kn)$, and use the matrix multiplication to compute the set of states reachable under $0^{\ell}$ in polynomial time; cf. the literature for details how to use matrix multiplication [@Masopust2018nb]. Having this set of states, it is easy to verify whether the guess was correct.
To show that the problem whether a system is not critically observable is NP-hard, we reduce the nonempty intersection problem for unary NFAs [@StockmeyerM73]. Let $A_1,\ldots,A_n$ be NFAs over a unary alphabet $\{a\}$. From $A_i=(Q_i,\{a\},\delta_i,I_i,F_i)$, we construct an NFA $G_i=(Q_i\cup\{s_i,t_i\},\{a\},\delta_i,I_i,F_i)$ by adding two new states $s_i$ and $t_i$, and transitions $(p,a,s_i)$ and $(p,a,t_i)$, for every $p\in F_i$. Then $\|_{i=1}^{n} G_i$ is not critically observable with respect to $\{(s_1,\ldots,s_n)\}$ iff $\cap_{i=1}^{n} L_m(A_i)$ is nonempty.
Critical Observability for Petri Nets
=====================================
We assume that the reader is familiar with the basic notions and concepts of Petri nets [@Peterson1981]. Let $\mathbb{N}$ denote the set of all natural numbers (including zero).
A [*Petri net*]{} is a structure $N=(P,T,Pre,Post)$, where $P$ is a finite set of places, $T$ is a finite set of transitions, $P \cup T \neq \emptyset$ and $P \cap T = \emptyset$, and $Pre\colon P \times T \to \mathbb{N}$ and $Post\colon P \times T \to \mathbb{N}$ are the pre- and post-incidence functions specifying the arcs directed from places to transitions and vice versa. A marking is a function $M\colon P \to \mathbb{N}$ assigning to each place a number of tokens. A Petri net system $(N, M_0)$ is the Petri net $N$ with the initial marking $M_0$. A transition $t$ is enabled in a marking $M$ if $M(p) \ge Pre(p,t)$ for every place $p\in P$. If $t$ is enabled, it can fire, resulting in the marking $M(p) - Pre(p,t) + Post(p,t)$ for every $p\in P$. Let $M \xrightarrow{\sigma}_{N}$ denote that the transition sequence $\sigma$ is enabled in marking $M$ of $N$, and $M \xrightarrow{\sigma}_N M'$ that the firing of $\sigma$ results in a marking $M'$. We often omit the subscript $N$ if it is clear from the context. Let $L(N,M_0) = \{ \sigma \in T^* \mid M_0\xrightarrow{\sigma}\}$ denote the set of all transition sequences enabled in marking $M_0$.
A [*labeled Petri net system*]{} is a structure $G=(N,M_0,\Sigma,\ell)$, where $(N,M_0)$ is a Petri net system, $\Sigma$ is an alphabet (a set of labels), and $\ell\colon T \to \Sigma\cup\{{\varepsilon}\}$ is a labeling function that can be extended to $\ell\colon T^* \to \Sigma^*$ by $\ell(\sigma t) = \ell(\sigma)\ell(t)$ for $\sigma \in T^*$ and $t \in T$; we set $\ell(\lambda) = {\varepsilon}$ for $\lambda$ denoting the empty transition sequence. A transition $t$ is observable if $\ell(t)\in\Sigma$ and unobservable otherwise. The language of $G$ is the set $L(G) = \{ \ell(\sigma) \mid \sigma \in L(N,M_0) \}$. A marking $M$ is reachable in $G$ if there is a sequence $\sigma \in T^*$ such that $M_0 \xrightarrow{\sigma} M$. The set of all markings reachable from the initial marking $M_0$ defines the reachability set of $G$, denoted by $R(G)$. For $s\in L(G)$, let $R(G,s) = \{ M \mid \sigma\in L(N,M_0),\, \ell(\sigma)=s,\, M_0\xrightarrow{\sigma}M \}$ be the set of all reachable markings consistent with the observation $s$.
Let $G=(N,M_0,\Sigma,\ell)$ be a labeled Petri net, and let $C$ be a set of critical markings. System $G$ is [*critically observable*]{} with respect to $C$ if $R(G,w) \subseteq C$ or $R(G,w) \subseteq R(G)\setminus C$ for every $w \in L(G)$.
Results
-------
Similarly as for automata, checking critical observability is equivalent to checking whether there are two sequences with the same observations leading to two different markings one of which is critical. To formalize this claim, we adopt the twin-plant construction for Petri nets used to test diagnosability [@cabasino2012new; @yin2017decidability] or prognosability [@yin2018prognosis].
For a labeled Petri net system $G=(N,M_0,\Sigma,\ell)$, let $G'=(N',M_0',\Sigma,\ell)$ be a place-disjoint copy of $G$, that is, $N'=(P',T,Pre',Post')$ where $P'=\{p' \mid p\in P\}$ is a disjoint copy of $P$ and the functions $Pre'$ and $Post'$ are naturally adjusted. The copy $G'$ has the same initial marking as $G$, i.e., $M_0'(p')=M_0(p)$ for every $p \in P$.
Let $(N_{\|},M_{0,\|})=((P_{\|},T_{\|},Pre_{\|},Post_{\|}),M_{0,\|})$ denote a label-based synchronization of $G$ and $G'$, where the initial marking $M_{0,\|} = \{M_0\} \times \{M_0'\}$ is the concatenation of initial markings of $G$ and $G'$, $P_{\|}=P\cup P'$, $T_{\|}= (T\cup\{\lambda\})\times (T\cup\{\lambda\})\setminus \{(\lambda,\lambda)\}$ are pairs of transitions of $G$ and $G'$ without the empty pair, and $Pre_{\|}\colon P_{\|}\times T_{\|}\to \mathbb{N}$ and $Post_{\|}\colon P_{\|}\times T_{\|}\to \mathbb{N}$ are defined as follows: For $p\in P$ and $t\in T$ with $\ell(t)={\varepsilon}$, $Pre_{\|}( p,(t,\lambda) )= Pre(p,t)$, $Post_{\|}( p,(t,\lambda) )= Post(p,t)$, $Pre_{\|}( p',(\lambda,t) )= Pre'(p',t)$, $Post_{\|}( p',(\lambda,t) )= Post'(p',t)$, and for $p\in P$ and $t_1,t_2\in T$ with $\ell(t_1)=\ell(t_2)\neq{\varepsilon}$, $Pre_{\|}( p, (t_1,t_2) ) = Pre(p,t_1)$, $Post_{\|}( p, (t_1,t_2) )=Post(p,t_1)$, and $Pre_{\|}( p', (t_1,t_2) ) = Pre'(p',t_2)$, $Post_{\|}( p', (t_1,t_2) ) = Post'(p',t_2)$. Otherwise, $Pre_{\|}(p_{\|},t_{\|})=Pre_{\|}(p_{\|},t_{\|})=0$, i.e., no arc is defined.
Intuitively, $(N_{\|},M_{0,\|})$ tracks all pairs of sequences with the same observation; namely, for any $(\sigma,\sigma')\in L(N_{\|},M_{0,\|})$, we have $\ell(\sigma)=\ell(\sigma')$, and for any $\sigma,\sigma'\in L(N,M_0)$ with $\ell(\sigma)=\ell(\sigma')$, there is a sequence in $(N_{\|},M_{0,\|})$ whose first and second components are $\sigma$ and $\sigma'$, respectively (possibly with inserted empty transition $\lambda$).
The following lemma shows how to use $(N_{\|},M_{0,\|})$ to verify critical observability.
\[thm\_formula\] A labeled Petri net $G=(N,M_0,\Sigma,\ell)$ is not critically observable iff there is a reachable marking $M$ in $(N_{\|},M_{0,\|})$ such that $M(P)\in C$ and $M(P')\notin C$, where $M(P)$ and $M(P')$ are projections of $M$ to the places of $P$ and $P'$, respectively.
If there is such a reachable marking $M$, then there is a transition sequence $(\alpha,\beta)$ in $L(N_{\|},M_{0,\|})$ such that $M_{0,\|} \xrightarrow{(\alpha,\beta)}_{N_{\|}} M$. By the definition of $(N_{\|},M_{0,\|})$, we have that $M_0 \xrightarrow{\alpha}_N M(P)$, $M_0 \xrightarrow{\beta}_N M(P')$, and $\ell(\alpha) = \ell(\beta)$. Since $M(P) \in C$, $M(P')\notin C$, and $\{M(P),M(P')\}\subseteq R(G,\ell(\alpha))$, $G$ is not critically observable with respect to $C$.
Assume that the system is not critically observable. Then there is a word $w$ such that $R(G,w)\cap C \neq \emptyset \neq R(G,w)\cap (R(G)\setminus C)$. Let $\alpha,\beta \in L(N,M_0)$ be such that $\ell(\alpha) = \ell(\beta) = w$, $M_0\xrightarrow{\alpha}_N M_{\alpha} \in C$, and $M_0 \xrightarrow{\beta}_N M_{\beta} \notin C$. By the construction of $N_{\|}$, we have that $(\alpha,\beta)\in L(N_{\|},M_{0,\|})$, and hence $M_{0,\|} \xrightarrow{(\alpha,\beta)}_{N_{\|}} M=[M_{\alpha} \ M_{\beta}]$, as required.
To prove our next result, we recall a fragment of Yen’s path logic, for which the satisfiability problem is decidable [@yen1992unified; @AtigH11]. Let $(N,M_0)$ be a Petri net. Let $M_1,M_2,\ldots$ be variables representing markings and $\sigma_1,\sigma_2,\ldots$ be variables representing finite sequences of transitions. Terms are defined as follows. Every mapping $c \in \mathbb{N}^P$ is a term. For all $j > i$, if $M_i$ and $M_j$ are marking variables, then $M_j - M_i$ is a term, and if $T_1$ and $T_2$ are terms, then $T_1+T_2$ and $T_1-T_2$ are terms. If $c \in \mathbb{N}$ and $t \in T$, then $\#_t(\sigma_1) \le c$ is an atomic (transition) predicate denoting the number of occurrences of $t$ in $\sigma_1$. If $T_1$ and $T_2$ are terms and $p_1,p_2 \in P$ are places, then $T_1(p_1) = T_2(p_2)$, $T_1(p_1) < T_2(p_2)$, and $T_1(p_1) > T_2(p_2)$ are atomic (marking) predicates. A [*predicate*]{} is a positive finite boolean combination of atomic predicates. A [*path formula*]{} is a formula of the form $
(\exists \sigma_1, \sigma_2,\ldots, \sigma_n)
(\exists M_1,\ldots, M_n)
(M_0 \xrightarrow{\sigma_1} M_1 \xrightarrow{\sigma_2} \cdots \xrightarrow{\sigma_n} M_n)
\land
\varphi(M_1,\ldots,M_n,\sigma_1,\ldots,\sigma_n)
$ where $\varphi$ is a predicate.
We can now prove the following.
\[thm10\] If the set of critical markings is finite, then critical observability for labeled Petri nets is decidable. It is as hard as the non-reachability problem for Petri nets.
According to Lemma \[thm\_formula\], a labeled Petri net $G=(N,M_0,\Sigma,\ell)$ is not critically observable iff the following path formula of Yen’s logic is satisfiable: $$\begin{gathered}
(\exists \sigma_1,\sigma_2)
(\exists M_1, M_2)
(M_{0,\|} \xrightarrow{\sigma_1}_{N_{\|}} M_1 \xrightarrow{\sigma_2}_{N_{\|}} M_2)
\land \\
\bigvee_{c \in C} {M_2(P)=c} \land \bigwedge_{c \in C} {M_2(P')\neq c}
\land \sigma_1={\varepsilon}\end{gathered}$$ where $\sigma_1={\varepsilon}\equiv \land_{t\in T} \#_t(\sigma_1) \le 0$, for $c=(c_i)_{i=1}^{|P|}$, $M_2(P)=c \equiv \land_{i=1}^{|P|} M_2(p_i)=c_i$, $M_2(P)\neq c \equiv \lor_{i=1}^{|P|} (M_2(p_i) < c_i \lor M_2(p_i) > c_i)$, and $M_2 \equiv (M_2-M_1)+M_0$ is a term. Satisfiability of Yen’s logic is polynomially reducible to the reachability problem for Petri nets [@AtigH11; @yen1992unified], and hence so is the problem whether $G$ is not critically observable.
We now reduce the reachability problem to the problem of non-critical observability. Let $(N,M_0)$ be a Petri net and $M$ be a marking. We construct a labeled Petri net $G$ by adding a new place $p'$ and a new unobservable transition $t'$ with an arc from $t'$ to $p'$ generating an arbitrary number of tokens in $p'$, that is, $Pre(p',t')=0$ and $Post(p',t')=1$, and with the labeling function $\ell\colon T\cup\{t'\}\to T\cup\{{\varepsilon}\}$ defined by $\ell(t)=t$, for $t\in T$, and $\ell(t')={\varepsilon}$. Let the set of critical markings be $C=\{M\times (0)\}$, where $M\times (0)$ denotes the marking of the net $G$ that coincides with the marking $M$ on the places of the net $N$ and has zero tokens in the new place $p'$. The initial marking of $G$ is the marking $M_0\times (0)$. Now, if $M$ is not reachable in $(N,M_0)$, then $M\times (0)$ is not reachable in $G$, and hence $G$ is critically observable. However, if $M$ is reachable in $(N,M_0)$, let $\sigma$ denote a transition sequence reaching $M$ in $(N,M_0)$. Then, by construction, $\{M\times (0),M\times (1), M\times (2),\ldots\}\subseteq R(G,\ell(\sigma))$ are reachable in $G$ under sequences with the same labels, since $\ell(\sigma) = \ell(\sigma t') = \ell(\sigma t't') = \ldots$, and hence $G$ is not critically observable.
The complexity of reachability for Petri nets is a longstanding open problem. The lower bound has recently been improved from EXPSPACE-hard to non-elementary [@WojtekNotElem]. The upper bound is non-primitive recursive cubic Ackermannian [@LerouxS15].
We have shown that critical observability is decidable for a labeled Petri net system $G$ if the set of critical markings $C$ is finite. The same holds if the set $R(G)\setminus C$ is finite, which can be shown by exchanging the sets $C$ and $R(G)\setminus C$. If $R(G)\setminus C$ is finite, then $C$ is called co-finite.
However, if $C$ is not finite neither co-finite, we show that the problem of critical observability is undecidable.
\[thm11\] Critical observability for labeled Petri Nets is undecidable.
We reduce the marking inclusion problem asking, given two Petri nets $A$ and $B$, whether $R(A) \subseteq R(B)$ [@Hack76]. Let $\ell_A$ and $\ell_B$ be arbitrary labeling functions of $A$ and $B$, and let $\Sigma_A$ and $\Sigma_B$ denote the corresponding sets of labels. We construct a Petri net $G$ as depicted in Fig. \[fig04\], where place $p_{r+2}$ contains $|\Sigma_A|$ self-loops under new transitions $s_1,\ldots,s_{|\Sigma_A|}$. The initial marking of $G$ consists of one token in place $p_{r+3}$. Then, $R(G) = \{0\}^r\times (0,0,1) \cup R(A)\times (1,0,0) \cup R(B)\times (0,1,0)$. We define the labeling function $\ell$ of $G$ as the extension of $\ell_A$ and $\ell_B$ so that $\ell(t)=\ell_X(t)$ if $t$ is a transition of $X\in\{A,B\}$, $\ell(t_1)=\ell(t_2)={\varepsilon}$, and the self-loops in $p_{r+2}$ are labeled by $\Sigma_A$ in such a way that $\ell(s_i)$ is the $i$-th element of $\Sigma_A$. Let $C = \{0\}^r \times (0,0,1) \cup R(B)\times (1,0,0) \cup R(B) \times (0,1,0)$ be the set of critical markings. If $R(A)\subseteq R(B)$, then we have that $R(G)\subseteq C$, and hence $G$ is critically observable. However, if there is a marking $M\in R(A)\setminus R(B)$, let $\sigma$ denote a transition sequence under which $M$ is reachable in $A$. Then the marking $M\times (1,0,0)$ is reachable in $G$ by $t_1\sigma$. Let $\sigma'\in\{s_1,\ldots,s_{|\Sigma_A|}\}^*$ be a sequence of transitions such that $\ell(\sigma)=\ell(\sigma')$; such a sequence exists by the labeling of these places. Then $M_0(B) \times (0,1,0)$ is reachable in $G$ by $t_2\sigma'$. Since $\ell(t_1\sigma)=\ell(t_2\sigma')$, $M\times (1,0,0)\notin C$, and $M_0(B) \times (0,1,0)\in C$, $G$ is not critically observable.
![The Petri net $G$ of Theorem \[thm11\][]{data-label="fig04"}](pn_figure.pdf)
[^1]: T. Masopust ([masopust[@]{}math.cas.cz]{}) is with the Department of Computer Science, Palacky University, Olomouc, Czechia, and with the Institute of Mathematics of the Czech Academy of Sciences, Žižkova 22, 616 62 Brno, Czechia. The research was supported by RVO 67985840.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'We offer an overview of the specification property, its relatives and their consequences. We examine relations between specification-like properties and such notions as: mixing, entropy, the structure of the simplex of invariant measures, and various types of the shadowing property. We pay special attention to these connections in the context of symbolic dynamics.'
address:
- ' Faculty of Mathematics and Computer Science, Jagiellonian University in Krakow, ul. Łojasiewicza 6, 30-348 Kraków, Poland'
- ' Faculty of Mathematics and Computer Science, Jagiellonian University in Krakow, ul. Łojasiewicza 6, 30-348 Kraków, Poland'
- 'AGH University of Science and Technology, Faculty of Applied Mathematics, al. Mickiewicza 30, 30-059 Kraków, Poland'
author:
- Dominik Kwietniak
- 'Martha [Ł]{}cka'
- Piotr Oprocha
bibliography:
- 'bibliography.bib'
title: 'A panorama of specification-like properties and their consequences'
---
The specification property is the ability to find a single point following ${\varepsilon}$-close an arbitrary collection of orbit segments, provided that the tracing point is allowed to spend a fixed (dependent on ${\varepsilon}$) time between consecutive segments.
Rufus Bowen introduced the specification property in his seminal paper of 1971 on Axiom A diffeomorphisms [@Bowen71]. In recent years this notion and its generalizations served as a basis for many developments in the theory of dynamical systems.
This property is closely related to the study of hyperbolic systems initiated during the 1960’s. Around that time Stephen Smale noticed that certain maps arising from forced oscillations and geodesic flows on surfaces of negative curvature had similar geometric and analytic properties. This motivated his definition of what we know today as *uniformly hyperbolic systems*. At the same time, the Russian school (an incomplete list contains such names as Anosov, Sinai, Katok) worked intensively on Anosov systems, that is, diffeomorphisms of manifolds under which the whole manifold is hyperbolic. Many properties of uniformly hyperbolic systems are consequences of the Specification Theorem [@KH Thm. 18.3.9]. It states that a diffeomorphism restricted to a compact locally maximal hyperbolic set has the specification property. This result, together with the closely related Shadowing Theorem [@KH Thm. 18.1.3] provides tools of great utility in exploring the topological structure and statistical behavior of uniformly hyperbolic systems. There are other important classes of dynamical systems that also have the specification property. Mixing interval maps or, more generally, graph maps, mixing cocyclic shifts (in particular, mixing sofic shifts, and thus shifts of finite type) are among them. Needless to say that this list, although impressive, does not contain all interesting systems. This motivates the search for other properties, call them *specification-like*, which may be used to examine systems without specification in Bowen’s sense. In this survey we describe various notions designed to replace specification. It turns out that there are many systems lacking the specification property, but exhibiting a weaker version of it, which suffices to derive interesting results. This approach has been used to study systems with some forms of non-uniform hyperbolicity, such as $\beta$-shifts.
![The connections between various generalizations of the specification property. There are no more implications between these notions besides those following by transitivity.[]{data-label="fig:rys"}](rysunek2){width="\textwidth"}
The length of this paper does not allow detailed exposition of all aspects of the theory of specification-like properties. We would like to concentrate on the “big picture”, presenting a broad overview of possible generalizations of the specification property and discussing various examples illustrating dynamical systems with these properties. Figure \[fig:rys\] presents a diagram summarizing the specification-like properties we discuss. We also describe examples illustrating the fact that none of the implications presented on Figure \[fig:rys\] can be reversed. Some of them have never been published before. We would like to add to this panoramic overview a more detailed (but certainly not complete) account of two problems: intrinsic ergodicity and density of ergodic measures for systems with specification-like properties. Both are related to the structure of the simplex of invariant measures of the dynamical system. The first problem is, broadly speaking, a question about the relation between specification-like properties and entropy, both topological and measure-theoretic. One of the first results obtained using specification was that this property together with expansiveness implies the uniqueness of a measure of maximal entropy. Recall that the Variational Principle states that the *topological entropy* ${h_\textrm{top}}(T)$ of a compact dynamical system $(X,T)$ equals the supremum over the set of all measure-theoretic entropies $h_\mu(T)$ where $\mu$ runs through all $T$-invariant Borel probability measures on $X$. An invariant measure which achieves this supremum is called the *measure of maximal entropy* for $(X,T)$. A dynamical system $(X,T)$ is *intrinsically ergodic* if it has a unique measure of maximal entropy. We discuss related results in connection with other specification-like properties.
The second problem is an instance of one of the most basic questions in the theory of dynamical systems: *Given a dynamical system, classify and study the properties of invariant measures.* In case that $(X,T)$ has a specification-like property one can usually prove that the ergodic invariant measures are abundant: they form a dense subset of the simplex of invariant measures endowed with the weak$^\ast$-topology.
Among the subjects omitted here are: the role of specification-like properties in the theory of large deviations, specification for flows (actions of reals), and other group actions (for example ${\mathbb{Z}}^d$ actions with $d\ge 1$). We are also sure that our catalog of specification-like properties is far from being complete. We have selected only those properties, which have clear connections with Bowen’s original notion of specification. There are many properties which are fitted only to apply to some very specific examples and their relation with the core of this theory remains unclear. There is also a theory developed by Climenhaga and Thompson and their co-authors which is close in spirit to those notions included here. It certainly deserves attention, but regretfully we have had to leave the comparison of this theory with the specification-like properties presented here to another occasion.
We did try to make this paper accessible to non-specialists, but in some places we had to assume that the reader has some experience with topological dynamics and ergodic theory (as presented, e.g. in [@DGS; @KH; @Walters]). For every result which already exists in the literature the statement itself includes the reference to the original source. But some results we provide are restatements or compilations for which no single reference is appropriate. In these cases we only include the author’s name (if such an attribution is possible) in the statement and cite the relevant origins in the preceding paragraph. To make our presentation complete we also introduce a few original results. They mostly come from the second named author’s Master’s Thesis written at the Jagiellonian University in Kraków under supervision of the first named author. In particular, the results in Section \[sec:app\] (on connections between the almost product property and shadowing) namely Theorems \[thm:shd:aps\] and \[thm:40\], Corollaries \[cor:shad\] and \[cor:41\] and most Examples have not been published before.
Acknowledgements {#acknowledgements .unnumbered}
================
We would like to thank the referee for his/her careful reading and constructive comments. We are also grateful to Vaughn Climenhaga and Ronnie Pavlov for many discussions on the subject of the paper.
Dominik Kwietniak was supported by the Polish National Science Centre (NCN) grant no. 2013/08/A/ST1/00275; the research of Martha [Ł]{}cka was supported by the Polish Ministry and Higher Education grant no. [DI2012 002942]{}; Piotr Oprocha was supported by the Polish Ministry of Science and Higher Education from sources for science in the years 2013-2014, grant no. IP2012 004272.
The idea of writing this paper together was born in June 2014 during the Activity on Dynamics & Numbers in the Max Planck Institute of Mathematics in Bonn. The hospitality of MPI is gratefully acknowledged. A preliminary version was derived from the set of notes prepared by the first named author for the mini-course *Specification and shadowing properties* presented by him during *A week on Dynamical Systems* at IM-UFRJ in Rio de Janeiro. Using this occasion he would like to thank the organizers for the invitation and warm reception.
Basic definitions and notation
==============================
Notation and some conventions
-----------------------------
We write ${\mathbb{N}}=\{1,2,3,\ldots\}$ and ${{{\mathbb{N}}_0}}=\{0,1,2,\ldots\}$. By $|A|$ we mean the cardinality of a finite set $A$. Given any set $A\subset{{{\mathbb{N}}_0}}$ we write
- $\overline d(A)$ for the *upper asymptotic density* of $A$, that is, $$\overline d(A)=\limsup\limits_{n\to\infty}\frac{\big|A\cap\{0,\ldots,n-1\}\big|}{n},$$
- $\operatorname{BD^*}(A)$ for the *upper Banach density* of $A$, that is, $$\operatorname{BD^*}(A)=\limsup\limits_{n\to\infty}\max\limits_{k\in{{{\mathbb{N}}_0}}}\frac{\big|A\cap\{k,k+1,\ldots, k+n-1\}\big|}{n}.$$
We denote the set of all sequences ${\underline{x}=\{x_n\}_{n=0}^{\infty}}$ with $x_n$ in some (not necessarily finite) set $A$ for $n=0,1,\ldots$ by $A^\infty$. Recall that a subset of a topological space is of *first category* if it can be written as countable union of closed nowhere dense sets. It is *residual* if it is a countable intersection of open and dense sets. A set is *nontrivial* if it contains at least two elements.
Dynamical systems
-----------------
Throughout the paper a *dynamical system* means a pair $(X,T)$ where $X$ is a compact metric space and $T\colon X\to X$ is a continuous[^1] map. We say that $(X,T)$ is *invertible* if $T$ is a homeomorphism. We denote a metric on $X$ by $\rho$. We will often identify a dynamical system $(X,T)$ with a map $T\colon X\to X$ alone. We say that $x\in X$ is a *periodic point* for $T$ if $T^k(x)=x$ for some $k\in{\mathbb{N}}$ and we call $k$ a *period* for $x$. We denote the set of all periodic points of $T$ by $\operatorname{Per}(T)$.
Choquet theory
--------------
A nonempty convex compact and metrizable subset $K$ of a locally convex topological vector space is a *Choquet simplex* if every point of $K$ is the barycenter of a unique probability measure supported on the set of extreme points of $K$ (see [@Phelps01]). A *Poulsen simplex* is a nontrivial Choquet simplex $K_P$ such that its extreme points $\operatorname{ext}(K_P)$ are dense in $K_P$. By [@LOS] any two nontrivial metrizable Choquet simplices with dense sets of extreme points are equivalent under an affine homeomorphism. Therefore one can speak about *the Poulsen simplex* $K_P$. It is also known that $\operatorname{ext}(K_P)$ is arcwise connected.
Topological dynamics
--------------------
We say that $T$ is *transitive* if for every non-empty open sets $U,V\subset X$ there is $n>0$ such that $U\cap T^{-n}(V)\neq\emptyset$. A dynamical system $(X,T)$ is *(topologically) weakly mixing* when the product system $(X\times X,T\times T)$ is topologically transitive. A map $T$ is *(topologically) mixing* if for every non-empty open sets $U,V\subset X$ there is $N\in{\mathbb{N}}$ such that for all $n\ge N$ we have $U\cap T^{-n}(V)\neq\emptyset$. We say that a set $K\subset X$ is *$T$-invariant* if $T(K)\subset K$. A *subsystem* of $(X,T)$ is a pair $(K,T)$, where $K\subset X$ is a nonempty closed $T$-invariant set. Here and elsewhere, we make no distinction between $T$ and its restriction $T|_K$ to a $T$-invariant set $K$ and we often identify a subsystem $(K,T)$ with the set $K$ alone. We say that nonempty closed and $T$-invariant set $K\subset X$ is a *minimal set* for $(X,T)$ if $(K,T)$ does not contain any proper nonempty subsystem. Given $x\in X$ we define the *orbit* of $x\in X$ as the set $\operatorname{Orb}_T(x)={\left\{x,T(x), T^2(x),\ldots\right\}}$ and the *orbit closure* of an $x$ as $\overline{\operatorname{Orb}(x,T)}$. A point $x\in X$ is *minimal* if its orbit closure is a minimal set.
Invariant measures
------------------
Let $\operatorname{\mathcal{M}}(X)$ be the set of all Borel probability measures on $X$ equipped with the weak$^\ast$-topology. It is well known that this is a compact metrizable space (see [@Walters §6.1]). A metric inducing the weak$^\ast$-topology on $\operatorname{\mathcal{M}}(X)$ is given by $$\operatorname{\overrightarrow D}(\mu,\nu)=\inf \{{\varepsilon}>0\colon \mu(A)\le \nu (A^{\varepsilon}) +{\varepsilon},\text{ for every Borel set }A\subset X\},$$ where $\mu,\nu\in \operatorname{\mathcal{M}}(X)$ and $A^{\varepsilon}=\{x\in X\colon \rho(x,A)<{\varepsilon}\}$ denotes the ${\varepsilon}$-neighborhood of $A$ (see [@Strassen65]). The *support* of a measure $\mu\in\operatorname{\mathcal{M}}(X)$, denoted by $\operatorname{supp}\mu$, is the smallest closed set $C\subset X$ such that $\mu(C)=1$. We say that $\mu\in \operatorname{\mathcal{M}}(X)$ has *full support* if $\operatorname{supp}\mu=X$.
Let $\operatorname{\mathcal{M}_T}(X)$ denote the set of all $T$-invariant measures in $\operatorname{\mathcal{M}}(X)$. By the Krylov-Bogolyubov theorem any dynamical system admits at least one invariant Borel probability measure. We write $\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathcal{M}}_T^e}(X)$ for the subset of all ergodic measures. We say that $T$ is *uniquely ergodic* if there is exactly one $T$-invariant measure.
Recall that $\operatorname{\mathcal{M}_T}(X)$ is a Choquet simplex (see [@Walters §6.2]). In particular, $\operatorname{\mathcal{M}_T}(X)$ is the closure of the convex hull of $\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathcal{M}}_T^e}(X)$, thus $\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathcal{M}}_T^e}(X)$ is a nonempty $G_\delta$-subset of $\operatorname{\mathcal{M}_T}(X)$. Note that $\operatorname{\mathcal{M}_T}(X)$ is a compact metric space, hence a subset of $\operatorname{\mathcal{M}_T}(X)$ is residual if, and only if, it is a dense $G_\delta$.
Recall that $\mu\in\operatorname{\mathcal{M}_T}(X)$ is *strongly mixing* if for any Borel sets $A,B\subset X$ we have $\mu(A\cap T^{-n}B)\to \mu(A)\mu(B)$ as $n\to\infty$. We denote by $\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathcal{M}}_T^{\text{mix}}}(X)$ the set of all strongly mixing measures.
Let $\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathcal{M}}_T^+}(B)$ denote the set of all $\mu\in\operatorname{\mathcal{M}_T}(X)$ such that the Borel set $B\subset X$ is a subset of $\operatorname{supp}\mu$. In particular, $\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathcal{M}}_T^+}(X)$ denote the set of all measures with full support.
We denote by $\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathcal{M}}_T^{\text{co}}}(X)$ the set of all invariant measures supported on the orbit of some periodic point.
Generic points
--------------
Let ${\hat{\delta}({x})}$ denote the point mass measure (Dirac measure) concentrated on $x$. For any $x\in X$ and $N\in{\mathbb{N}}$ let $\operatorname{\mathfrak{m}}(x,N)=\frac 1N\sum_{n=0}^{N-1}\hat\delta(T^n(x))$. A measure $\mu\in \operatorname{\mathcal{M}_T}(X)$ is *generated* by $x\in X$ if $\mu$ is a limit of some subsequence of $\{\operatorname{\mathfrak{m}}(x,n)\}_{n=1}^\infty$. The set of all invariant measures generated by $x\in X$ is denoted by ${\hat{\omega}({x})}$. We say that $x$ is a *generic point* for $\mu\in\operatorname{\mathcal{M}_T}(X)$ if $\mu$ is the unique measure generated by $x$. It is *quasiregular* for $T$ if there exists $\mu\in\operatorname{\mathcal{M}_T}(X)$ such that $x$ is generic for $\mu$.
Measure center
--------------
An open set $U\subset X$ is *universally null* in a dynamical system $(X,T)$ if $\mu(U)=0$ for every $\mu\in\operatorname{\mathcal{M}_T}(X)$. The *measure center* of $(X,T)$ is the complement of the union of all universally null sets, or equivalently, it is the smallest closed subset $C$ of $X$ such that $\mu(C)=1$ for every $\mu\in\operatorname{\mathcal{M}_T}(X)$. Another characterization of the measure center uses ideas of Birkhoff and Hilmy. Birkhoff introduced the *probability of sojourn*, defined for $x\in X$ and $U\subset X$ as $$p(x,U)=\limsup_{N\to\infty}\frac{1}{N} \left|{\left\{0\le n<N:T^n(x)\in U\right\}}\right|.$$ Hilmy [@Hilmy36] defined the *minimal center of attraction* of a point $x\in X$ as $$I(x)={\left\{y\in X : p(x,U)>0 \text{ for any neighborhood } U \text{ of }y\right\}}.$$ It can be proved (see [@Sigmund77]) that the measure center is the smallest closed set containing the minimal center of attraction of every point $x\in X$. If the minimal points are dense in $X$ then the measure center is the whole space, but without density of minimal points no specification-like property we consider can guarantee that.
Entropy
-------
Measure-theoretic and topological entropies are among the most important invariants in topological dynamics and ergodic theory. Recall that given a dynamical system $(X,T)$ and an open cover $\mathcal{U}$ of $X$ we define $$\mathcal{U}^n=\{U_0\cap T^{-1}(U_1)\cap \ldots \cap T^{-(n-1)}(U_{n-1}):U_j\in \mathcal{U}\text{ for }j=0,1,\ldots,n-1\}.$$ The *topological entropy* of $(X,T)$ with respect to $\mathcal{U}$ is given by $${h_\textrm{top}}(T,\mathcal{U})=\lim_{n\to\infty}\frac{1}{n}\log\mathcal{N}(\mathcal{U}^n),$$ where $\mathcal{N}(\mathcal{U}^n)$ denotes the smallest possible cardinality of an open cover of $X$ formed by elements of $\mathcal{U}^n$. We will denote by ${h_\textrm{top}}(T)$ the *topological entropy* of a map $T$ defined by $${h_\textrm{top}}(T)=\sup\{{h_\textrm{top}}(T,\mathcal{U}): \mathcal{U}\text{ is an open cover of }X\}.$$ For the proof of the existence of the limit above and basic properties of topological entropy see [@Walters chapter VII].
For the definition of the *measure-theoretic entropy* $h_{\mu}(T)$ of a $T$-invariant measure $\mu$ we refer for instance to [@Walters chapter IV].
Non-wandering set
-----------------
Given a dynamical system $(X,T)$ let $\Omega(T)$ be the *non-wandering set* of $T$, that is, $x\in X$ belongs to $\Omega(T)$ if for every neighborhood $U$ of $x$ there exists $n>0$ with $T^n(U)\cap U\neq\emptyset$. It is well known that $\Omega(T)$ is a closed invariant subset of $X$.
Chain recurrence
----------------
A $\delta$-chain (of length $m$) between $x$ and $y$ is any sequence ${\left\{x_n\right\}}_{n=0}^{m}$ such that $x=x_0$, $ y=x_m$, and $\rho(T(x_n),x_{n+1})<\delta$ for $0\le n <m$. A point $x$ is *chain recurrent* for $T$ if for every $\delta>0$ there is a $\delta$-chain from $x$ to $x$. The set of all chain recurrent points is denoted $\operatorname{CR}(T)$. Using compactness, we easily obtain that $\operatorname{CR}(T)$ is a closed set and for every $y\in \operatorname{CR}(T)$ there is $x\in \operatorname{CR}(T)$ such that $T(x)=y$, that is $T(\operatorname{CR}(T))=\operatorname{CR}(T)$.
A dynamical system $(X,T)$ is *chain recurrent* if $X=\operatorname{CR}(T)$. If for every $x,y\in X$ and every $\delta>0$ there exists a $\delta$-chain from $x$ to $y$ then $(X,T)$ is *chain transitive*.
Orbit segments and Bowen balls
------------------------------
Let $a,b\in{{{\mathbb{N}}_0}}$, $a\leq b$. The *orbit segment* of $x\in X$ over $[a,b]$ is the sequence $$T^{[a,b]}(x)=(T^a(x),T^{a+1}(x),\ldots, T^b(x)).$$ We also write $T^{[a,b)}(x)=T^{[a,b-1]}(x)$. A *specification* is a family of orbit segments $$\xi=\{T^{[a_j,b_j]}(x_j)\}_{j=1}^n$$ such that $n\in{\mathbb{N}}$ and $b_j<a_{j+1}$ for all $1\le j <n$. The number of orbit segments in a specification is its *rank*.
The *Bowen distance between $x,y\in X$ along a finite set $\Lambda\subset{{{\mathbb{N}}_0}}$* is $$\rho^T_\Lambda(x, y) = \max\{\rho(T^j(x), T^j(y)) : j \in\Lambda\}.$$ By the *Bowen ball (of radius ${\varepsilon}$, centered at $x\in X$) along $\Lambda$* we mean the set $$B_\Lambda(x, {\varepsilon}) = \{y \in X : \rho^T_\Lambda(x, y) < {\varepsilon}\}.$$ If $\Lambda={\left\{0,1,\ldots,n-1\right\}}$ then we simply write $B_n(x, {\varepsilon}):=B_\Lambda(x, {\varepsilon})$ and $\rho^T_n(x, y)=\rho^T_\Lambda(x, y)$.
Natural extension
-----------------
The *inverse limit space* of a surjective dynamical system is the space $$X_T=\{(x_1,x_2,x_3,\ldots)\in X^\infty:T(x_{i+1})=x_i \text { for all }i\in{\mathbb{N}}\}.$$ We equip $X_T$ with the subspace topology induced by the product topology on $X^\infty$. The map $T$ is called a *bonding map*. The map $\sigma_T\colon X_T\to X_T$ given by $$\sigma_T(x_0,x_1,x_2,\ldots)=(T(x_0),T(x_1),T(x_2),\ldots)=(T(x_0),x_0,x_1,\ldots).$$ is called the *shift homeomorphism* and the invertible dynamical system $(X_T,\sigma_T)$ is a *natural extension* of $(X,T)$. Note that if $(X,T)$ is invertible then $(X,T)$ and $(X_T,\sigma_T)$ are conjugate. If $T$ is not invertible, then $(X,T)$ is only a factor of $(X_T,\sigma_T)$.
Dynamical systems $(X,T)$ and $(X_T,\sigma_T)$ share many dynamical properties. For example, it is not hard to check that one of them is transitive, mixing or has a specification(-like) property if and only if the other has the respective property. It was proved in [@ChenLi] that the same equivalence holds for the shadowing property. Furthermore, the invariant measures of $(X,T)$ and $(X_T,\sigma_T)$ can be identified by a natural entropy preserving bijection. Hence, ${h_\textrm{top}}(T)={h_\textrm{top}}(\sigma_T)$ (see [@Ye95] for a more general statement).
Expansiveness
-------------
An (invertible) dynamical system $(X,T)$ is *positively expansive (expansive)* if there is a constant $c>0$ such that if $x,y\in X$ satisfy $d(T^n(x),T^n(y))<c$ for all $n\in {{{\mathbb{N}}_0}}$ (all $n\in {\mathbb{Z}}$), then $x=y$.
Two-sided shift spaces and Axiom A diffeomorphisms are expansive (see [@DGS]). One-sided shift spaces are positively expansive. If $(X,T)$ is invertible and positively expansive, then $X$ is a finite set (see [@Richeson]). If a dynamical system is expansive or positively expansive, then its natural extension is expansive, but the converse is not true (see [@AH], Theorem 2.2.32(3)).
Specification property
======================
The periodic specification property was introduced by Bowen [@Bowen71] as a consequence of topological mixing of an axiom A diffeomorphism. Roughly speaking, the specification property allows to approximate segments of orbits by a single orbit, provided that these segments are sparse enough in time. Recall that a diffeomorphism $T\colon M\to M$ of a smooth compact manifold satisfies *Smale’s Axiom A* if the periodic points of $T$ are dense in the non-wandering set $\Omega(T)$ and the tangent bundle of $M$ restricted to $\Omega(T)$, denoted $T\Omega(M)$, has a continuous splitting $T\Omega(M)=E_s\oplus E_u$ into subspaces invariant under the derivative $DT$ such that the restrictions $DT|E_s$ and $DT^{-1}|E_u$ are contractions. Smale [@Smale67 Theorem 6.2] proved that the non-wandering set of an Axiom A diffeomorphism $T$ is the disjoint union of finitely many *basic sets* which are closed, invariant, and the restriction of $T$ to each of them is topologically transitive. Furthermore, Bowen proved that if $\Lambda$ is a basic set for $T$, then $\Lambda$ can be decomposed into disjoint closed sets $\Lambda_1,\ldots,\Lambda_m$ such that $T(\Lambda_i)=\Lambda_{(i+1)\bmod m}$ and $T^m|\Lambda_i$ has the periodic specification property and that is how this property entered into mathematics. Some authors call $\Lambda_1,\ldots,\Lambda_m$ *elementary sets*.
Let $\nu\colon {\mathbb{N}}\to{\mathbb{N}}$ be any function. A family of orbit segments $\xi=\{T^{[a_j,b_j]}(x_j)\}_{j=1}^n$ is a *$\nu$-spaced specification* if $a_i-b_{i-1} \ge \nu(b_i-a_i+1) $ for $2\le i \le n$. Given a *constant* $N\in{\mathbb{N}}$ by an *$N$-spaced specification* we mean a $\nu$-spaced specification where $\nu$ is the *constant function* $\nu(n)= N$ for all $n\in{\mathbb{N}}$.
We say that a specification $\xi=\{T^{[a_j,b_j]}(x_j)\}_{j=1}^n$ is ${\varepsilon}$-traced by $y\in X$ if $$\rho(T^k(y),T^k(x_i)) \le {\varepsilon}\quad\text{for } a_i\le k \le b_i\text{ and }1\le i \le n.$$
\[def:spec\] We say that $(X,T)$ has the *specification property* if for any ${\varepsilon}>0$ there is a constant $N = N({\varepsilon})\in{\mathbb{N}}$ such that any $N$-spaced specification $\xi=\{T^{[a_j,b_j]}(x_j)\}_{j=1}^n$ is ${\varepsilon}$-traced by some $y\in X$. If additionally, $y$ can be chosen in such a way that $T^{b_n-a_0+N}(y)=y$ then $(X,T)$ has the *periodic specification property*.
Some authors consider a weaker notion, which we propose to name the *(periodic) specification property of order $k$*. A dynamical system has (periodic) specification of order $k\in{\mathbb{N}}$ if for every ${\varepsilon}>0$ there is an $N$ such that every specification of rank $k$ is ${\varepsilon}$-traced by some (periodic) point. This weaker version of the (periodic) specification property may replace the stronger one in many proofs, but we do not know of any examples showing that these notions differ. We expect that even if they do, the examples demonstrating this would not be “natural”, that is, these potential examples would be systems defined for the sole purpose of proving that a specification property of finite order does not imply the specification property. Note that for shift spaces the periodic specification property, the specification property, and the specification property of order $k$, where $k\ge 2$ are equivalent (see Lemma \[lem:psp\] and Section \[sec:symbolic\]).
It is not hard to see that every map with the periodic specification property is onto, but this is not the case if the map has only specification.
Let $X={\left\{0,1\right\}}$ and $T\colon X\ni x\mapsto 0\in X$. Then $(X,T)$ has the specification property, but $T$ is not onto.
Every map on a one point space has the periodic specification property. Therefore we henceforth concentrate on dynamical systems $(X,T)$ given by an **onto map on a nontrivial space**. Note that some authors (see for example [@Yamamoto09]) use a slightly different definition of the specification property which implies surjectivity and for onto maps is equivalent to Definition \[def:spec\]. For the sake of completeness we recall that a dynamical system $(X,T)$ has the specification property as defined in [@Yamamoto09] if for any ${\varepsilon}>0$ there is an integer $M_{\varepsilon}$ such that for any $k\ge 1$ and $k$ points $x_1,\ldots,x_k\in X$ and for any sequence of integers $0\le a_1\le b_1< a_2\le b_2<\ldots<a_k\le b_k$ with $a_{i}-b_{i-1}\ge M_{\varepsilon}$ for $2\le i\le k$, there is an $x\in X$ with $\rho(T^{a_i+j}(x),T^j(x_i))\le {\varepsilon}$ for $0\le j\le b_i-a_i$ and $0\le i\le k$. Note that periodic specification is called *strong specification* in [@Yamamoto09].
Observe that a dynamical system $(X,T)$ is topologically transitive if and only if for every $x_0,\ldots, x_k\in X$ and $n_0,\ldots, n_k\in\mathbb N_0$ there exist $m_1,\ldots,m_k\in{\mathbb{N}}$ such that $$\bigcap_{j=0}^k T^{-\sum_{i=1}^{j}(n_{i-1}+m_i)}B_{n_j}(x_j,{\varepsilon})\neq\emptyset.$$ Clearly, each $m_j$ depends on all points $x_i$, all $n_i$ and ${\varepsilon}$. Therefore the specification property can be considered as a uniform version of transitivity, which allows us to pick all $m_j$ equal to a constant depending only on ${\varepsilon}$.
The following theorem summarizes easy consequences of the (periodic) specification property.
1. If $(X,T)$ has the (periodic) specification property then $(X,T^k)$ has the (periodic) specification property for every $k\geq 1$.
2. If $(X,T)$, $(Y,S)$ have the (periodic) specification property then the product system $(X\times Y, T\times S)$ also has the (periodic) specification property.
3. Every factor of a system with the (periodic) specification property has the (periodic) specification property.
4. Every onto map with the specification property is topologically mixing.
The following fact is a simple consequence of the definition of expansiveness, but due to its importance we single it out as a separate lemma. It is proved implicitly by many authors, and an explicit statement and proof can be found as a part of Lemma 9 in [@KO12].
\[lem:psp\] If $(X,T)$ has the specification property and its natural extension is expansive, then $(X,T)$ has the periodic specification property.
Bowen [@Bowen71 Proposition 4.3] proved that any system with the periodic specification property[^2] on a nontrivial space has positive topological entropy with respect to any open cover of $X$ by two nondense open sets. In ergodic theory there is a class of $K$-systems [@Walters Definition 4.13], which contains measure preserving transformations whose measure-theoretic entropy is in some sense completely positive, that is, the Kolmogorov-Sinai entropy of every nontrivial partition is positive, equivalently, the measure-theoretic entropy of every nontrivial measure-preserving factor is positive. It is natural to seek for an analog of this notion in topological dynamics. It turns out that the conditions characterizing $K$-systems in ergodic theory are no longer equivalent when translated to the topological setting. This problem was studied by Blanchard [@B92] who defined *completely positive entropy* and *uniform positive entropy*. A dynamical system $(X,T)$ has *completely positive entropy* if all nontrivial topological factors of this system have positive topological entropy, and $(X,T)$ has *uniform positive entropy* if $T$ has positive topological entropy with respect to every open cover of $X$ by two sets none of which is dense in $X$. Blanchard proved that uniform positive entropy implies completely positive entropy (this was also proved earlier by Bowen, see Proposition 4.2 in [@Bowen71]), but the converse implication is not true. Moreover, completely positive entropy does not imply any mixing property. Huang and Ye [@HY06] introduced the notion of a *topological $K$-system*. Following them we say that $(X,T)$ is a *topological $K$-system* if every finite cover of $X$ by nondense and open sets has positive topological entropy.
The topological $K$-systems are also known as systems with *uniform positive entropy of all orders*. In this nomenclature Blanchard’s *uniform positive entropy* is the *uniform positive entropy of order $2$*. Every minimal topological $K$-system is mixing [@HSY05]. Huang and Ye [@HY06 Theorem 7.4] observed that topological $K$-systems have a kind of a very weak specification property.
Here we only mention an easy part of this connection (cf. [@HY06], Theorem 7.4). It is easy to see that if a surjective system $(X,T)$ has the specification property, then for any nonempty open sets $U_1,\ldots,U_k\subset X$ there is an $N$ such that for any $n\in{\mathbb{N}}$ and ${\varphi}\colon {\left\{0,\ldots,n\right\}}\to {\left\{1,\ldots,k\right\}}$ there is a point $z$ satisfying $T^{iN}(z)\in U_{{\varphi}(i)}$ for $i=0,\ldots,n$. This immediately gives the following (cf. Proposition 21.6 in [@DGS] and Proposition 4.3 in [@Bowen71]).
If a surjective system $(X,T)$ has the specification property, then it is a topological $K$-system.
The next result is a consequence for $d=1$ of Theorem B in [@EKW] (Eizenberg, Kifer and Weiss stated it for $\mathbb{Z}^d$ actions). Theorem B in [@EKW] asserts that if $(X,T)$ is an invertible dynamical system with the specification property and $\mu$ is a $T$-invariant probability measure such that the function $\operatorname{\mathcal{M}_T}(X)\ni\nu\mapsto h_\nu(T)\in{\mathbb{R}}$ is upper semicontinuous at $\mu$, then $\mu$ is the limit in the weak$^\ast$ topology of a sequence of ergodic measures $\mu_n$ such that the entropy of $\mu$ is the limit of the entropies of the $\mu_n$. This is an important point in obtaining large deviations estimates, which was first emphasized in [@FO] (see also [@Comman09; @Yamamoto09]). Analysis of the proof of Theorem B in [@EKW] yields the following.
\[thm:8\] Let $(X,T)$ be an invertible dynamical system with the specification property. Then the ergodic measures are *entropy dense*, that is, for every measure $\mu\in \operatorname{\mathcal{M}_T}(X)$, every neighborhood $U$ of $\mu$ in $\operatorname{\mathcal{M}_T}(X)$ and every ${\varepsilon}>0$ there is an ergodic measure $\nu\in U$ with $h_\nu(T)\in (h_\mu(T)-{\varepsilon},h_\mu(T)]$.
Let $\operatorname{Per}_n(T)$ denote the set of fixed points of $T^n$, where $n\in{\mathbb{N}}$. Observe that if $(X,T)$ is expansive, then for every $n$ the set $\operatorname{Per}_n(T)$ is finite, and is nonempty for all $n$ large enough provided that $(X,T)$ has the periodic specification property.
Bowen [@Bowen71] proved that if $T$ is expansive and has periodic specification, then the topological entropy of $T$ equals the exponential growth rate of the number of fixed points of $T^n$.
If $(X,T)$ is an invertible expansive dynamical system with the periodic specification property then $${h_\textrm{top}}(T)=\lim_{n\to \infty}\frac{1}{n}\log |\operatorname{Per}_n(T)|.$$
Every expansive dynamical system has a measure of *maximal entropy*, since expansiveness implies that the function $\operatorname{\mathcal{M}_T}(X)\ni\mu\mapsto h_\mu(T)\in [0,\infty)$ is upper semicontinuous and every such function on a compact metric space is bounded from the above and attains its supremum. It turns out that for a system with the periodic specification property the entropy maximizing measure is unique and can be described more precisely.
For each $n\in {\mathbb{N}}$ such that $\operatorname{Per}_n(T)$ is nonempty denote by $\mu_n$ the probability measure uniformly distributed on $\operatorname{Per}_n(T)$, that is, $$\mu_n=\frac{1}{|\operatorname{Per}_n(T)|}\sum_{x\in \operatorname{Per}_n(T)}\hat\delta(x).\label{mun}$$ Clearly, each $\mu_n$ is an invariant measure. By the above observation, if $(X,T)$ is expansive and has the periodic specification property, then we can consider an infinite sequence formed by $\mu_n$’s. The proof of following result may be found in [@DGS]. It closely follows Bowen’s proofs in [@Bowen71] and [@Bowen74].
\[thm:10\] If $(X,T)$ is an invertible expansive dynamical system with the periodic specification property, then the sequence $\mu_n$ defined by converges to a fully supported ergodic measure $\mu_B\in\operatorname{\mathcal{M}_T}(X)$, which is the unique measure of maximal entropy of $T$. In particular, $(X,T)$ is intrinsically ergodic.
In Theorems \[thm:8\]–\[thm:10\] one can replace invertible by surjective and expansiveness by positive expansiveness or expansiveness of the natural extension.
It is known that the set of fully supported measure is either empty or residual in $\operatorname{\mathcal{M}_T}(X)$, e.g. see [@DGS Proposition 21.11]. It is easy to see that if minimal points are dense in $X$ then the set of fully supported measures is nonempty, hence fully supported measures are dense in $\operatorname{\mathcal{M}_T}(X)$. It follows that the specification property has a strong influence not only on the topological entropy but also on the space of invariant measures. Sigmund studied relations between the specification property and the structure of $\operatorname{\mathcal{M}_T}(X)$ in [@Sigmund70; @Sigmund74]. Parthasarathy [@Parthasarathy61] proved similar results for a dynamical system $(Y,T)$ where $Y=X^\infty$ is a product of countably many copies of a complete separable metric space $X$ and $T$ is the shift transformation. Sigmund’s results may be summarized as follows:
\[thm:sigmund\] If $(X,T)$ has the periodic specification property, then:
1. \[Sig:1\] The set $\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathcal{M}}_T^{\text{co}}}(X)$ is dense, hence $\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathcal{M}}_T^e}(X)$ is arcwise connected and residual in $\operatorname{\mathcal{M}_T}(X)$, hence $\operatorname{\mathcal{M}_T}(X)$ is the Poulsen simplex.
2. \[Sig:5\] The set $\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathcal{M}}_T^e}(X)\cap\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathcal{M}}_T^+}(X)$ is residual in $\operatorname{\mathcal{M}_T}(X)$.
3. \[Sig:6\] The set $\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathcal{M}}_T^{\text{mix}}}(X)$ is of first category in $\operatorname{\mathcal{M}_T}(X)$.
4. \[Sig:9\] The set of all non-atomic measures is residual in $\operatorname{\mathcal{M}_T}(X)$.
5. \[Sig:10\] For every non-empty continuum $V\subset \operatorname{\mathcal{M}_T}(X)$ the set $\{x\in X : \hat{\omega}_T(x)=V\}$ is dense in $X$. In particular, every invariant measure has a generic point.
6. \[Sig:11\] The set $\{x\in X : \hat{\omega}_T(x)=\operatorname{\mathcal{M}_T}(X)\}$ is residual in $X$.
7. \[Sig:12\] The set of quasiregular points is of first category.
8. \[Sig:13\] For every $l\in {\mathbb{N}}$ the set $\bigcup_{p=l}^\infty P(p)$ is dense in $\operatorname{\mathcal{M}_T}(X)$, where $P(p)$ denotes the set of all invariant probability Borel measures supported on periodic points of period $p$.
9. The set of strongly mixing measures is of first category in $\operatorname{\mathcal{M}_T}(X)$.
There are various extensions of Sigmund’s results. Hofbauer [@Hofbauer87; @Hofbauer88] and Hofbauer and Raith [@HR] proposed weaker forms of the specification property to prove a variant of Sigmund’s Theorem for some transitive and not necessarily continuous transformations $T\colon [0,1]\to[0,1]$. Further generalizations were given by Abdenur, Bonatti, Crovisier [@ABC11], Coudene and Schapira [@CS], Sun and Tian [@ST12] to name a few.
Entropy-density of ergodic measures implies that the ergodic measures are dense in the simplex of invariant measures, but there are systems with dense but not entropy-dense set of ergodic measures (see [@GK Proposition 8.6.]).
The paper [@GK] introduces two new properties of a set $K\subset\text{Per}(T)$: *closeability* with respect to $K$ and *linkability* of $K$. It is proved there that Sigmund’s Theorem holds for a system which is closeable with respect to a linkable set $K\subset\text{Per}(T)$. The periodic specification property implies that the dynamical system is closeable with respect to $K=\text{Per}(T)$, which is also linkable. These methods lead to an extension of Sigmund’s theorem which covers also:
- systems with the periodic weak specification property,
- $\mathcal C^1$-generic diffeomorphisms on a manifold,
- irreducible Markov chains over a countable alphabet,
- all $\beta$-shifts,
- many other coded systems.
Furthermore, there is a continuous-time counterpart of this theory. For the details we refer the reader to [@GK].
There are many examples of systems with the specification property besides iterates of an Axiom A diffeomorphism restricted to an elementary set. Weiss [@Weiss73] noted that a mixing sofic shift (hence a mixing shift of finite type) has the periodic specification property. Kwapisz [@Kwapisz00] extended it to cocyclic shifts. Blokh characterized the periodic specification property for continuous interval maps [@Blokh83; @Blokh95] proving the following (an alternative proof was given by [@Buzzi97]):
A dynamical system $([0,1],T)$ has the periodic specification property if and only if it is topologically mixing.
Later, Blokh generalized this result to topological graphs [@Blokh84; @Blokh87] (see also a presentation of Blokh’s work in [@ARR]). An independent proof, extending some ideas for interval case in [@Buzzi97] was developed in [@HKO]. Recall that a *topological graph* is a continuum $G$ such that there exists a one-dimensional simplicial complex $\mathcal K$ with geometric carrier $|\mathcal K|$ homeomorphic to $G$ (see [@Croom78 p. 10])\[top-graph\]. Examples include the compact interval, circle, all finite trees etc.
Let $G$ be a topological graph. A dynamical system $(G,T)$ has the specification property if and only if it is topologically mixing.
It would be interesting to know whether a similar result holds for dendrites.
We conclude this section by mentioning some important applications of the specification property we have no place to describe in more details. The specification property was used by Takens and Verbitskiy [@TV] to obtain a variational description of the dimension of multifractal decompositions. This result motivated Pfister and Sullivan [@PS07] to introduce the $g$-almost product property renamed later the almost specification property by Thompson [@Thompson12]. Another application is due to Fan, Liao and Peyrière [@FPL08], who proved that for any system with the specification property the Bowen’s topological entropy of the set of generic points of any invariant measure $\mu$ is equal to the measure-theoretic entropy of $\mu$. Further generalizations can be found in [@Oliveira12; @KT13; @Varandas12].
Weak specification
==================
Among examples of dynamical systems with the periodic specification property are hyperbolic automorphisms of the torus. Lind proved that non-hyperbolic toral automorphisms do not have the periodic specification property (see Theorem \[thm:19\]). Nevertheless, Marcus showed that the periodic point measures are dense in the space of invariant measures for ergodic automorphisms of the torus (automorphisms which are ergodic with respect to the Haar measure on the torus). To apply Sigmund’s ideas Marcus has extracted in [@Marcus80 Lemma 2.1], the following property and showed that it holds for every ergodic toral automorphism.
\[def:weak\_spec\] A dynamical system $(X,T)$ has the *weak specification property* if for every ${\varepsilon}>0$ there is a nondecreasing function $M_{\varepsilon}\colon {\mathbb{N}}\to {\mathbb{N}}$ with $M_{\varepsilon}(n)/n\to 0$ as $n\to \infty$ such that any $M_{\varepsilon}$-spaced specification is ${\varepsilon}$-traced by some point in $X$. We say that $M_{\varepsilon}$ is an *${\varepsilon}$-gap function* for $(X,T)$.
Marcus did not give this property any name in [@Marcus80]. It was coined *almost weak specification* by Dateyama [@Dateyama82] (this name is also used by Pavlov [@Pavlov14] or Quas and Soo [@QS]). Dateyama chose this name probably due to the fact that at that time the term weak specification was used as a name for the property we call specification [@BS]. At present the *almost specification property* (see below) has gained some attention, and as we explain later it is independent of the property given by Definition \[def:weak\_spec\]. Therefore we think that *weak specification* is a more accurate name.
An easy modification of the above definition leads to the notion of the *periodic weak specification property* in which we additionally require that the tracing point is periodic. As for the classical specification property, both weak specification notions are equivalent provided the natural extension is expansive. The proof is analogous to that of Lemma \[lem:psp\].
If $(X,T)$ has the weak specification property and its natural expansion is expansive, then $(X,T)$ has the periodic weak specification property.
Note that the length of a gap a tracing point is allowed to spend between two orbit segments of a specification depends on the length of the later segment, that is, in the definition of an $\nu$-spaced specification we have the condition $$a_i-b_{i-1} \ge \nu(b_i-a_i+1) \text{ for }2\le i \le n. \label{spaced:1}$$ One may consider a “dual” notion of an $\nu$-spaced specification in which the length of a gap between two consecutive orbit segments in a specification is a function of the length of the earlier segment, that is, we may replace the condition by $$a_i-b_{i-1} \ge \nu(b_{i-1}-a_{i-1}+1) \text{ for }2\le i \le n. \label{spaced:2}$$ It seems that there is no agreement which of those conditions should be used and both are present in the literature (the variant using is used in [@Dateyama82; @Dateyama91; @KOR; @QS] while is required by [@Pavlov14]). These two “dual” definitions of the weak specification property are non-equivalent, as shown by the example below. Nevertheless, the proofs assuming one of the variants seem to be easily adapted to the case when the other variant is used.
Let us call, tentatively, the weak specification property as defined in Definition \[def:weak\_spec\] the *forward weak specification* property and its dual version (the one in which the condition replaces ) the *backward weak specification* property. We will construct two shift spaces (see Section \[sec:symbolic\] for definitions we use here). Consider two sets of words over $\{0,1\}$ given by $$\mathcal{F}={\left\{1 0^b 1^a : a,b\in{\mathbb{N}},\,b<\log_2 (a)\right\}}\text{ and }\mathcal{G}={\left\{1^a 0^b 1 : a,b\in{\mathbb{N}},\,b<\log_2 (a)\right\}}.$$ Let $X=X_{\mathcal{F}}$ and $Y=X_{\mathcal{G}}$ be shift spaces defined by taking $\mathcal{F}$ and $\mathcal{G}$ as the sets of forbidden words. Note that for any words $u,w$ admissible in $X$ we have $u 0^{\lceil\log_2 |w|\rceil}w\in \operatorname{\operatorname{\mathcal{B}}}(X)$, and similarly if $u,w\in\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathcal{B}}}(Y)$, then $u 0^{\lceil\log_2 |u|\rceil}w$ is also admissible in $Y$. Using this observation it is easy to check that $(X,\sigma)$ satisfies the forward weak specification property and $(Y,\sigma)$ satisfies the backward weak specification property. Note that both shift spaces $X$ and $Y$ contain points $x_1=1^\infty$ and $x_2=01^\infty$. Thus, the words $1^\ell$ and $01^\ell$ are admissible in both $X$ and $Y$ for all $\ell\in{\mathbb{N}}$. Furthermore, the necessary condition for the word $1 w 01^{\ell}$ to be admissible in $X$ is that $w$ ends with $0^s$ where $s=\lfloor\log_2\ell\rfloor$. Assume that $X$ has also the backward specification property. Let $k=M_{1/2}(1)$ where $M_{1/2}$ denotes the $1/2$-(“backward”)-gap function for $X$. This implies that for every $\ell\in{\mathbb{N}}$ there exists a word $w$ of length $k$ such that $1 w 01^{\ell}$ is admissible in $X$. But this contradicts the definition of $X$ if $\log_2(\ell)\ge k+1$. Therefore $X$ cannot have the backward weak specification property. A similar argument shows that $Y$ does not have the forward weak specification property.
It is easy to see that weak specification is inherited by factors, finite products and higher iterates. Furthermore it implies topological mixing.
1. If $(X,T)$ has the weak specification property then $(X,T^k)$ has the weak specification property for every $k\geq 1$.
2. If $(X,T)$, $(Y,S)$ have the weak specification property then $(X\times Y, T\times S)$ has the weak specification property.
3. Every factor of a system with the weak specification property has the weak specification property.
4. Every onto map $T\colon X\to X$ with the weak specification property is topologically mixing.
We prove only the last statement as the first three are obvious. Take $x,y\in X$ and ${\varepsilon}>0$. It is enough to prove that for every $n\geq M_{\varepsilon}(1)+1$ there exists $z\in X$ such that $\rho(x,z)<{\varepsilon}$ and $\rho(T^n(z),y)<{\varepsilon}$. Fix any $n> M_{{\varepsilon}}(1)$. Let $a_1=b_1=0$, $a_2=b_2=n$ and take any $y'\in T^{-n}({\left\{y\right\}})$. Then ${\left\{T^{[a_1,b_1]}(x),T^{[a_2,b_2]}(y')\right\}}$ is an $M_{\varepsilon}(1)$-spaced specification and hence the result follows.
Specification for automorphisms of compact groups
-------------------------------------------------
Sigmund [@Sigmund74 p. 287, Remark (E)] asked which ergodic automorphisms of compact groups have the specification property. Lind [@Lind79] gave the answer for ergodic toral automorphisms. The result of Marcus completed the characterization of specification-like properties for that case. We will briefly describe these results below.
Lind [@Lind82] calls a toral automorphisms *quasi-hyperbolic* if the associated linear map has no roots of unity as eigenvalues. An automorphisms of the torus is quasi-hyperbolic if and only if it is ergodic with respect to Haar measure [@Halmos43]. Quasi-hyperbolic toral automorphisms can be classified using the spectral properties of the associated linear maps. Following Lind [@Lind79] we distinguish:
- *Hyperbolic automorphisms*, that is, those without eigenvalues on the unit circle.
- *Central spin automorphisms*, that is, those with some eigenvalues on the unit circle, but without off-diagonal $1$’s in the Jordan blocks associated with unitary eigenvalues.
- *Central skew automorphisms*, that is, those with off-diagonal $1$’s in the Jordan blocks associated with some unitary eigenvalues.
We can summarize results of [@Lind82; @Marcus80] as follows.
\[thm:19\] Let $T$ be a quasi-hyperbolic toral automorphisms. Then:
1. $T$ has the periodic specification property if and only if $T$ is hyperbolic;
2. $T$ has the specification property, but does not have the periodic specification property if and only if $T$ is central spin;
3. $T$ has the weak specification property, but does not have the specification property if and only if $T$ is central skew.
Actually Marcus (see main theorem in [@Marcus80]) obtained a slightly stronger, periodic version of weak specification which allowed him to prove that for any quasi-hyperbolic toral automorphism $T$ the invariant measures supported on periodic points are dense in $\operatorname{\mathcal{M}_T}(X)$.
The above theorem shows that (periodic) specification and weak specification are different properties.
Clearly, specification implies weak specification. We have explained above why the converse is not true.
Similar results hold for ergodic automorphisms of other compact metric groups. Here we mention only a result of Dateyama (see [@Dateyama91]) and refer the reader to references therein for more details and a more general statement for some nonabelian groups.
Let $X$ be a compact metric abelian group and $T$ be an automorphism of $X$. Then $(X, T)$ is ergodic with respect to Haar measure if and only if $(X, T)$ satisfies weak specification.
A dynamical system $(X,T)$ is called *universal* if for every invertible, non-atomic, ergodic, and measure-preserving system $(Y,S,\mu)$ with the measure-theoretic entropy strictly less than the topological entropy of $T$ there exists a Borel embedding of $(Y, S)$ into $(X,T)$. It is *fully universal* if one can, in addition, choose this embedding in such a way that $\text{supp}(\mu^*)=X$, where $\mu^*$ denotes the push-forward of $\mu$. The Krieger theorem says that the full shift over a finite alphabet is universal. Lind and Thouvenot [@LT78] proved that hyperbolic toral automorphisms are fully universal. This was recently extended by Quas and Soo, who proved the following theorem (we refer to [@QS] for terms not defined here).
A self homeomorphism of a compact metric space is fully universal whenever it satisfies
1. weak specification,
2. asymptotic entropy expansiveness,
3. the small boundary property.
Benjy Weiss (personal communication) has proved that the second assumption above (asymptotic entropy expansiveness) is not necessary. He also has a version of this result for ${\mathbb{Z}}^d$ actions. Universality of ${\mathbb{Z}}^d$-actions was also a subject of [@RS01].
Almost specification
====================
Another specification-like notion is the *almost specification property*. Pfister and Sullivan introduced it as the *$g$-almost product property* in [@PS05]. Thompson [@Thompson12] used a slightly modified definition and renamed it the *almost specification property*. $\beta$-shifts are model examples of dynamical systems with the almost specification property (see [@CT12; @PS05]). Here we follow Thompson’s approach, hence the almost specification property presented below is a priori weaker (less restrictive) than the notion introduced by Pfister and Sullivan.
We say that $g \colon {{{\mathbb{N}}_0}}\times(0,{\varepsilon}_0)\to{\mathbb{N}}$, where ${\varepsilon}_0>0$ is a *mistake function* if for all ${\varepsilon}<{\varepsilon}_0$ and all $n \in{{{\mathbb{N}}_0}}$ we have $g(n, {\varepsilon}) \le g(n + 1, {\varepsilon})$ and $$\lim_{n\to \infty}
\frac{g(n, {\varepsilon})}{n}= 0.$$ Given a mistake function $g$ we define a function $k_g\colon (0,\infty) \to {\mathbb{N}}$ by declaring $k_g({\varepsilon})$ to be the smallest $n\in{\mathbb{N}}$ such that $g(m,{\varepsilon})<m{\varepsilon}$ for all $m\ge n$.
Given a mistake function $g$, $0<{\varepsilon}<{\varepsilon}_0$ and $n\ge k_g({\varepsilon})$ we define the set $$I(g; n, {\varepsilon}) := \{\Lambda\subset {\left\{0,1,\ldots, n - 1\right\}} : \#\Lambda \ge n-g(n,{\varepsilon})\}.$$
We say that a point $y\in X$ $(g;{\varepsilon},n)$-traces an orbit segment $T^{[a,b]}(x)$ if for some $\Lambda\in I(g;n,{\varepsilon})$ we have $\rho^T_\Lambda(T^a(x),T^a(y))\le{\varepsilon}$. By $B_n(g;x,{\varepsilon})$ we denote the set of all points which $(g;{\varepsilon},n)$-trace an orbit segment $T^{[0,n)}(x)$. Note that $B_n(g;x,{\varepsilon})$ is always closed and nonempty.
A dynamical system $(X,T)$ has the *almost specification property* if there exists a mistake function $g$ such that for any $m\geq 1$, any ${\varepsilon}_1,\ldots,{\varepsilon}_m > 0$, and any specification $\{T^{[a_j,b_j]}(x_j)\}_{j=1}^m$ with $b_j-a_j+1\ge k_g({\varepsilon}_j)$ for every $j=1,\ldots,m$ we can find a point $z\in X$ which $(g;b_j-a_j+1,{\varepsilon}_j)$-traces the orbit segment $T^{[a_j,b_j]}(x_j)$ for every $j=1,\ldots,m$.
In other words, the appropriate part of the orbit of $z$ ${\varepsilon}_j$-traces with at most $g(b_j-a_j+1,{\varepsilon}_j)$ mistakes the orbit of $x_j$ over $[a_j,b_j]$.
Pfister and Sullivan [@PS07 Proposition 2.1] proved that the specification property implies the $g$-almost product property with any mistake function $g$. The proof can be easily adapted to show that the specification property implies the almost specification property. The converse is not true because for every $\beta>1$ the $\beta$-shift $X_\beta$ has the almost specification property with a mistake function $g(n)=1$ for all $n\in{\mathbb{N}}$ (see [@PS07]), while the set of $\beta>1$ such that $X_\beta$ has the specification property has Lebesgue measure zero [@Buzzi97; @Schmeling97]. We recall that $\beta$-shifts are symbolic encodings of the $\beta$-transformations $x\mapsto \beta x \bmod 1$ on $[0,1]$. Given $\beta>1$ find a sequence $\{b_j\}_{j=1}^\infty$ with $0\le b_j <\beta$ such that $$1=\sum_{j=1}^\infty \frac{b_j}{\beta^j},$$ where the $j$th “digit” of the above $\beta$-expansion of $1$ is given by $$b_j=\lfloor \beta\cdot T_\beta^{j-1}(1)\rfloor, \quad\text{ where}\quad T_\beta(x)=\beta x -\lfloor\beta x\rfloor =\beta x\bmod 1 \text{ for }x\in[0,1].$$ If $\{b_j\}_{j=1}^\infty$ is not finite, that is, it does not end with a sequence of zeros only, then the $\beta$-shift is the set $X_\beta$ of all infinite sequences $x$ over the alphabet $\{0,1,\ldots,\lfloor \beta\rfloor\}$ such that $\sigma^k(x)<\{b_j\}_{j=1}^\infty$ lexicographically for each $k>0$. If $$\{b_j\}_{j=1}^\infty=i_1,\ldots,i_m,0,0,\ldots,$$ then $x\in X_\beta$ if and only if $$\sigma^k(x)< i_1,\ldots,i_{m-1},(i_m-1), i_1,\ldots,i_{m-1},(i_m-1), i_1,\ldots$$ lexicographically for each $k>0$ (see [@Parry60]). This notion was introduced by Rényi in [@R]. For more details see [@Blanchard89; @Parry60; @Thomsen05].
As noted above, the almost specification property of $(X,T)$ does not imply surjectivity of $T$. Furthermore, $(X,T)$ has the almost specification property if and only if it has the same property when restricted to the measure center (see [@WOC Theorem 6.7.] or [@KKO Theorem 5.1.] for a proof). As a consequence, almost specification property alone does not imply any recurrence property like transitivity or mixing (see [@KKO]). But the restriction of a system with the almost specification property to the measure center must be weakly mixing (see [@KKO]). We do not know whether one can conclude that almost specification implies mixing on the measure center.
Thompson [@Thompson12] used the almost specification property to study the irregular set of a dynamical system $(X,T)$. Given a continuous function $\varphi \colon X \to {\mathbb{R}}$ we consider the *irregular set* for $\varphi$ defined by $$\hat{X}(\varphi,T):= \left\{x\in X: \lim_{n\to \infty}\frac{1}{n}\sum_{i=0}^{n-1}\varphi(T^i(x)) \text{ does not exist}\right\}.$$ Some authors call it the *set of points with historic behaviour*. It is meant to stress that these points witness the history of the system and record the fluctuations, while points for which the limit exists capture only the average behaviour. The set $\hat{X}$ is the natural object of study of multifractal analysis. Although it is not detectable from the point of view of ergodic theory (it follows from Birkhoff’s ergodic theorem that $\hat{X}$ is a universally null set) it can be large from the point of view of dimension theory. There is a vast literature on this topic, see [@EKL; @Olsen03b; @OW03] to mention only a few contributions. Thompson’s main result (see below) says that the irregular set of a system with the almost specification property is either empty or has full topological entropy. In this statement entropy is the Bowen’s dimension-like characteristic of a non necessarily compact, nor invariant set $A\subset X$ denoted by ${h_\textrm{top}}(A,T)$ (see [@Thompson12 Definition 3.7] or [@Pesin] for more details).
Let $(X, T)$ be a dynamical system with the almost specification property. If a continuous function $\varphi \colon X\to {\mathbb{R}}$ satisfies $$\inf_{\mu \in \operatorname{\mathcal{M}_T}(X)}\int \varphi d\mu <\sup_{\mu \in \operatorname{\mathcal{M}_T}(X)}\int \varphi d\mu$$ then ${h_\textrm{top}}(\hat{X}(\varphi,T),T)={h_\textrm{top}}(T)$.
Almost and weak specification
=============================
It is natural to ask whether the weak or almost specification property implies intrinsic ergodicity. Moreover, the definition of these properties might suggest that weak specification implies almost specification. The problem of intrinsic ergodicity of shift spaces with almost specification was mentioned in [@CT12 p. 798], where another approach was developed in order to prove that certain classes of symbolic systems and their factors are intrinsically ergodic. It turns out that there are shift spaces with the weak (almost) specification property and many measures of maximal entropy. Moreover, there is no connection between the almost and the weak specification property. This was discovered independently by Pavlov [@Pavlov14] and the authors of [@KOR]. In the latter paper there is a construction of a family of shift spaces, which contains:
1. A shift space with the almost specification property and finite number of measures of maximal entropy concentrated on disjoint nowhere dense subsystems.
2. A shift space with the weak specification property and finite number of measures of maximal entropy concentrated on disjoint nowhere dense subsystems.
3. A shift space with the almost specification property but without weak specification.
4. Shift spaces $X$ and $Y$ satisfying
1. $Y$ is a factor of $X$,
2. their languages possess the Climenhaga-Thompson decomposition (see [@CT12]) $\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathcal{B}}}(X)=\operatorname{\mathcal{C}^p_X}\cdot\operatorname{\mathcal{G}}_X\cdot\operatorname{\mathcal{C}^s_X}$ and $\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathcal{B}}}(Y)=\operatorname{\mathcal{C}^p_Y}\cdot\operatorname{\mathcal{G}}_Y\cdot\operatorname{\mathcal{C}^s_Y}$,
3. $h(\operatorname{\mathcal{G}}_X)>h(\operatorname{\mathcal{C}^p_X}\cup\operatorname{\mathcal{C}^s_X})$ and $h(\operatorname{\mathcal{G}}_Y) < h(\operatorname{\mathcal{C}^p_Y}\cup\operatorname{\mathcal{C}^s_Y})$,
4. $X$ is intrinsically ergodic, while $Y$ is not.
This construction proves that the sufficient condition for the inheritance of intrinsic ergodicity by factors from the Climenhaga-Thompson paper [@CT12] is optimal — if this condition does not hold, then the symbolic systems to which Theorem of [@CT12] applies may have a factor with many measures of maximal entropy. We refer the reader to [@CT12; @KOR] for more details. It is also proved in [@KOR] that nontrivial dynamical systems with the almost specification property and a full invariant measure have uniform positive entropy and horseshoes (subsystems which are extensions of the full shift over a finite alphabet). Since $(X,T)$ has the almost specification property if and only if it has the same property when restricted to the measure center (see [@WOC Theorem 6.7.] and [@KKO Theorem 5.1.]), it follows that minimal points are dense in the measure center, thus a minimal system with the almost specification property must be trivial.
It follows from [@Pavlov14; @KOR] that for any positive nondecreasing function $f\colon{\mathbb{N}}\to{{{\mathbb{N}}_0}}$ with $$\lim_{n\to \infty}\frac{f(n)}{n}=0 \quad \text{ and } \quad \liminf_{n\to\infty}\frac{f(n)}{\ln n} >0,$$ there exists a shift space, which has the weak specification property with the gap function $f(n)$ and at least two measures of maximal entropy, whose supports are disjoint. In [@KOR] it is shown that the same condition as for the gap function suffices for the existence of a shift space with the almost specification property, the mistake function $f$, and many measures of maximal entropy. Pavlov [@Pavlov14] proves that even a constant mistake function $g(n) = 4$ can not guarantee intrinsic ergodicity. He also shows that if the mistake or the gap function grows sufficiently slowly, then the shift cannot have two measures of maximal entropy with disjoint supports.
If a shift space $X$ has either
1. the weak specification property with the gap function $f$ satisfying $$\liminf_{n\to\infty}\frac{f(n)}{\ln n} =0, \text{ or}$$
2. the almost specification property with the mistake function $g(n) = 1$,
then it cannot have two measures of maximal entropy with disjoint support.
Approximate product property {#sec:app}
============================
Pfister and Sullivan [@PS05 Definition 4.2] introduced the following weaker form of the specification property.
We say that a dynamical system $(X,T)$ has the *approximate product structure* if for any ${\varepsilon}>0$, $\delta_1>0$ and $\delta_2>0$ there exists an integer $N>0$ such that for any $n\geq N$ and $\{x_i\}_{i=1}^{\infty} \subset X$ there are $\{h_i\}_{i=1}^{\infty}\subset{{{\mathbb{N}}_0}}$ and $y\in X$ satisfying $h_1=0$, $n\leq h_{i+1}-h_i\leq n(1+\delta_2)$ and $${ \left|\big\{0\leq j<n\,:\,\rho\big(T^{h_i+j}(y),T^j(x_i)\big)>{\varepsilon}\big\}\right|\leq \delta_1} n\text{ for all } i\in{\mathbb{N}}.$$
The thermodynamic behaviour of a dynamical system with the approximate product structure is a consequence of the large scale structure of the orbit space of the system, which is essentially the product of weakly interacting large subsystems. Pfister and Sullivan refer to the notion of an asymptotically decoupled probability measure introduced in [@Pfister02] in the context of statistical mechanics as an inspiration for their definition. They used almost product structure to obtain large deviations results, which were previously proven for dynamical systems with the specification property in [@EKW]. They achieved it by proving first that the approximate product property is strong enough to imply entropy-density of ergodic measures.
It is clear that the weak (almost) specification property implies the approximate product property. We demonstrate below why neither converse is true.
We observe that the approximate product property is equivalent to transitivity for systems with the shadowing property. Thus every transitive system with shadowing is an example of a system with the approximate product property. Readers not familiar with the definition of the shadowing property will find it in the next section.
\[thm:shd:aps\] Assume that $(X,T)$ has the shadowing property. The following conditions are equivalent:
1. $(X,T)$ is transitive,\[shd:aps:1\]
2. $(X,T)$ has the approximate product property.\[shd:aps:2\]
First we prove $\eqref{shd:aps:2}\Longrightarrow\eqref{shd:aps:1}$. First we show that $T$ restricted to its measure center is transitive. Let $U$, $V$ be nonempty open subsets of $X$ with a nonempty intersection with the measure center. It follows that there are invariant measures $\mu_U$ and $\mu_V$ such that $\mu_U(U)>0$ and $\mu_V(V)>0$. Pfister and Sullivan proved [@PS05 Theorem 2.1] that there is a sequence $\mu_n$ of ergodic measures weak$^*$ converging to $\mu=(1/2)(\mu_U+\mu_V)$. By [@DGS Proposition 2.7] $\liminf_{n\to\infty}\mu_n(W)\geq \mu(W)$ for every open set $W$. Hence there is $m$ such that $\mu_m(U)>0$, and $\mu_m(V)>0$. Since $\mu_m$ is ergodic, $T$ is transitive on $\operatorname{supp}\mu_m$. This shows that $U\cap T^n(V)$ is nonempty for some $n\in{\mathbb{N}}$ and therefore $(X,T)$ is transitive on the measure center.
Note that if $T$ has the shadowing property, then minimal points are dense in $\Omega(T)$ (see [@Moothathu11 Corollary 1(i)]). On the other hand the measure center always contains the closure of the set of minimal points and is contained in $\Omega(T)$. Hence shadowing implies that the measure center coincides with the non-wandering set. But shadowing implies also that $\operatorname{CR}(T)=\Omega(T)$ ([@AH Theorem 3.1.2.]) therefore the system $(\operatorname{CR}(T),T)$ is transitive. By [@TShi Proposition 5] (see also [@Mazur00]) if $(\operatorname{CR}(T),T)$ is transitive, then $\operatorname{CR}(T)=X$. We conclude that $(X,T)$ is also transitive. For the proof of $\eqref{shd:aps:1}\Longrightarrow\eqref{shd:aps:2}$ fix any ${\varepsilon},\delta_1,\delta_2>0$. Use shadowing to pick $\delta>0$ for the given ${\varepsilon}$. There is a finite cover $\{U_1,\ldots, U_p\}$ of $X$ with the diameter smaller than $\delta$. Since $T$ is transitive, for every pair $i,j\in\{1,\ldots, p\}$ there exists $\alpha(i,j)\in{\mathbb{N}}$ and a point $z_{i,j}\in U_i$ such that $T^{\alpha(i,j)}(z_{i,j})\in U_j$. Let $M=\max\limits_{i,j}\{\alpha(i,j)\}\in{\mathbb{N}}$. Let $N$ be such that $M\leq N\delta_2$. We claim that it is enough to set $N({\varepsilon},\delta_1,\delta_2)=N$. Fix ${\underline{x}=\{x_n\}_{n=0}^{\infty}}\in X^{\infty}$ and $n\geq N$. For every $i\in{\mathbb{N}}$ let $k(i)\in\{1,\ldots, p\}$ be such that $x_i\in U_{k(i)}$ and $l(i)\in\{1,\ldots, p\}$ satisfy $T^{n}(x_i)\in U_{l(i)}$.
Define a $\delta$-pseudo-orbit as follows: $$\begin{gathered}
\big(x_1,\,T(x_1),\,\ldots,\, T^{n-1}(x_1),\quad z_{l(1),k(2)},\, T( z_{l(1),k(2)}),\ldots,\, T^{\alpha(l(1), k(2))-1}( z_{l(1),k(2)}),\quad\\
x_2,\,T(x_2),\,\ldots, \,T^{n-1}(x_2),\quad z_{l(2), k(3)},\,\ldots\big).
\end{gathered}$$ There exists $y\in X$ which ${\varepsilon}$-traces it. Setting $$h_i=(i-1)n+\sum_{j=1}^{i-1}\alpha\big(l(j), k(j+1)\big),$$ we get that for all $i\in{\mathbb{N}}$ one has $T^{h_i}(y)\in B_n(x_i,{\varepsilon})$. Moreover $h_1=0$ and for any $i\in{\mathbb{N}}$ we have $h_{i+1}-h_i=n+\alpha\big (l(i),k(i+1)\big)\in\big[n, n(1+\delta_2)\big]$. This completes the proof.
As a corollary we obtain the following theorem, which is an extension of a result of Li and Oprocha [@LO13] who proved that for weakly mixing systems with shadowing the ergodic measures supported on orbit closures of regularly recurrent points are dense in the simplex of all invariant Borel probability measures. We obtain a stronger conclusion of entropy density of ergodic measures under a weaker assumption of transitivity and shadowing, but we do not know whether the measures supported on the orbit closures of regularly recurrent points are dense in this more general situation.
\[cor:shad\] If $(X,T)$ is transitive and has the shadowing property, then the set $\mathcal M_T^e(X)$ is entropy-dense in $\mathcal M_T(X)$.
Every Axiom A diffeomorphism and every transitive shift of finite type has the shadowing property (see [@AH] and [@WaltersSFT]).
\[ex:adding\] We briefly recall the construction of the *adding machine*. Equip $\Sigma=\{0,1\}^\infty$ with the product topology. Define the addition $\oplus$ $$\Sigma\times\Sigma\ni (\alpha,\beta)\mapsto \alpha\oplus\beta \in\Sigma$$ as the coordinate-wise addition modulo $2$ with possible infinite carry-over (see [@Vries], p. 246 for details). Let $\tau \colon\Sigma\to\Sigma$ be given by $\tau(z)=z\oplus \mathbf{1}$, where $\mathbf{1}=(1,0,0,\ldots)$.
The dynamical system $(\Sigma,\tau)$ is known as the *dyadic adding machine* and has the shadowing property (see [@Kurka03]). Moreover $(\Sigma,\tau)$ is minimal, equicontinuous, uniquely ergodic, transitive but not totally transitive and has zero topological entropy (see [@Vries], Chapter III, (5.12) 3). As a consequence of Corollary \[cor:shad\] we obtain that $(\Sigma, \tau)$ has the approximate product structure, but it can have neither weak nor almost specification.
By the same argument, $(\Sigma,\tau^2)$ does not have approximate product structure since it has the shadowing property, but is not transitive.
The above example shows that approximate product structure does not imply weak mixing, nor positive topological entropy, nor is inherited by Cartesian products. Moreover, it demonstrates that $(X,T)$ may have the approximate product structure while $T^k$ does not have this property for some $k\ge 2$.
Any factor of a system with the approximate product structure has the approximate product structure.
If the set of ergodic measures is dense in the simplex of all invariant measures, then the simplex is either trivial or the Poulsen simplex. Example \[ex:adding\] above shows that the approximate product property cannot guarantee that the simplex of invariant measures is Poulsen.
Dynamical properties relative to a regular periodic decomposition
-----------------------------------------------------------------
For shifts of finite type or interval maps the periodic specification property is equivalent to topological mixing. Therefore transitive, but not mixing shifts of finite type and interval maps do not have specification, nor weak (almost) specification as the later two properties imply weak mixing which is in this case equivalent to mixing. But we will show that these and similar examples have the approximate product property.
The domain of a transitive map $T\colon X\to X$ cannot be decomposed into $T$-invariant topologically nontrivial subdomains (sets with pairwise disjoint nonempty interior). Banks studied in [@Banks97] transitive maps $T$ such that $T^n$ is not transitive for some integer $n\ge 2$. He showed that for such maps there exists a decomposition of $X$ into topologically nontrivial subsets $D_0,D_1,\ldots,D_{n-1}$ which are mapped by $T$ in a periodic fashion, that is, $T(D_i)=D_{(i+1)\bmod n}$ for $0\le i\le n-1$ and fulfilling some additional assumption. He called these decompositions *regular periodic decompositions*.
We say that a collection $\mathcal{D}=\{D_0,\ldots,D_{n-1}\}$ is a *regular periodic decomposition* of a dynamical system $(X,T)$ if the following conditions are satisfied:
1. for each $i\in\{0,\ldots, n-1\}$ the set $D_i$ is regular closed (that is $D_i=\overline{\text{int}(D_i)}$),
2. $D_i\cap D_j$ is nowhere dense whenever $i\neq j$,
3. $T(D_i)\subset D_{(i+1)\bmod n}$ for $0\leq i<n-1$,
4. $D_0\cup\ldots\cup D_{n-1}=X$.
Clearly, $\{X\}$ is always a regular periodic decomposition of the space $X$. We call such a decomposition [*trivial*]{}. Banks proved that a transitive dynamical system is either totally transitive, or it has a regular periodic decomposition $\mathcal{D}=\{D_0,\ldots,D_{n-1}\}$ for some $n\ge 2$.
A class $P$ of compact dynamical systems is a *property* if it is saturated with respect to conjugacy, that is, if $(X,T)\in P$ and $(Y,S)$ is conjugated to $(X,T)$, then $(Y,S)\in P$.
\[df:relativespec\] Let $P$ be a property of compact dynamical systems (e.g. transitivity, (weak) mixing, specification). A dynamical system $(X,T)$ has the [*property $P$ relative to a regular periodic decomposition $\mathcal D=\{D_0,\ldots, D_{n-1}\}$*]{} if $T^n|_{D_i}$ has the property $P$ for each $i\in\{0,\ldots,n-1\}$. We say that $(X,T)$ has the *relative property $P$*, if there exists a regular periodic decomposition $\mathcal D$ such that $(X,T)$ has the relative property $P$ with respect to $\mathcal D$.
If $(X,T)$ has the property $P$ and $\tau$ is a cyclic permutation of the set $\{0,\ldots, r-1\}$ given by $\tau(i)=i+1\bmod r$, then the system $$\big(X\times\{0,\ldots, r-1\},\, S\big), \text{ where }S(x,i)=
\begin{cases} (T(x),1),&\text{ if }i=0,\\
(x,\tau(i)),&\text{ otherwise}
\end{cases}$$ has the relative property $P$ with respect to the regular periodic decomposition $\{D_0,\ldots, D_{r-1}\}$ where $D_i=X\times\{i\}$ for every $i\in\{0,\ldots, r-1\}$.
Hence we can consider systems with the relative specification-like property. It is a simple but a bit surprising fact that the almost product property and its relative version are equivalent.
\[thm:40\] A dynamical system $(X,T)$ has the relative approximate product structure if and only if it has the approximate product structure.
Choose a regular periodic decomposition $\mathcal D=\{D_0,\ldots, D_{r-1}\}$ such that $T^r|_{D_i}$ has the approximate product structure for every $i\in\{0,\ldots, r-1\}$. Fix ${\varepsilon}>0$, $\delta_1>0$ and $\delta_2>0$. Let $\eta\in(0,{\varepsilon})$ be such that for every $y,z\in X$ and every $i=0,\ldots, r$ one has $\rho(T^i(y), T^i(z))\leq{\varepsilon}$ provided $\rho(y,z)\leq\eta$. Let $M\geq 4$ be chosen for $\eta,\, \delta_1/2,\, \delta_2/2$ using the approximate product structure of $T^r|_{D_0}$. Let $N\geq rM$ be such that $\delta_2\geq 6r/(N-2r)$. We claim that it is enough to set $N({\varepsilon}, \delta_1, \delta_2)=N$. Fix $n\geq N$ and $\{x_i\}_{i=1}^{\infty}\in X^{\infty}$. For any $i\in{\mathbb{N}}$ let $\tilde x_i\in D_0$ be such that there exists $p_i\in\{0,\ldots, r-1\}$ such that $T^{p_i}(\tilde x_i)=x_i$. There are $m> M$ and $q\in\{0,\ldots,r-1\}$ satisfying $n=(m-1)r-q$. Let $y\in D_0$ and $\{h_i\}_{i=1}^{\infty}\subset{\mathbb{N}}$ be such that $h_1=0$, $m\leq h_{i+1}-h_i\leq (1+\delta_2/2)m$ for every $i\in{\mathbb{N}}$ and $$\left|\big\{0\leq j<m\,:\,\rho\big(T^{r(h_i+j)}(y),T^{rj}(\tilde x_i)\big)>\eta\big\}\right|\leq \delta_1 m/2\text{ for any } i\in{\mathbb{N}}.$$ By the choice of $\eta$ we get that $$\left|\big\{0\leq j<rm\,:\,\rho\big(T^{rh_i+j}(y),T^j(\tilde x_i)\big)>{\varepsilon}\big\}\right|\leq \delta_1rm/2\text{ for any } i\in{\mathbb{N}}.$$ Consequently, $$\left|\big\{0\leq j<r(m-1)\,:\,\rho\big(T^{rh_i+j+p_i}(y),T^j( x_i)\big)>{\varepsilon}\big\}\right|\leq \delta_1rm/2\text{ for any } i\in{\mathbb{N}}.$$ Set $z=T^{p_1}(y)$, $g_1=0$ and $g_i=rh_i+p_i$ for $i>1$. One has $g_{i+1}-g_i=r(h_{i+1}-h_i)+p_{i+1}-p_i\in [r(m-1), (1+\delta_2/2)rm+r]\subset[n,(1+\delta_2)n]$ for any $i>1$, where the inclusion holds because $\delta_2\geq 6r/(n-2r)$ and hence $(1+\delta_2/2)rm+r\leq(1+\delta_2)((m-1)r-q)$ . Moreover for every $i\in{\mathbb{N}}$ we have $$\left|\big\{0\leq j<n\,:\,\rho\big(T^{g_i}(z),T^j( x_i)\big)>{\varepsilon}\big\}\right|\leq \delta_1rm/2\leq \delta_1 n\text{ for any } i\in{\mathbb{N}}$$ since $m\geq 4$. This completes the proof.
We recall that a *topological graph* (or a *graph* for short) is, informally said, a compact connected metric space homeomorphic to a representation of a graph (a combinatorial object consisting of a finite set of vertices and a finite set of edges joining pairs of distinct vertices) in the Euclidean space, where the vertices of the graph are represented by distinct points and the edges are disjoint arcs joining the corresponding pairs of points (see page or [@Croom78 p. 10]).
\[cor:41\] If $(X,T)$ has the relative almost (weak) specification property, then it has the approximate product property. In particular, transitive and noninvertible graph map or transitive sofic shift has the approximate product property.
The first part is a consequence of the previous theorem. The second part follows from the well known fact that transitive noninvertible graph maps and transitive sofic shifts have the relative specification property. Note that we added the noninvertibility assumption for graph maps to exclude the irrational rotation of the circle. It follows from [@Blokh84; @Blokh87] (see also [@Banks97]) that this is the only possible example of a transitive graph map without relative specification.
Specification and shadowing {#sec:shadowing}
===========================
One of fundamental tools of topological dynamics is the shadowing property (or pseudo-orbit tracing property), which allows tracing pseudo-orbits (approximate orbits, that is, sequences where the next point is uniformly close to the image of the previous point) with real orbits. We recall that a sequence ${\underline{x}=\{x_n\}_{n=0}^{\infty}}\in X^\infty$ is a *$\delta$-pseudo-orbit* for $T$ if $\rho(T(x_n),x_{n+1})<\delta$ for each $n\in{{{\mathbb{N}}_0}}$. We say that a dynamical system $(X,T)$ has the *shadowing property* if for any ${\varepsilon}>0$ there is a $\delta>0$ such that for every $\delta$-pseudo-orbit ${\underline{x}=\{x_n\}_{n=0}^{\infty}}$ one can find a point $y\in X$ with $\rho(x_n,T^n(y))<{\varepsilon}$ for all $n\in{{{\mathbb{N}}_0}}$. Bowen defined specification for systems with the shadowing property. Subsequent generalizations of the specification property were defined mostly for systems without the shadowing property. It is perhaps an interesting phenomenon that if $(X,T)$ has the shadowing property, then many specification-like properties are equivalent.
There are many notions generalizing the shadowing property. Here we are concerned with two averaged versions of shadowing. Both follow from the almost specification property (see [@KKO; @WOC]).
The first was introduced by Blank [@Blank88], who considered sequences ${\underline{x}=\{x_n\}_{n=0}^{\infty}}$ in $X$ in which the distances $\rho(T(x_n),x_{n+1})$ are small only on average and points whose orbits trace such sequences with small average errors.
A sequence ${\{x_{n}\}_{n=0}^{\infty}}\in X^{\infty}$ is a *$\delta$-average-pseudo-orbit* for $T$ if there is an integer $N>0$ such that for every $n>N$ and $k\geq 0$ one has $$\frac{1}{n}\sum_{i=0}^{n-1} \rho(T(x_{i+k}),x_{i+k+1})<\delta.$$
A dynamical system $(X,T)$ has the *average shadowing property* if for every ${\varepsilon}>0$ there is a $\delta>0$ such that for any $\delta$-average-pseudo-orbit ${\{x_{n}\}_{n=0}^{\infty}}$ for $T$ there is $y\in X$ with $$\limsup_{n\to\infty}\frac{1}{n}\sum_{k=0}^{n-1} \rho(T^k(y),x_{k})<{\varepsilon}.$$
The next notion, coined by Gu [@Gu07], appeared earlier unnamed in [@Sigmund77 Remark 3].
A sequence ${\{x_{n}\}_{n=0}^{\infty}}\in X^{\infty}$ is an [*asymptotic-average-pseudo-orbit*]{} for $T$ if $$\lim\limits_{N\to\infty}\frac{1}{N}\sum_{i=0}^{N-1} \rho(T(x_i),x_{i+1})=0.$$
Gu [@Gu07] also introduced the following generalization of the shadowing property.
A dynamical system $(X,T)$ has the *asymptotic average shadowing property* if for every asymptotic-average-pseudo-orbit ${\{x_{n}\}_{n=0}^{\infty}}$ for $T$ there is $y\in X$ with $$\limsup_{n\to\infty}\frac{1}{n}\sum_{k=0}^{n-1} \rho(T^k(y),x_{k})=0.$$
The following fact summarizes relations between various mixing properties under assumption of shadowing. Similar results were implicitly used before by many authors, starting with Bowen’s classical work [@Bowen71]. A complete and purely topological proof of most of the implications stated below can be found in [@KO12] which is based on an earlier paper by Sakai [@Sakai03]. The remaining implications are proved in [@KKO] (see also [@KO10]).
\[thm:shadowing\] Let $(X,T)$ be a dynamical system with the shadowing property. Then the following conditions are equivalent:
1. \[main:c1\] $(X,T)$ is totally transitive,
2. \[main:c2\] $(X,T)$ is topologically weakly mixing,
3. \[main:c3\] $(X,T)$ is topologically mixing,
4. \[main:c4\] $T$ is onto and $(X,T)$ has the specification property,
5. \[main:c44\] $T$ is onto and $(X,T)$ has the asymptotic average shadowing property,
6. \[main:c5\] $T$ is onto and $(X,T)$ has the average shadowing property,
7. \[main:c6\] $T$ is onto and $(X,T)$ has the almost specification property.
Moreover, if the natural extension $(X_T,\sigma_T)$ is expansive, then any of the above conditions is equivalent to the periodic specification property of $T$.
Note that if $(X,T)$ is expansive or positively expansive, then the natural extension $(X_T,\sigma_T)$ is expansive (see [@AH p. 57]). As we observed above the approximate product property is equivalent to transitivity for systems with the specification property.
Symbolic dynamics {#sec:symbolic}
=================
We encourage the reader unfamiliar with techniques from symbolic dynamics to consult [@LM]. Here we follow the terminology and notation of [@LM] as close as possible. We restrict our presentation to one-sided shifts, but all results presented here remain true in the two-sided setting.
Equip a finite *alphabet* ${\mathscr{A}}$ with discrete topology and consider ${\mathscr{A}}^\infty$ as a compact metric space in the product topology (recall that ${\mathscr{A}}^\infty$ denotes the set of all infinite sequences of elements of ${\mathscr{A}}$ indexed by nonnegative integers). The formula $\rho(x,y)=2^{-k}$, where $x,y\in{\mathscr{A}}^\infty$ and $k=\sup\{j\ge 0:x_j=y_j\}$ generates the topology of ${\mathscr{A}}^\infty$ (we agree that $2^{-\infty}=0$ here).
Let $\sigma$ be the *shift* $\{x_i\}_{i=0}^\infty\mapsto \{x_{i+1}\}_{i=0}^\infty$ on ${\mathscr{A}}^\infty$. A *shift space* over ${\mathscr{A}}$ is a nonempty closed and $\sigma$-invariant subset of ${\mathscr{A}}^\infty$. We call a dynamical system $({\mathscr{A}}^\infty,\sigma)$ the *full shift* over ${\mathscr{A}}$.
A *block* of length $k$ over ${\mathscr{A}}$ is any string $w = w_1w_2\ldots w_k$ of symbols from ${\mathscr{A}}$. We shall use the term “*a word*” and “*a block*” interchangeably. The length of a word $w$ is denoted by $|w|$. We say that a block $w$ *occurs* or *appears* in $x$ if $w = x_ix_{i+1}\ldots x_j$ for some $0\le i\le j$. The set of all words that occur in $x\in{\mathscr{A}}^\infty$ is denoted $\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathcal{B}}}(x)$. The *language* of a shift space $X$ is the set $\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathcal{B}}}(X)$ of all blocks that occur in some $\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathcal{B}}}(x)$ for $x\in X$. By $\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathcal{B}}}_n(X)$ we denote the set of blocks of length $n$ in $\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathcal{B}}}(X)$. Concatenation of blocks or sequences is indicated by juxtaposition in the obvious way, for example $w^n=w\ldots w$ ($n$-times) and $w^\infty=www\ldots\in{\mathscr{A}}^\infty$.
There is a characterization of a shift spaces using *forbidden blocks*. It says that $X\subset {\mathscr{A}}^{\infty}$ is a shift space if and only if there exists a set $\mathcal{F}$ consisting of blocks over ${\mathscr{A}}$ such that $x\in X$ is equivalent to $\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathcal{B}}}(x)\cap\mathcal{F}=\emptyset$ (in other words: no block from $\mathcal{F}$ occurs in $x$). A *shift of finite type* is a shift space which can be defined using a finite set of forbidden blocks.
By a *countable graph* we mean an irreducible directed graph with at most countably many vertices and edges. A graph is *irreducible* if for any pair of its vertices $(v_i, v_j)$ there is a directed path from $v_i$ to $v_j$.
A *labeled graph* $(G,\Theta)$ is a countable graph $G$ together with a *labeling* function $\Theta$ mapping edges of $G$ to a finite alphabet ${\mathscr{A}}$. The set $Y_G$ of infinite sequences constructed by reading off labels along an infinite path of $(G,\Theta)$ is shift invariant, thus its closure $X=\overline{Y_G}$ in $\mathcal{A}^{\infty}$ is a shift space. Then we also say that $X$ is *presented* by $(G,\Theta)$. Any shift space admitting such a presentation is a *coded system*. A *sofic shift* is a coded system which can be presented by a finite graph. A *synchronized system* is a shift space which has a *synchronizing word*, that is, there is $v\in\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathcal{B}}}(X)$ such that $uv,vw\in\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathcal{B}}}(X)$ imply $uvw\in\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathcal{B}}}(X)$. Synchronized systems were introduced in [@BH]. Every synchronized system is coded.
The uniqueness of minimal right-resolving presentation known for sofic shifts extends to synchronized systems as outlined in [@LM p. 451] (see also [@Thomsen p. 1241] and references therein). Synchronized systems and their generalizations were extensively studied in [@FF].
A *cylinder set* of a word $u\in\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathcal{B}}}_{r}(X)$ in a shift space $X$, where $r\in{\mathbb{N}}$, is the set $[u]\subset X$ of points from $X$ which begin with the block $u$, that is, $\{y\in X: y_{[0,r-1]}=u\}$. Cylinders are open and closed subsets of $X$ generating the topology. Furthermore, if $x\in X$, then the Bowen balls $B_n(x, {\varepsilon})$ centered at $x$ coincide with the cylinder sets $[x_{[0,k]}]$, where $k=n+s$ and $s$ depends only on ${\varepsilon}>0$.
Using this terminology the definitions of dynamical properties can be conveniently restated for shift spaces:
1. A shift space $X$ is *transitive* if for any $u,v\in \operatorname{\operatorname{\mathcal{B}}}(X)$ there is $w\in \operatorname{\operatorname{\mathcal{B}}}(X)$ such that $uwv\in \operatorname{\operatorname{\mathcal{B}}}(X)$;
2. A shift space $X$ is *totally transitive* if for any $u,v\in \operatorname{\operatorname{\mathcal{B}}}(X)$ and any $n>0$ there is $w\in \operatorname{\operatorname{\mathcal{B}}}(X)$ such that $uwv\in \operatorname{\operatorname{\mathcal{B}}}(X)$ and $n$ divides $|uw|$;
3. A shift space $X$ is *weakly mixing* if for any $u_1,v_1,u_2,v_2\in \operatorname{\operatorname{\mathcal{B}}}(X)$ there are $w_1,w_2\in \operatorname{\operatorname{\mathcal{B}}}(X)$ such that $u_1w_1v_1,u_2w_2v_2\in \operatorname{\operatorname{\mathcal{B}}}(X)$ and $|u_1w_1|=|u_2w_2|$;
4. A shift space $X$ is *mixing* if for every $u,v\in \operatorname{\operatorname{\mathcal{B}}}(X)$ there is $N>0$ such that for every $n>N$ there is $w\in \operatorname{\operatorname{\mathcal{B}}}_n(X)$ such that $uwv\in \operatorname{\operatorname{\mathcal{B}}}(X)$.
5. A shift space $X$ has the *specification property* if there is an integer $N\geq 0$ such that for any $u,v\in \operatorname{\operatorname{\mathcal{B}}}(X)$ there is $w\in \operatorname{\operatorname{\mathcal{B}}}_N(X)$ such that $uwv\in \operatorname{\operatorname{\mathcal{B}}}(X)$.
6. We say that a nondecreasing function $\theta \colon {{{\mathbb{N}}_0}}\to{{{\mathbb{N}}_0}}$ is a mistake function if $\theta(n) \le n$ for all $n$ and $\theta(n)/n \to 0$. A shift space has the *almost specification property* if there exists a mistake function $\theta$ such that for every $n\in{\mathbb{N}}$ and $w_1,\ldots,w_n\in\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathcal{B}}}(X)$, there exist words $v_1,\ldots,v_n\in\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathcal{B}}}(X)$ with $|v_i| = |w_i|$ such that $v_1v_2\ldots v_n\in\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathcal{B}}}(X)$ and each $v_i$ differs from $w_i$ in at most $\theta(|v_i|)$ places.
7. A shift space $X$ has the *weak specification property* if for every $n\in {\mathbb{N}}$ there exists $t(n)\in{\mathbb{N}}$ such that $t(n)/n\to 0$ as $n\to\infty$ and any $u,w \in \operatorname{\operatorname{\mathcal{B}}}(X)$ with $|w|=n$ and $k\geq t(n)$ there exists a word $v\in \operatorname{\operatorname{\mathcal{B}}}_k(X)$ such that $x = uvw \in\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathcal{B}}}(X)$.
8. A shift space $X$ has the *variable specification property* if there exists $N\in{\mathbb{N}}$ such that for all $u,v\in\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathcal{B}}}(X)$, there exists $w\in\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathcal{B}}}(X)$ with $uwv\in\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathcal{B}}}(X)$ and $|w|\leq N$.
9. A shift space $X$ has the *strong property $P$* if for any $k\ge 2$ and any words $u_1,\ldots, u_k\in \operatorname{\operatorname{\mathcal{B}}}(X)$ with $|u_1|=\ldots=|u_k|$ there is an $n\in{\mathbb{N}}$ such that for any $N\in{\mathbb{N}}$ and function $\varphi\colon\{1,\ldots,N\}\to\{1,\ldots,k\}$ there are words $w_1,\ldots, w_{N-1}\in \operatorname{\operatorname{\mathcal{B}}}_n(X)$ such that $u_{\varphi(1)}w_1u_2\ldots u_{\varphi(N-1)}w_{N-1}u_{\varphi(N)}\in \operatorname{\operatorname{\mathcal{B}}}(X)$;
Blanchard [@B92] defined the strong property $P$, which is also a some form of specification and proved that it implies uniformly positive entropy and thus weak mixing, and does not imply mixing. A simpler example of this kind is provided in [@EKO]. Note that all unilateral symbolic dynamical systems are positively expansive (two-sided shift spaces contained in ${\mathscr{A}}^{\mathbb{Z}}$ are expansive), thus the specification property and the periodic specification property are equivalent. Also the weak specification property and the periodic weak specification property are equivalent in shift spaces. Thompson’s paper [@Thompson12] concludes with an example showing that the almost specification property does not imply its periodic variant even for expansive or positively expansive systems.
The variable specification property was introduced by Jung [@Jung11] under the name *almost specification property*. Jung [@Jung11 Lemma 3.7] also proved that every shift space $X$ with the variable specification property is synchronized, and $X$ has the variable specification property if and only if $X$ has the relative specification property with respect to a regular periodic decomposition. Bertrand-Mathis [@Bertrand88] was first to prove that the specification property for shift spaces implies the existence of a synchronizing word.
Thompson’s shift mentioned above does not have periodic points, hence it cannot be coded. We do not know whether there are shift spaces with the weak specification property which are not coded.
Buzzi [@Buzzi05] investigated a class of shifts which arose in symbolic coding of several classes of non-uniformly hyperbolic dynamical systems such as entropy-expanding maps. It would be interesting to study the specification-like properties in this setting.
Given a (possibly finite) set $S=\{n_1, n_2,\ldots\}\subset{{{\mathbb{N}}_0}}$ with $n_i\le n_{i+1}$ let $\mathcal{F}_S=\{10^t1\in\{0,1\}^+: t\notin S\}$ and let $X(S)$ be the shift space defined by declaring $\mathcal{F}_S$ as the set of forbidden words. Then $X(S)$ is a synchronized system called an *$S$-gap shift*.
In [@Jung11 Example 3.4] there is a following characterization of specification properties for an $S$-gap shift $X(S)$, where $S=\{n_1, n_2\ldots\}\subset{{{\mathbb{N}}_0}}$ and $n_i\le n_{i+1}$.
1. $X(S)$ has the variable specification property if and only if $\sup_i\left|n_{i+1}-n_i\right|<\infty$,
2. $X(S)$ is mixing if and only if $\gcd\{n+1: n\in S\}=1$,
3. $X(S)$ has the periodic specification property if and only if $\gcd\{n+1: n\in S\}=1$ and $\sup_i\left|n_{i+1}-n_i\right|<\infty$.
Using the above observation it is easy to show that there are shifts spaces with the relative specification property but without specification, and there are synchronized and mixing shift spaces without any form of specification.
A (proper) generalization of sofic shifts was introduced by Kwapisz in [@Kwapisz00]. He was motivated by certain computations important for the theory of cohomological Conley index. Let ${\mathscr{A}}$ be an alphabet, fix any $m\in {\mathbb{N}}$ and consider a family of square matrices with integer entries $\Phi={\left\{\Phi_a\right\}}_{a\in {\mathscr{A}}}$ indexed by ${\mathscr{A}}$. If we denote by $0$ the zero matrix, then a *cocyclic subshift* of $\Phi$ is a shift space $$X_{\Phi}={\left\{x\in {\mathscr{A}}^\infty : \Phi_{x_0}\Phi_{x_1}\ldots \Phi_{x_n}\neq 0, \text{ for all } n\in {{{\mathbb{N}}_0}}\right\}}.$$ We recall them because from the point of view of specification-like properties they behave much like sofic systems. The following theorem summarizes connections between variants of specification for coded systems. The main ingredient of the proof are two equivalences: equivalence of weak mixing and mixing, and mixing and specification. Given these two facts the rest is more or less standard. For shifts of finite type it follows mostly from Bowen’s work, Weiss noted that it holds for sofic shifts and Kwapisz [@Kwapisz00] proved it for cocyclic shifts.
\[thm:coded\_compilation\] Let $X$ be a non trivial coded system. Then the following conditions are equivalent:
(a) \[mix\] $X$ is topologically mixing;
(b) \[pp\] $X$ has the strong property $P$;
(c) \[wm\] $X$ is topologically weakly mixing;
(d) \[tt\] $X$ is totally transitive.
If $X$ is synchronized, then any of the above conditions is equivalent to
(e) \[rel-p\] $X$ has two periodic points with relatively prime primary periods.
Moreover, there exists a coded system $X$ fulfilling –, but not . If $X$ is cocyclic (in particular, if $X$ is sofic or of finite type), then any of the above conditions is equivalent to
(f) \[spec\] $X$ has the periodic specification property;
(g) \[w-spec\] $X$ has the weak periodic specification property;
(h) \[a-spec\] $X$ has the almost specification property.
Moreover, there exists a synchronized system $X$ (an $S$-gap shift) fulfilling –, but none of -.
It follows from [@EKO] and the results mentioned above.
[^1]: Sometimes we will consider maps that are only piecewise continuous, but in each such case we will indicate this explicitly.
[^2]: Strictly speaking, Bowen assumed that the system is *$C$-dense* (a notion which we do not use in this paper), but his proof applies to systems with the specification property which follows from the $C$-density assumption.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'Rate-dependent effects in the electronics used to instrument the tagger focal plane at the MAX IV Laboratory have been investigated using the novel approach of Monte Carlo simulation. Results are compared to analytical calculations as well as experimental data for both specialized testing and production running to demonstrate a thorough understanding of the behavior of the detector system.'
address:
- 'University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana-Champaign IL 61802, USA'
- 'The George Washington University, Washington DC 20052, USA'
- 'Lund University, SE-221 00 Lund, Sweden'
- 'University of Kentucky, Lexington KY 40506, USA'
- 'University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon SK Canada S7N 5E2'
- 'MAX IV Laboratory, Lund University, SE-221 00 Lund, Sweden'
author:
- 'L. S. Myers'
- 'G. Feldman'
- 'K. G. Fissum'
- 'L. Isaksson'
- 'M. A. Kovash'
- 'A. M. Nathan'
- 'R. E. Pywell'
- 'B. Schröder'
title: 'Monte Carlo Simulation of the Photon-Tagger Focal-Plane Electronics at the MAX IV Laboratory'
---
tagger hodoscope, electronics simulation, rate dependencies
Introduction {#section:introduction}
============
The MAX IV Laboratory [@m4] is the Swedish National Electron Accelerator Facility located in Lund, Sweden. The Tagged-Photon Facility (TPF) at the MAX IV Laboratory [@adler2012; @tpf] is the beamline at the facility which utilizes the 200 MeV pulse-stretcher mode [@lindgren2002]. Electrons in pulses with widths of about 200 ns are accelerated to energies up to 200 MeV and then injected into the MAX I pulse-stretcher ring (PSR) at a frequency of 10 Hz. The electrons are then slowly extracted over the following 100 ms, before the arrival of the next pulse from the linac, and then transported to the TPF. In this manner, the pulsed electron beam originating in the injector is converted into a continuous, but non-uniform, electron beam with an average current of approximately 20 nA. Understanding rate-dependent effects in the experiment electronics resulting from the time structure in the electron beam required the efforts reported upon in this paper.
The TPF houses two photon-tagging spectrometers inherited from the Saskatchewan Accelerator Laboratory (SAL) in Saskatoon, Canada [@vogt1993; @sal1994; @sal1995]. These devices are used to perform photonuclear experiments via the well-known photon-tagging technique [@adler1990] illustrated in Fig. \[figure:figure\_01\_tagging\_technique\]. The electron beam passes through a thin metal radiator ($\sim$100 $\mu$m Al), and a small portion ($\sim$0.1%) of the incident electron beam is converted into a bremsstrahlung photon beam. Electrons that do not interact are dumped onto a well-shielded Faraday cup which registers the non-interacting electron-beam current. The resulting bremsstrahlung photon beam passes through a collimator to define its size prior to striking the experimental target. Post-bremsstrahlung electrons are momentum-analyzed using one of the magnetic photon-tagging spectrometers together with a 63-counter plastic-scintillator array positioned at the spectrometer focal plane (FP) [@adler2012]. A time coincidence between a reaction product from a photon-target interaction and a recoiling electron is a tagged-photon event.
The energy of a tagged photon is determined from the difference between the energy of the incident electron beam and the energy of the post-bremsstrahlung electron detected in the focal plane. The number of electrons striking a given channel in the FP array is a crucial experimental parameter, as it is part of the overall experimental photon-flux normalization. The number of electrons must be corrected for the tagging efficiency [@adler1997], which measures the probability that the bremsstrahlung photon in question passes through the beam-defining collimator and is incident upon the experimental target.
The number of electrons counted in a given FP channel must also be corrected for rate-dependent effects. These effects arise due to the fact that the electron beam striking the radiator is not truly continuous, but rather has a periodic structure of varying intensity. These intensity variations are due to the non-uniform filling of the PSR by the injector and the frequency of the shaker in the PSR which is used to disturb the electrons from the central orbit of the ring lattice in the extraction process. The measure of this intensity variation is the duty factor of the beam [@florizone1994]. At an operating current of 20 nA, the average rate in a FP channel is approximately 1 MHz; however, the instantaneous rate in the same FP channel can be as high as 4 MHz [@myers2010] due to the duty factor. Using this exact tagging spectrometer and FP detector array at such high rates, Hornidge [*et al.*]{} observed substantial rate-dependent effects in deuterium Compton-scattering data measured at SAL [@hornidge1999; @hornidge2000]. In order to determine the necessary rate-dependent corrections, Pywell developed a Monte-Carlo simulation of the tagger setup [@pywell2009]. This original simulation has been completely overhauled and adapted to the present experimental conditions of the TPF at the MAX IV Laboratory.
In this paper, we present a detailed comparison between both dedicated test data and experimental production data obtained using the TPF and the overhauled Monte Carlo, and we demonstrate a clear understanding of the rate-dependent effects that we have encountered.
Rate-dependent effects {#section:rate_dependent_effects}
======================
The FP detector hodoscope consists of an array of NE110 scintillators arranged in two parallel rows of scintillators. The front row nearest the exit window of the tagger magnet has 31 elements, while the back row has 32 elements. The relative orientation of the two rows may be varied in order to adjust the overlap between the rows from complete (100%) to 50% (the configuration used for this work). By decreasing the overlap, the recoil-electron energy resolution is increased and consequently the photon-energy resolution is also increased (see Fig. \[figure:figure\_02\_focal\_plane\_hodoscope\]).
Each counter is instrumented with a Hammamatsu R1450 photomultiplier tube with a 19 mm head, and high voltage is supplied by a LeCroy 1440 power supply. The signals from the FP counters are passed to LRS 4413 leading-edge discriminators operated in burst-guard mode. These discriminators are used to generate logic signals of widths varying from 25 ns to 50 ns depending upon the experiment in question. Coincidences between two overlapping scintillators in the front and back rows are identified in overlap coincidence modules designed and built at SAL – it is these coincidences that define tagger channels. When operated in 50% overlap mode, the length of the hodoscope is 842 mm, and each of the so-defined tagger channels has a physical width of 13 mm. The logical OR of the 62 FP channels is used as a trigger for a recoil-electron event (see Fig. \[figure:figure\_03\_focal\_plane\_electronics\]). When a recoil-electron trigger occurs in coincidence with a trigger from the experiment detectors, a candidate tagged-photon event is registered.
Two advantages to requiring a coincidence between the front and back rows of scintillators in the FP hodoscope are that the gamma-ray background in the tagger hall is not registered by the tagger, and that the photon-energy resolution may be increased by varying the relative orientation of the two scintillator planes rather than building a new array with smaller scintillators. However, a major disadvantage of requiring a coincidence between the front and back rows of scintillators in the FP hodoscope is the creation of so-called “ghost events” at high rates. The ghosts are an artificial creation of the instrumentation of the focal plane. The scenario leading to a ghost event is illustrated in the top panel of Fig. \[figure:figure\_04\_ghosts\]. Two electrons strike next-to-neighboring channels (counters F1 $\cdot$ B1 and F2 $\cdot$ B2) simultaneously which creates the illusion of an electron in the channel in the middle (counters F1 $\cdot$ B2) – the ghost event. The accidental coincidences that result in ghost events depend on the electron rate, the width of the the discriminator output pulses, and the resolving time of the coincidence modules. Because these ghosts are formed in the FP electronics, the accidental coincidences are registered in both the scalers and the TDC modules. This results in a partial cancellation of the effect. Understanding the dependence of the ghosts on the input conditions and determining the amount of cancellation requires a Monte Carlo simulation of the tagger setup and electronics.
High recoil-electron rates can also lead to real electron stops being missed by the leading-edge discriminators (even though they are operated in burst-guard mode) and the overlap coincidence modules due to dead-time effects. They also result in asymmetries in the data acquisition, since the scalers counting the electron signals which are used to normalize the data are much faster than the TDCs which identify tagged-photon events – see Sect. \[subsection:electronics\]. And finally, when single-hit TDCs are employed, a random electron may be detected in the FP channel before the actual electron that corresponds to the tagged photon. The result is that the single-hit TDC stops too early, leading to a well-studied phenomenon known as stolen coincidences [@owens1990] – see Fig. \[figure:figure\_05\_stolen\_coincidences\].
In order to measure the number of stolen coincidences in the data set, a prescaled FP (pFP) trigger is routinely included in the data stream – see Fig. \[figure:figure\_06\_pFP\]. To form this trigger, a representative logic signal from a single FP channel is passed to a bank of three scalers (uninhibited, bad-beam inhibited[^1], and bad-beam OR busy DAQ inhibited). A fourth copy of this signal is bad-beam inhibited, rate-divided (typically by a factor of 10$^5$), and used as the pFP trigger. It is trickled into the data stream at a rate of $\sim$10 Hz as a valid trigger and is used to start the FP TDCs. As a result, for the pFP-triggered subset of events, the FP TDCs are started by the pFP signal and stopped by the usual recoil-electron signal (recall Fig. \[figure:figure\_03\_focal\_plane\_electronics\]). Note that the coincidence between the normal recoil-electron signals in the front and back scintillator planes was established using SAL modules, while the same coincidence for the pFP trigger was established using a LRS 622.
Figuse \[figure:figure\_07\_pFP\] shows a typical TDC spectrum where the start signals were provided by the pFP trigger and the stop signals were provided by recoil electrons striking the focal plane. In the TDC spectrum, we expected to see a single self-timing peak (shown here from channels 165 to 175) and a grouping of events to the left of the self-timing peak (shown here below channel 150) corresponding to stolen coincidences. The appearances of a satellite peak (shown here from channels 150 to 165) as well as a flat distribution of events at times greater than the self-timing peak (events ranging from channel 180 to 400 and higher) were a mystery prior to the simulation efforts.
Basic features of the simulation {#section:basic_features_of_the_simulation}
================================
Using the procedure established by Pywell, the Monte Carlo simulation models the FP electronics in 1 ns steps from the recoil-electron detectors to the scalers and TDCs, traversing all of the intermediate electronics in the process. In contrast to the Pywell procedure, our simulation addresses all 62 FP channels simultaneously. In an effort to make the simulation as versatile as possible, it was written so that many of the initial conditions are input from separate files rather than being hard-coded. During each ns of the simulation, the FP channels are checked to see if a recoil electron struck the channel. The probability for such an electron event is dependent on the instantaneous electron rate in the FP channel, which in turn depends on the time structure of the electron beam. Both of these parameters are adjustable inputs.
A Poisson distribution is used to generate recoil electrons in the FP channels[^2]. If an electron is observed in a given channel, the corresponding counter discriminators are updated, and then the counter discriminator pulses are tracked to the overlap coincidence modules which are updated. The signals from the overlap coincidence modules are then propagated to the FP scalers and TDCs which record the electron. For each recoil electron in a FP channel, there is also a probability that the corresponding photon generates a start for the FP TDCs. The likelihood of this occurring (which is related to the tagging efficiency) is another input to the simulation. Additionally, untagged photons and cosmic-ray events can also be used to start the FP TDCs[^3]. If there is an experiment trigger (either a pFP electron, a tagged or untagged photon, or a cosmic ray), the FP TDCs are started and the FP scalers are inhibited. The duration of the inhibit may be adjusted to precisely match the experimental running conditions. Finally, the simulation checks each coincidence in the coincidence modules to see if a corresponding real electron is responsible for generating the coincidence. If no electron was present, then a flag is set which identifies the coincidence output as a ghost event. This flag allows for the analysis of both real and ghost events and leads to the subsequent correction factors for the data.
The original code developed at SAL by Pywell was written in <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">fortran</span>. The new simulation was updated to <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">C++</span> and was compiled with `gcc`, and the simulation output is written to a <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">root</span> file [@root]. The compiled code is run on a 2.66 GHz CPU which takes approximately one hour to simulate the FP electronics for events spanning a time interval of one second. A flow chart describing the simulation is shown in Fig. \[figure:figure\_08\_flowchart\], and a summary of input parameters is presented in Table \[table:table\_01\_simulation\_input\_parameters\]. Most of the inputs to the simulation listed in Table \[table:table\_01\_simulation\_input\_parameters\] are taken directly from the electronics setup (such as pulse widths) or from the data itself (such as electron rates and tagging efficiency).
Input parameters {#section:input_parameters}
================
Electronics {#subsection:electronics}
-----------
Once the framework of the tagger simulation was developed, it was necessary to understand the response of the various electronics modules in order to implement them correctly. This required a thorough understanding of the leading-edge discriminators, various coincidence modules, TDCs, and scalers.
As previously mentioned, the LRS 4413 leading-edge discriminators used to instrument the focal plane were operated in burst-guard mode, which resulted in behavior that was especially important at high rates. The modules are designed to produce an output pulse of a fixed, user-determined width when the threshold is crossed. If a second event arrives at the discriminator before the end of the previous output pulse, the output will be updated and will extend to the greater of the fixed width or the threshold re-crossing of the second input pulse. Any subsequent inputs will be ignored until the fixed width has passed and the discriminator is reset.
Figure \[figure:figure\_09\_burstguard\] illustrates the burst-guard behavior of the LRS 4413 leading-edge discriminator. In panel (a), a single analog signal corresponding to an electron is discriminated, resulting in a 40 ns output pulse. Panels (b) and (c) show the conditions for updating the output pulse with a second electron. In panel (b), the re-crossing associated with the second electron occurs before the original output ends – the output pulse is thus the same as in panel (a), and the second electron is missed. In panel (c), the second re-crossing occurs after the output would have ended, so the duration of the output signal is extended. Third hits are never registered, as shown in panel (d).
The SAL overlap coincidence modules used for forming the pulses that were sent to the FP TDCs and scalers were continuously updating. An output pulse was generated whenever the two input pulses overlapped and was terminated whenever one or both inputs were reset. An overlap of at least 3 ns was necessary to produce an output pulse. This behavior is asymmetric to the LRS 622 coincidence module used to generate the pFP trigger – it produced a fixed output pulse that began when the discriminator output signals from the two FP counters overlapped. The CAEN V775 single-hit TDCs used to instrument the focal plane were experimentally determined to require input pulses of at least 11 ns in width in order to register the pulses. In contrast, the CAEN 830 scalers which counted the recoiling electrons were experimentally determined to require input pulses of at least 3 ns in width in order to register the pulses[^4].
Figure \[figure:figure\_10\_overlap\_test\_result\] shows the count rate relative to the trigger rate for FP channel 24 for a wide range of relative pulse timings generated by a pulser. In this test, pulser triggers running at 10 Hz were fed into the SAL overlap coincidence unit inputs for the front and back scintillator planes corresponding to FP channel 24. Tests were performed for pulse widths of 25 ns, 35 ns, and 45 ns. The relative timing between the front and back pulses was then varied in steps of a few ns over a total range of $\pm$40 ns. The open circles correspond to the FP channel 24 scaler, while the filled triangles correspond to the FP channel 24 TDC. Clearly, over the entire dynamic range investigated, the CAEN V830 scalers were able to register the signals from the SAL overlap coincidence units. This was true even when the timing of the back-plane pulse relative to the front-plane pulse was artificially fixed 40 ns early or 40 ns late, resulting in an overlap pulse of $\sim$3 ns width. On the other hand, the CAEN V775 single-hit TDCs only registered pulses when the timing of the back-plane pulse relative to the front-plane pulse was between 35 ns early and 30 ns late, resulting in an overlap pulse of $\sim$11 ns width.
The fact that a $\sim$3 ns overlap pulse could generate a pFP trigger and, consequently, a start signal for the FP TDCs but an $\sim$11 ns overlap pulse was needed to generate a stop signal resulted in missing stops. The flat distribution from channels 180 to 400 in Fig. \[figure:figure\_07\_pFP\] thus resulted from random electrons stopping the FP TDC. Obviously, this important asymmetry in the response of the electronics must be taken into account and corrected in order to properly normalize experimental data.
A peculiar feature of the FP TDCs and/or overlap coincidence modules was observed during the test of the FP TDC resolving time. This test was performed using a 10 kHz pulser, and the signal from the pulser was split into three identical copies, which were then passed to the electronics connected to FP counters 34 (front plane), 35 (back plane), and 36 (front plane). Holding the timing fixed for the counter 34 and 35 electronics, it was observed that as delay was added to or removed from counter 36, the location of the counter 35/36 (channel 34) overlap coincidence peak in the FP TDC varied by as much as 40 ns. A shift was expected to some degree (for example, for fixed counters 34 and 35, as counter 36 is mistimed to arrive later and later, then the coincidence peak representing counter 35/36 overlaps should also shift in time by the amount of the mistiming); however, the behavior shown in Fig. \[figure:figure\_11\_ghost\_timing\] is not consistent with this behavior. There is a shift in the prompt peak location at around $-$30 ns of added delay as well as non-linear behavior (a “kink" and then a “dogleg") above $+$20 ns. This variation in the location of the coincidence peak as a function of the relative timing of the front-plane and back-plane signals explains the ghost-peak structure in Fig. \[figure:figure\_04\_ghosts\] (recall the three peaks) and the satellite peak between channels 150 and 165 in Fig. \[figure:figure\_07\_pFP\]. This effect was included in the simulation.
Electron-beam profile {#subsection:electron_beam_profile}
---------------------
One very important input parameter to the simulation is the time profile of the electron beam extracted from the PSR. Unfortunately, this is not directly accessible from the data. To obtain the time profile of the electron beam, the subset of the data pertaining only to pFP triggers was employed. This data set was generated by requiring a recoil-electron signal in a specific FP channel. For this data set, recoil electrons striking FP channels well-separated from the selected channel were taken to be accidentals. The FP TDC distributions for these distant channels were then summed together to produce a purely accidental FP TDC spectrum, $A(t)$, with high statistics. This spectrum was then related to the true electron-beam profile via an auto-correlation function according to $$\label{equation:auto_correlation_function}
%TDC_{\rm accidentals} =
A(t) = \int^{\infty}_{-\infty}P(T)P(t+T)dT.$$ The method of Fourier transform was then used to extract the beam profile $P(t)$ shown in the top panel of Fig. \[figure:figure\_12\_beam\_profile\][^5]. The secondary and tertiary time structures in this distribution result from the 3.3 MHz frequency (305 ns period) of the shaker used in the extraction of the electron beam and the incomplete filling of the 32.4 m diameter (108 ns period) MAX I PSR.
Instantaneous electron beam rates {#subsection:instantaneous_electron_rates}
---------------------------------
The determination of the average instantaneous beam rate over one beam period (hereafter, the instantaneous rate) is crucial for an accurate calculation of both the stolen coincidences and the ghost corrections. The rate is given by the time constant of the accidental TDC spectrum which can be determined by fitting the data with an exponential function. However, due to the complicated time structure of the beam, the method of extracting the rate must be carefully chosen so as not to be sensitive to the fitting region selected. This is done by defining the fitting function as $$\label{equation:fitting_function}
f(t) =
p_0~A(t)~e^{-Rt} + p_1~e^{(t-t_0)^2/2\sigma^2},$$ where $p_0$ and $p_1$ are constants, $A(t)$ is the FP TDC spectrum for accidental events (see Eq. \[equation:auto\_correlation\_function\]), and $R$ is the instantaneous rate. Since the spectrum also contains some true coincidences, a Gaussian function centered at $t_0$ is used to account for these events so as to eliminate any bias they might cause in the fitting procedure. As seen in Fig. \[figure:figure\_13\_fitted\_TDC\_spectrum\], this method accurately fits the data.
Input parameter Description
--------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------
total run time number of ns to run the simulation
electron rate in reference channel taken from data, $\sim$1 MHz
cosmic-ray event rate taken from data, $\sim$50 Hz
untagged event rate taken from data, $\sim$50–150 Hz
probability of a tagged event taken from data, $\sim$50% (inbeam), $\sim$0.5% (scattering)
electron rate relative to reference channel taken from data, $\sim$1–4
focal-plane discriminator pulse width leading edge, $\sim$25–50 ns
inhibit duration bad beam or DAQ busy, $\sim$1 ms
geometric double recoil electron strikes adjacent channels, $\sim$1%
pFP trigger channel channel 32
pFP trigger pulse width same as focal-plane discriminator pulse width, $\sim$25–50 ns
pFP overlap properties flag, module (non)updating
pFP trigger flag, on/off
duty-factor meter (DFM) counters counter 20 and counter 50
DFM pulse widths $\sim$25–50 ns
DFM overlap characteristics flag, module (non)updating
prompt-peak location $\Delta t$ between FP TDC start and prompt peak, $\sim$100 ns
periodicity of the electron-beam profile long enough to generate several repetitions
electron-beam profile see top panel of Fig. \[figure:figure\_12\_beam\_profile\]
Comparison to data {#section:comparison_to_data}
==================
Focal-plane TDC spectrum {#subsection:focal_plane_tdc_spectrum}
------------------------
Figure \[figure:figure\_12\_beam\_profile\] (bottom panel) shows a comparison between the simulated FP TDC spectrum for accidentals for the OR of all 62 FP TDCs and data. The inputs included the electron-beam profile shown in the top panel of Fig. \[figure:figure\_12\_beam\_profile\] together with all the parameters presented in Table \[table:table\_01\_simulation\_input\_parameters\]. A correction based on the location of the coincidence peak has been applied to align all of the individual 62 FP TDC spectra. The broad peaks in this spectrum are due to the structures in the electron beam extracted from the PSR. Time periods when greater numbers of electrons are extracted from the PSR correspond to enhancements in the number of tagged photons available to the experiment. The agreement between the data and the simulation is excellent.
Scaler rates and system deadtime {#subsection:scaler_rates_and_system_deadtime}
--------------------------------
A rate-dependent study of the effects of deadtime in the FP electronics was performed using a standard 45% duty-factor electron beam to determine the impact on the FP scalers. FP channels 5, 15, 25, and 35 were first tested individually, then OR-ed together in two groups of two (5 and 15, 25 and 35), and finally tested as a single group of four in order to conveniently increase the available rates. The counts in the individual channels were used to determine the actual numbers of counts reaching the FP scalers. The fraction of counts reaching the FP scalers for the twofold and fourfold ORs was then monitored as a function of rate. Figure \[figure:figure\_14\_recoil\_electron\_loss\_effects\] shows data (solid circles) for the fraction of expected counts in the twofold and fourfold configurations as a function of average recoil-electron rate. Simulated values are shown for a duty factor of about 50% (open circles). The inset shows the densely populated region from 0 to 1 MHz. Clearly, the simulation does an excellent job of predicting the loss of counts in the FP scalers due to deadtime effects.
Prescaled focal-plane trigger {#subsection:pre_scaled_focal_plane_trigger}
-----------------------------
It is straightforward to compare the data collected using the pFP trigger to the simulation because the trigger source is one of the FP channels. The number of stolen coincidences in the pFP trigger channel is the ratio of the number of counts in the TDC prompt peak (recall Fig. \[figure:figure\_07\_pFP\]) to the total number of triggers. Since events with an output width of less than 11 ns in the coincidence overlap module do not register a stop in the FP TDCs, it is important to include events to the right of the prompt peak as stolen coincidences since these events were not recorded due to the limitations in the electronics setup. Using data, the stolen coincidences can be determined for the pFP trigger on a run-by-run basis (recall Fig. \[figure:figure\_07\_pFP\]). The stolen coincidences can also be calculated using the simulation at several recoil-electron rates. A comparison of the two approaches is presented in Fig. \[figure:figure\_15\_pFP\_comparison\].
Stolen-coincidence correction {#subsection:stolen_coincidence_correction}
-----------------------------
A method for analytically calculating the stolen coincidences for a nearly continuous beam is given in Ref. [@owens1990]. The stolen-coincidence correction is given by
$$\label{equation:stolen_coincidence_correction}
f_{\rm stolen} =
e^{R\tau},$$
where $R$ is the electron rate and $\tau$ is the time between the start of the TDC and the arrival of the corresponding tagged electrons. The stolen-coincidence correction can also be determined via the simulation. The simulated, tagged-photon TDC spectrum (see Fig. \[figure:figure\_16\_stolen\_methods\]) shows both prompt events and stolen coincidences. The fraction of stolen coincidences determined using the simulated tagged photons is given by $$\label{equation:stolen_coincidence_correction2}
f_{\rm stolen}^{\rm sim,tag} =
\frac{N}{N_{\rm prompt}},$$ where $N$ is the total number of events and $N_{\rm prompt}$ is the number of events arriving during the prompt window.
Several values of $R$ and $\tau$ were chosen as simulation inputs in order to compare the simulated stolen coincidences to those predicted by Eq. \[equation:stolen\_coincidence\_correction\]. The results are shown in Table \[table:table\_02\_stolen\_coincidence\_correction\]. Agreement is excellent.
Rate$_{\rm inst}$ /MHz $\tau$ /ns $f_{\rm stolen}^{\rm calculated}$ $f_{\rm stolen}^{\rm simulated}$
------------------------ ------------ ----------------------------------- ----------------------------------
1.0 19 1.019 1.018 $\pm$ 0.001
2.0 19 1.039 1.036 $\pm$ 0.001
1.0 199 1.220 1.211 $\pm$ 0.001
2.0 199 1.489 1.477 $\pm$ 0.002
: \[table:table\_02\_stolen\_coincidence\_correction\] Comparison of the fraction of stolen coincidences obtained using Eq. \[equation:stolen\_coincidence\_correction\] and the simulation.
Another method [@hoorebeke1992] for determining the stolen-coincidence correction determines the correction from the accidental FP TDC spectrum [@hoorebeke1992] (see Fig. \[figure:figure\_16\_stolen\_methods\]). With this approach, the correction factor is given by
$$\label{equation:schroder_correction}
f_{\rm stolen}^{\rm accidentals} =
\frac{N}{N-N_{t<t_{\rm left}} },$$
where $N$ is the total number of events and $N_{t<t_{\rm left}}$ is the number of events arriving prior to the coincidence peak (located at $t_0$). The stolen-coincidence correction was calculated for both a simulated accidental FP TDC spectrum and the TDC spectrum of the tagged photons. The results are shown in Table \[table:table\_03\_schroder\_stolen\_coincidence\_correction\]. Agreement is excellent.
FP ch $f_{\rm stolen}^{\rm accidentals}$ $f_{\rm stolen}^{\rm tagged}$
------- ------------------------------------ -------------------------------
0 1.521 1.519
10 1.567 1.578
20 1.672 1.670
30 1.739 1.738
40 1.768 1.785
50 1.900 1.916
60 2.029 2.056
: \[table:table\_03\_schroder\_stolen\_coincidence\_correction\] Comparison of the of the stolen-coincidence correction obtained using Eq. \[equation:schroder\_correction\] applied to the accidental TDC spectrum and Eq. \[equation:stolen\_coincidence\_correction2\] applied to the tagged photons TDC spectrum.
Ghosts correction {#subsection:ghosts_correction}
-----------------
The correction for the rate-dependent ghost effect differs from the stolen-coincidence correction in that an exact analytical form for the correction does not exist. However, it is possible to compare the results of the simulation to the values used by Hornidge [**]{} [@hornidge1999; @hornidge2000]. Unfortunately, it is impossible to replicate the exact parameters of the SAL configuration. Additionally, the results given by Hornidge [*et al.*]{} are run-averaged results. Still, a comparison of the ghost corrections is useful in evaluating the overall accuracy of our FP simulation.
In order to perform such a comparison, the beam conditions were reconstructed as carefully as possible to best reproduce the conditions of the SAL experiment. The beam rates (1.4 and 4.755 MHz) were chosen to match two of those listed by Hornidge [*et al.*]{} The ghost correction is defined as
$$\label{equation:ghost_correction}
1/f_{\rm ghost} =
\sigma_M/\sigma,$$
where $\sigma_{M}$ is the measured cross section and $\sigma$ is the real cross section. The correction factors predicted by the FP simulation are compared to the values obtained by Hornidge [*et al.*]{} in Table \[table:table\_04\_ghost\_correction\]. The apparent disagreement in these results is likely due to undocumented differences in the two experimental setups (for example: discriminator modes, pulse timing, TDC behavior, and beam structure). It is probably impossible to improve the agreement without completely recreating the precise conditions of the SAL experiment.
Rate$_{\rm inst}$ /MHz $f_{\rm ghosts}^{\rm Hornidge}$ $f_{\rm ghosts}^{\rm this~work}$
------------------------ --------------------------------- ----------------------------------
1.400 1.019 0.993
4.755 1.076 1.007
: \[table:table\_04\_ghost\_correction\] Comparison of the ghost correction obtained in Ref [@hornidge1999] and our simulation.
Systematic Uncertainties {#subsection:systematic_errors}
------------------------
The systematic uncertainties in the ghosts and stolen-coincidence corrections was determined as a function of variations in (1) the FP discriminator pulse width, (2) the time profile of the stretched electron beam leaving the PSR, and (3) the electron rate in the individual FP channels.
During the inaugural run periods at the TPF, the FP discriminator pulse widths were typically set to (50$\pm$1) ns[^6]. In the simulation, the discriminator pulse widths were varied by $\pm$2 ns to see how the corrections were affected. In this case, both the stolen-coincidence and ghosts correction varied by less than 0.5$\%$.
Understanding the effect of the time profile of the beam on the corrections was more involved. Conceptually, the electron-beam profile after the PSR could be more uniform (“flatter" as a function of time representing a more continuous beam) or less uniform (higher peaks and lower valleys as a function of time representing a less continuous beam) than the profile used. To obtain a more uniform time profile, $[P(t)]^{0.75}$ was employed; the less uniform profile was given by $[P(t)]^{1.33}$. Exponents smaller than 0.75 or larger than 1.33 resulted in simulated accidental TDC spectra that did not reproduce the data. The variation in the stolen-coincidence correction due to these extreme profiles was less than 2$\%$. The variation of the ghosts correction was less than 3$\%$.
The stolen-coincidence correction depends on the electron rate according to Eq. \[equation:stolen\_coincidence\_correction\]. Further, a rate-independent method to extract the correction is presented in Eq. \[equation:stolen\_coincidence\_correction2\]. The difference between these methods is typically 2% or less. Using Eq. \[equation:stolen\_coincidence\_correction\] and assuming the electron rate varies by $\sim$10%, the correction is found to have a systematic uncertainty of $\le$ 5%. Combining these results, the variation of the stolen-coincidence correction as a function of electron rate is taken to be 5$\%$. The effect of the electron rate on the ghosts correction was investigated by varying the nominal electron beam rate during in the simulation by $\pm$25$\%$. The ghost correction varied by less than 1$\%$ over this range of beam rates.
A summary of the systematic uncertainties in the stolen-coincidence and ghosts corrections due to simulation parameter variations is presented in Table \[table:table\_05\_sys\_uncertainties\].
--------------------------------------------- --------------------- --------
varied parameter stolen coincidences ghosts
FP discriminator pulse width 0.5% 0.5%
time profile of the extracted electron beam 2% 3%
electron rate in FP channels 5% (see text) 1%
--------------------------------------------- --------------------- --------
: \[table:table\_05\_sys\_uncertainties\] Systematic uncertainties in the stolen-coincidence and ghosts corrections due to simulation parameter variations.
Carbon elastic scattering cross section for photons {#subsection:carbon_cross_section}
---------------------------------------------------
As an illustration of the success of our Monte Carlo method for addressing rate-dependent effects, Fig. \[figure:figure\_17\_carbon\] presents a comparison between the absolute differential cross section recently obtained at the TPF at the MAX IV Laboratory and existing data published by Warkentin [*et al.*]{} [@warkentin2001] (filled squares) for elastic photon scattering from $^{12}$C at a lab angle of 60$^{\circ}$ performed at SAL. Error bars reflect statistical uncertainties only. The open circles show our cross-section data prior to correction for rate-dependent effects, while the filled circles show the same data after correction for rate-dependent effects. The agreement between the two data sets is excellent. A summary of the rate-dependent corrections is presented in Table \[table:table\_06\_all\_corrections\].
photon energy / MeV 86 95 104 112
----------------------------------- -------------- -------------- -------------- --------------
Uncorrected Cross Section / nb/sr 320 $\pm$ 21 232 $\pm$ 17 202 $\pm$ 16 187 $\pm$ 15
Stolen Trues Correction 1.49 1.43 1.37 1.33
Ghosts Correction 0.99 0.99 0.99 1.00
Corrected Cross Section / nb/sr 472 $\pm$ 31 327 $\pm$ 25 273 $\pm$ 22 248 $\pm$ 20
: \[table:table\_06\_all\_corrections\] Stolen-coincidence and ghosts corrections applied to the $^{12}$C data shown in Fig. \[figure:figure\_17\_carbon\]. Non-negligible statistical uncertainties are listed.
Summary {#section:summary}
=======
Rate-dependent effects in the electronics used to instrument the tagger focal plane at the Tagged-Photon Facility at the MAX IV Laboratory have been investigated using a dedicated Monte Carlo simulation. The Monte Carlo simulation incorporates the unique behaviors of each of the critical focal-plane instrumentation modules. Results have been compared to analytical calculations of these effects, as well as experimental data collected for a series of specialized tests of the rate-dependent response. The simulation agrees very well with both. Further, the output of the simulation has been used to normalize high-rate tagged-photon production data (1 MHz average and up to 4 MHz instantaneous rates per focal-plane channel). Rate-corrected cross-section data are in excellent agreement with previous results obtained at lower instantaneous rates. We assert that this Monte Carlo simulation is of fundamental importance to the analysis of all experimental data from the Tagged-Photon Facility at the MAX IV Laboratory and, in principle, is adaptable to any high-rate coincidence experiment.
Acknowledgements {#acknowledgements .unnumbered}
================
This project was supported by the US National Science Foundation Grant No. 0855569, as well as The Swedish Research Council, the Crafoord Foundation, and the Royal Physiographic Society in Lund. The authors gratefully acknowledge the Data Management and Software Centre, a Danish Contribution to the European Spallation Source ESS AB, for generously providing access to their computations cluster.
[00]{}
<https://www.maxlab.lu.se>
J.-O. Adler, M. Boland, J. Brudvik, K. Fissum, K. Hansen, L. Isaksson, P. Lilja, L.-J. Lindgren, M. Lundin, B. Nilsson, D. Pugachov, A. Sandell, B. Schröder, V. Avdeichikov, P. Golubev, B. Jakobsson, J.R.M. Annand, K. Livingston, R. Igarashi, L. Myers, A. Nathan, W.J. Briscoe, G. Feldman, M. Kovash, D. Branford, K. Föhl, P. Grabmayr, V. Takau, G. O’Rielly, D. Burdeynyi, V. Ganenko, V. Morochovskyi, G. Vashchenko, Nucl. Instrum. and Meth. A 715 (2013) 1.
<https://www.maxlab.lu.se/node/1090>
L.-J. Lindgren, Nucl. Instrum. and Meth. A 492 (2002) 299.
J.M. Vogt, R.E. Pywell, D.M. Skopik, E.L. Hallin, J.C. Bergstrom, H.S. Caplan, K.I. Blomqvist, W. Del Bianco, J.W. Jury Nucl. Instrum. and Meth. A 324 (1993) 198.
Annual Report 1994, Saskatchewan Accelerator Laboratory, p. 21-23.
Annual Report 1995, Saskatchewan Accelerator Laboratory, p. 27-29.
see for example J.-O. Adler, B.-E. Andersson, K.I. Blomqvist, B. Forkman, K. Hansen, L. Isaksson, K. Lindgren, D. Nilsson, A. Sandell, B. Schröder, K. Ziakas, Nucl. Instr. and Meth. A 294 (1990) 15.
see for example J.-O. Adler, B.-E. Andersson, K.I. Blomqvist, K.G. Fissum, K. Hansen, L. Isaksson, B. Nilsson, D. Nilsson, H. Ruijter, A. Sandell, B. Schröder, D.A. Sims, Nucl. Instr. and Meth. A 388 (1997) 17.
J.M. Vogt, R. Florizone, Nucl. Instr. and Meth. A 339 (1994) 425.
L.S. Myers, PhD thesis, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, USA (2010) unpublished; see also <https://www.maxlab.lu.se/sites/default/files/myers.pdf>
D.L. Hornidge, PhD thesis, University of Saskatchewan, Canada (1999) unpublished; see also <http://www.mta.ca/~dhornidg/hornidge_phd.pdf>
D.L. Hornidge, B.J. Warkentin, R. Igarashi, J.C. Bergstrom, E.L. Hallin, N.R. Kolb, R.E. Pywell, D.M. Skopik, J.M. Vogt Phys. Rev. Lett. 84 (2000) 2334.
R.E. Pywell, Subatomic Physics Internal Reports, University of Saskatchewan, Canada (2009) unpublished; see also <http://nucleus.usask.ca/technical_reports/other/TaggerSim-1.1.pdf>
R.O. Owens, Nucl. Instr. and Meth. A 288 (1990) 574.
L. Van Hoorebeke, D. Ryckbosch, C. Van den Abeele, R. Van de Vyver, J. Dias, F. De Smet, B. Schröder, D. Nilsson Nucl. Instr. and Meth. A 321 (1992) 230.
<http://root.cern.ch>
B.J. Warkentin, D.L. Hornidge, R. Igarashi, J.C. Bergstrom, E.L. Hallin, N.R. Kolb, R.E. Pywell, D.M. Skopik, J.M. Vogt, G. Feldman Phys. Rev. C 64 (2001) 014603.
[^1]: Bad beam is defined as the first 1 ms of the extracted beam from the PSR.
[^2]: The individual FP counter rates were not recorded.
[^3]: The corresponding count rate is used to generate a random event using a Poisson distribution.
[^4]: Note that this $\sim$3 ns width is comparable to the smallest pulse that can be generated by the coincidence modules, so that the scalers may register even shorter pulses.
[^5]: An array was created representing the accidental spectrum with one entry per ns. The FFT transform function in <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">root</span> was then used to produce $P^2(T)$. High-frequency terms deemed unimportant were filtered before taking the square root of $P^2(T)$ and performing the inverse FFT.
[^6]: Today, the FP discriminator pulse widths are typically set to (25$\pm$1) ns.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'In this study, we investigate the characteristics and properties of a traversable wormhole constrained by the current astrophysical observations in the framework of modified theories of gravity (MOG). As a concrete case, we study traversable wormhole space–time configurations in the Dvali–Gabadadze–Porrati (DGP) braneworld scenario, which are supported by the effects of the gravity leakage of extra dimensions. We find that the wormhole space–time structure will open in terms of the $2\sigma$ confidence level when we utilize the joint constraints supernovae (SNe) Ia + observational Hubble parameter data (OHD) + Planck + gravitational wave (GW) and $z<0.2874$. Furthermore, we obtain several model-independent conclusions, such as (i) the exotic matter threading the wormholes can be divided into four classes during the evolutionary processes of the universe based on various energy conditions; (ii) we can offer a strict restriction to the local wormhole space–time structure by using the current astrophysical observations; and (iii) we can clearly identify a physical gravitational resource for the wormholes supported by astrophysical observations, namely the dark energy components of the universe or equivalent space–time curvature effects from MOG. Moreover, we find that the strong energy condition is always violated at low redshifts.'
author:
- Deng Wang
- 'Xin-He Meng'
title: Traversable braneworld wormholes supported by astrophysical observations
---
Keywords: braneworld model, traversable wormholes, astrophysical observations.
PACS numbers: 98.80.-k, 95.36.+x, 95.30.Sf.
Introduction
============
Almost two decades ago, distance measurements of type Ia supernovae (SNe Ia) indicated that the universe is undergoing a phase of late-time acceleration [@1; @2]. More recently, this exotic phenomenon remains strongly confirmed by different astrophysical observations, including measurements of baryon acoustic oscillations (BAO) from galaxy surveys, measurements of temperature anisotropies of cosmic microwave background (CMB) radiation, observational Hubble parameter data (OHD), the abundance of galaxy clusters (AGC), and strong and weak gravitational lensing (SGL and WGL). Nonetheless, theoretically, the absence of a reasonable physical mechanism responsible for the late-time accelerated expansion has inspired a great deal of alternatives.
In general, there exist two different approaches to explain the accelerated mechanism in the literature. The first approach is to introduce a new field in the framework of the general theory of relativity (GR), namely, the so-called dark energy. The most straightforward and elegant explanation is the well-known cosmological constant $\Lambda$ model, i.e., the $\Lambda$CDM model, which has been demonstrated to be very successful in depicting many aspects of the observed universe. For example, the late-time acceleration of the universe, the spectrum of anisotropies of the CMB radiation, and the large-scale structure of matter distribution at the linear level are well described by the base cosmology scenario. The newest results of Planck-2015 indicate that there are still some anomalies that are incompatible with the predictions of the base cosmology scenario [@3], specifically, the anomalies of the observed Hubble parameter $H(z)$ and the higher amplitude of the fluctuation spectrum than that inferred from some analyses of rich cluster counts and weak gravitational lensing. Apart from these anomalies, the $\Lambda$CDM scenario also faces the challenge of two fatal problems, i.e., the “fine-tuning” problem and the “coincidence” problem (see Ref. [@4] for details). In addition, Witten proposed that a positive cosmological constant $\Lambda$ is inconsistent with perturbed string theory [@5]. Therefore, the base cosmology scenario may not reflect the behaviors of the true universe. Based on this concern, numerous alternative dark energy scenarios have been proposed by theorists in recent years, for instance, phantom [@6], quintessence [@7; @8; @9; @10; @11; @12; @13; @14], decaying vacuum [@15], dark fluid [@16; @17; @18; @19; @20; @21], and Chaplygin gas [@22]. The second approach is to introduce modifications to the Einstein–Hilbert action when GR breaks down at substantially large scales, namely the so-called modified theories of gravity (MOG). In general, the popular scenarios belonging to MOG contain $f(R)$ gravity [@23; @24; @25; @26; @27; @28], scalar–tensor gravity [@29; @30; @31; @32], braneworld gravity [@33; @34; @35], Einstein–aether gravity [@36; @37], and Chern–Simons gravity [@38].
In particular, braneworld gravity is a substantially interesting scenario based on the basic idea that the observational universe could be a (3+1)-dimensional surface (the brane) embedded in a (3+1+d)-dimensional space–time (the bulk), with the Standard Model fields and particles trapped on the brane while gravity can be free to access the bulk. This theory of gravity is inspired by the developments of the $M$ theory [@35; @a2]. To be more precise, the (9+1)-dimensional superstring theories are encompassed by the (10+1)-dimensional $M$ theory, which is widely considered as a prospective route to quantum gravity. Braneworld scenarios have two main features: (i) at low energies, gravity is confined on the brane and GR is naturally recovered; (ii) at high energies, gravity leaks into the bulk, exhibiting behaviors in a high-dimensional way. The gravitational effects of extra dimensions offer attractively testable implications for high-energy astrophysics and cosmology, which result from the $M$ theory. More concretely, the accelerated universe could be the result of gravitational leakage into extra dimensions over Hubble distances rather than the consequence of a nonzero cosmological constant [@a3]. In the present situation, we just take into account the simplest braneworld scenario where the four-dimensional gravity on the brane is modified at low energies, becoming five-dimensional Dvali–Gabadadze–Porrati (DGP) scenarios, which is one class of the five-dimensional braneworld scenarios based on the Randall–Sundrum (RS) scenarios.
As in our previous works [@39; @40; @41; @42], the present study is aimed at exploring the astrophysical scale properties of the braneworld scenario by assuming that the dark energy fluid permeates over the whole universe. More precisely, we investigate the properties and features of a mysterious astrophysical object, i.e., a wormhole, which has attracted considerable attention today along with other astrophysical objects, such as pulsars, white dwarfs, and black holes.
Wormholes can be defined as a class of special space–time structure connecting two different universes or two widely separated regions of our own universe. In recent years, gradually mounting interest in the subject is mainly ascribed to the stirring and elegant discovery that the universe is experiencing a phase of accelerated expansion. Because the null energy conditions (NECs) are violated in both cases, an amazing and unexpected overlap occurs between these two seemingly separated subjects. More recently, as demonstrated in our previous works [@39; @40; @41; @42], we are dedicated to investigating the related properties and features of wormhole space–time structure for a given dynamical dark energy scenario. In the present study, we explore traversable wormholes in the framework of MOG. As a concrete case, traversable wormholes supported by astrophysical observations in the DGP scenario are investigated. In what follows, it is very necessary to provide a brief historical review on wormholes.
The first study of wormhole physics can be traced back to Flamm in 1916, when he analyzed the newly discovered Schwarzschild solution [@43]. Subsequently, in 1935, Einstein and Rosen (ER) proposed the so-called ER bridge when they attempted to construct a geometrical model for a physical fundamental particle, e.g., an electron [@44]. After the pioneering study by ER, this field lay dormant for almost two decades. Then, in 1955, Wheeler developed the appealing concept of a “geon, ” which was assumed to be the solution of the coupled Einstein–Maxwell equation [@45]. From the point of view of topology, he considered a multiply-connected space–time structure, where two distant regions were linked by a tunnel, namely, the geon. Furthermore, Misner and Wheeler conducted a series of research projects on differential geometry and abstract topology in physics. In their 1957 paper [@46], they introduced the term “wormhole” for the first time. During the following 30 years, the wormhole field lay dormant once again, except for Bronnikov’s tunnel-like solutions [@47] and Ellis’s drainhole [@48; @49]. In 1988, a new era of wormhole physics was opened by Morris and Thorne in light of their milestone paper [@50], where they analyzed in detail the construction of the wormhole, energy conditions, time machines, the stability problem, and traversabilities of wormholes. In succession, Visser and Possion introduced the interesting “thin-shell wormhole” by conjecturing that all the “exotic matter” is confined to a thin shell between universes [@51; @52; @53; @54]. Because of the discovery of the late-time acceleration of the universe in 1998, a great deal of related research about wormholes has been motivated by developments of various kinds of phantom-like dynamical dark energy scenarios or MOG scenarios [@55; @56]. Subsequently, for the first time, we investigated traversable wormholes constrained by modern astrophysical observations [@57; @58; @59]. This is also the starting point of our present work.
This paper is organized as follows. In the next section, we present a brief review of wormholes. In Section 3, we also review the DGP braneworld scenario briefly and constrain the DGP scenario by using the current astrophysical observations to investigate the wormhole space–time configuration quantitatively. In Section 4, two specific traversable wormhole solutions are presented and the related characteristics are also studied. In Section 5, we explore the energy conditions based on the current astrophysical observations on both cosmological and astrophysical scales. Our discussion and conclusions are presented in the final section. Note that throughout the paper we use the units $8\pi G=c=1$.
Brief review of wormholes
=========================
Consider a static, spherical symmetric metric for the wormhole space–time configuration, $$ds^2=-e^{2\Phi(r)}dt^2+\frac{dr^2}{1-b(r)/r}+r^2(d\theta^2+\sin^2\theta d\phi^2), \label{1}$$ where $r$ is the radial coordinate running in the range \[$r_0$, $\infty$) (where $r_0$ denotes the throat radius of a wormhole) and $\theta$ and $\phi$ represent the angular coordinates. $\Phi(r)$ denotes the redshift function since it is related to the gravitational redshift, and $b(r)$ denotes the shape function, for it can determine the spatial shape of the wormhole.
As described in our previous works [@39; @40; @41; @42], in general, four fundamental ingredients are required to form a traversable wormhole:
$\star$ Violate the NEC, i.e., $T_{\mu\nu}k^{\mu}k^{\nu}>0$, where $T_{\mu\nu}$ is the stress–energy tensor and $k^{\mu}$ is any future directed null vector.
$\star$ Satisfy the flare-out conditions, i.e., $b(r_0)=r_0$, $b'(r_0)<1$ and $b(r)<r$ when $r>r_0$.
$\star$ To avoid a horizon, the redshift function $\Phi(r)$ should be finite everywhere.
$\star$ Impose asymptotically flatness conditions, i.e., $b/r\rightarrow0$ and $\Phi\rightarrow0$ when $r\rightarrow\infty$.
Using the Einstein field equation $G_{\mu\nu}=T_{\mu\nu}$ in an orthonormal reference frame, we can obtain the stress–energy scenario as follows: $$\rho=\frac{b'}{r^2}, \label{2}$$ $$p_r=\frac{b}{r^3}-2\frac{\Phi'}{r}\left(1-\frac{b}{r}\right), \label{3}$$ $$p_t=\left(1-\frac{b}{r}\right)\left[\Phi''+(\Phi')^2-\Phi'\frac{b'r-b}{2r^2(1-b/r)}-\frac{b'r-b}{2r^3(1-b/r)}+\frac{\Phi'}{r}\right], \label{4}$$ where $\rho(r)$ is the matter energy density, $p_r(r)$ is the radial pressure, $p_t(r)$ is the lateral pressure orthogonal to the radial direction, and the prime denotes the derivative with respect to $r$. Using the stress–energy conservation equation, $T^{\mu\nu}_{\hspace{3mm};\nu} = 0$, we obtain $$p'_r=\frac{2}{r}(p_t-p_r)-\Phi'(\rho+p_r), \label{5}$$ which can be regarded as the hydrostatic equation of equilibrium for the materials supporting a wormhole or the relativistic Euler equation. In the following section, we review the DGP braneworld scenario briefly to constrain it by cosmic observations and study the corresponding traversable wormhole space–time configurations.
The DGP braneworld scenario
===========================
The DGP braneworld scenario, which was first generalized to the cosmology field by Deffayet [@a3], modifies GR at low energies. This scenario produces the self-acceleration of the late-time universe owing to a weakening of gravity at low energies. Similar to the RS scenario, the DGP scenario is also a five-dimensional scenario with infinite extra dimensions. The dynamics of gravity is governed by a competition between a Ricci scalar term in the four-dimensional brane and an Einstein–Hilbert action in the five-dimensional bulk. Then, the first Friedmann equation of the DGP scenario can be expressed as [@60] $$H^2=H_0^2\{\Omega_{k0}(1+z)^2+[\sqrt{\Omega_{r_c}}+\sqrt{\Omega_{r_c}+\Omega_{m0}(1+z)^3}]^2\}, \label{6}$$ where $H$ denotes the Hubble parameter, $H_0$ is the present value of the Hubble parameter, $\Omega_{m0}$ and $\Omega_{k0}$ are the fractional contributions of matter and curvature, respectively, and $\Omega_{r_c}=1/4r_c^2H_0^2$ is the bulk-induced term with respect to the crossover radius $r_c$. The $z=0$ value of Eq. (\[6\]) leads to the usual normalization condition $\Omega_{k0}+(\sqrt{\Omega_{r_c}}+\sqrt{\Omega_{r_c}+\Omega_{m0}})^2=1$, and for a flat universe ($\Omega_{k0}=0$), $\Omega_{r_c}=(1-\Omega_{m0})^2/4$. Furthermore, Eq. (\[6\]) can be rewritten as $$E(z)=\{[1-(\sqrt{\Omega_{r_c}}+\sqrt{\Omega_{r_c}+\Omega_{m0}})^2](1+z)^2+[\sqrt{\Omega_{r_c}}+\sqrt{\Omega_{r_c}+\Omega_{m0}(1+z)^3}]^2\}^{1/2}, \label{7}$$ where $E(z)$ denotes the normalized Hubble parameter. Furthermore, according to Ref. [@60], the $z$-dependent equation of state (EoS) of the DGP scenario can be expressed as $$\omega_{eff}(z)=\{[\sqrt{4\Omega_{r_c}/\Omega_{m0}(1+z)^3+4}][\sqrt{\Omega_{r_c}/\Omega_{m0}(1+z)^3}+\sqrt{\Omega_{r_c}/\Omega_{m0}(1+z)^3+1}]\}^{-1}-1. \label{8}$$ In what follows, we exhibit our methodology to constrain the DGP scenario by using the current astrophysical observations.
SNe Ia+OHD+GW SNe Ia+OHD+Planck-2015+GW
---------------- -------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------- -- -- -- --
$\chi^2_{min}$ $579.444$ $579.455$
$\Omega_{m0}$ $0.2660^{+0.0553+0.0927}_{-0.0524-0.0858}$ $0.2684^{+0.0552+0.0903}_{-0.0522-0.0864}$
$\Omega_{r_c}$ $0.1902^{+0.0221+0.0369}_{-0.0209-0.0346}$ $0.1912^{+0.0229+0.0379}_{-0.0203-0.0347}$
: Minimum values of the derived $\chi^2$; corresponding $1\sigma$, $2\sigma$, and $3\sigma$ confidence intervals; and the best-fitting values of the model parameter pair ($\Omega_{m0}$, $\Omega_{r_c}$) in the DGP braneworld scenario obtained by using different kinds of constraints: SNe Ia, OHD, Planck-2015, and GW.[]{data-label="tab1"}
In the present work, we utilize the Union 2.1 data sets for numerical analysis; these are composed of 580 SNe Ia data points covering the redshift range \[0.015, 1.4\]. To exhibit the standard $\chi^2$ statistical estimates, the theoretical distance modulus is defined as $\mu_{th}(z_i)=m-M=5\log_{10}d_L(z_i)+25$, where $m$ is the apparent magnitude, $M$ is the absolute magnitude, and $d_L(z_i)$ is the luminosity distance at a given redshift $z_i$ in units of Mpc. The luminosity distance is defined as $d_L(z_i)=(1+z_i)\int^{z_i}_0\frac{dz'}{E(z';\theta)}$, where $\theta$ represents a set of model parameters. Then, the corresponding $\chi^2$ for the SNe Ia observations is written as $\chi^2_{SN}=\sum^{580}_{i=1}[\frac{\mu_{obs}(z_i)-\mu_{th}(z_i;\theta)}{\sigma_i}]^2$, where $\mu_{obs}$ is the observed value of the distance modulus and $\sigma_i$ is the corresponding 1$\sigma$ statistical error at a given redshift $z_i$. We use the latest OHD set consisting of 36 data points, which are obtained from model-independent observations and avoid integrating over the redshift $z$. The corresponding $\chi^2$ for the OHD is defined as $\chi^2_{OHD}=\sum^{36}_{i=1}[\frac{H_0E(z_i)-H_{obs}(z_i)}{\sigma_i}]^2$, where $H_{obs}(z_i)$ is the observed value of the Hubble parameter at a given redshift $z_i$. Another important and powerful constraint comes from the CMB anisotropy observations, and we use the Planck-2015 data sets to constrain the DGP braneworld scenario. For simplicity, we take the shift parameter $\mathcal{R}$ instead of the full data from the CMB anisotropy observations, because taking the entire CMB data to perform a global fitting will expend a great deal of power and computation time. The shift parameter $\mathcal{R}$ is defined as $\mathcal{R}=\sqrt{\Omega_{m0}}\int^{z_C}_0\frac{dz'}{E(z')}$, where $z_C$ is the redshift of recombination and $\Omega_{m0}$ is the present-day value of the matter density ratio parameter. As shown in a recent paper [@3], the shift parameter for the Planck-2015 data sets is $\mathcal{R}=1.7482\pm0.0048$ and $z_C=1089.90$. The corresponding $\chi^2$ for the CMB anisotropy observations can be expressed as $\chi^2_{CMB}(\theta)=[\frac{\mathcal{R}_{obs}-\mathcal{R}(\theta)}{\sigma_{\mathcal{R}}}]^2$, where $\mathcal{R}_{obs}$ and $\sigma_{\mathcal{R}}$ denote the values of the shift parameter and the corresponding $1\sigma$ statistical error, respectively. In addition, as in our previous works [@57; @58; @59], we still take a single data point from the single gravitational-wave (GW) event GW150914 [@61]. Note that, although the quality of the current gravitational-wave data is not very good, we believe that the gradually mounting data in the future will place tighter constraints on various kinds of cosmological scenarios. To be more precise, we use the luminosity distance $420^{+150}_{-180}$ Mpc of two supermassive black holes as a complementary probe. The corresponding $\chi^2$ for GW150914 is expressed as $\chi^2_{GW}$. Naturally, the expected $\chi^2$ of the combined constraints from the SNe Ia, OHD, CMB and GW150914 data sets can be defined as $$\tilde{\chi}^2={\chi}^2_{SN}+{\chi}^2_{OHD}+\chi^2_{CMB}++\chi^2_{GW} \label{9}.$$
![$1\sigma$, $2\sigma$, and $3\sigma$ confidence ranges for the model parameter pair ($\Omega_{m0}$, $\Omega_{r_c}$) of the DGP braneworld scenario constrained by SNe Ia+OHD+GW data sets.[]{data-label="f1"}](1.jpg)
![$1\sigma$, $2\sigma$, and $3\sigma$ confidence ranges for the model parameter pair ($\Omega_{m0}$, $\Omega_{r_c}$) of the DGP braneworld scenario constrained by SNe Ia+OHD+Planck-2015+GW data sets.[]{data-label="f2"}](2.jpg)
![Evolutionary tendency of the EoS of the DGP braneworld scenario constrained by SNe Ia+OHD+Planck+GW data sets. The long-dashed (red) line represents the EoS when we take the best-fitting values of the model parameter pair ($\Omega_{m0}$, $\Omega_{r_c}$), and the short-dashed (blue) line represents the base cosmology scenario. The yellow region corresponds to the $1\sigma$ confidence band, and the red regions reflect the parts where the $2\sigma$ confidence band surpasses the $1\sigma$ confidence band.[]{data-label="f3"}](3.jpg)
![Profile curve of a traversable wormhole.[]{data-label="f4"}](4.pdf)
![Embedding diagram generated by rotating the profile curve about the vertical axis.[]{data-label="f5"}](5.jpg)
The minimum values of the derived $\chi^2$ for two different combined constraints, the best fitting values of the model parameter pair ($\Omega_{m0}$, $\Omega_{r_c}$), and the corresponding $1\sigma$ and $2\sigma$ confidence intervals are listed in Table \[tab1\]. Furthermore, the likelihood distributions of two different constraints for the DGP scenario are depicted in Figs. \[f1\] and \[f2\]. It is not difficult to find that, in our situation, the results of two different constraints share a high degeneracy; we cannot produce a tighter constraint apparently when adding Planck-2015 data to the joint constraints SNe Ia+OHD+GW.
Specific traversable wormholes
==============================
We explore the related properties of traversable wormholes of the DGP scenario in this section. Through some simple calculations, we find that the EoS parameter $\omega_{eff}(z)<-1$ in terms of the $2\sigma$ confidence level when $z<0.2874$ (the value at which wormholes appear); i.e., the NEC is violated by the effects of the gravity leakage of the extra dimensions in the DGP braneworld scenario. It is worth noting that, in our previous works, we just considered the EoS when the model parameters take the best-fitting values, which is insufficient for providing complete information on the survival range of the wormholes for a given cosmological scenario. In addition, the wormholes may not come into being immediately when the EoS parameter $\omega_{eff}(z)<-1$ and the specific formation mechanism of wormholes still needs to be explored further.
Constant redshift function
---------------------------
Considering the simplest case $\Phi=C$, where $C$ is an arbitrary constant, we can obtain the shape function by replacing Eqs. (\[2\]) and (\[8\]) in Eq. (\[3\]): $$b(r)=r_0^{\frac{1}{\omega_{eff}}+1}r^{-\frac{1}{\omega_{eff}}}. \label{10}$$ It is not difficult to find that the flare-out conditions are well satisfied by numerical calculations. To be more precise, the shape function $b(r)<r$ when $r>r_0$ and evaluating at the throat $r_0$, we can obtain $$b'(r_0)=-\frac{1}{\omega_{eff}}. \label{11}$$ Subsequently, if taking the model parameter pair ($\Omega_{m0}$, $\Omega_{r_c}$) from the joint constraints of SNe Ia+OHD+Planck-2015+GW data sets in terms of the lower boundary of the $2\sigma$ confidence band (see Fig. \[f3\]), we can obtain $b'(r_0)=0.931099<1$ ($\omega_{eff}=-1.074$) at the present epoch. The solution is both traversable and asymptotically flat, because the redshift function $\Phi$ is finite everywhere and $b/r\rightarrow0$ when $r\rightarrow\infty$. Furthermore, it is constructive and necessary to depict the space–time structure of the traversable wormhole. As described in Ref. [@50], we can obtain the wormhole space–time configuration through the function $f(r)$, which characterizes the embedded surface of the wormhole. This function is defined as $$\frac{df}{dr}=\pm\frac{1}{\sqrt{\frac{r}{b(r)}-1}}. \label{12}$$ Then, we can construct the profile curve and the concrete embedded diagram by solving this equation numerically. It is noteworthy that we assumed a throat radius of the wormhole of $r_0=10$ m and an EoS parameter of $\omega_{eff}=-1.074$ (see Figs. \[f4\] and \[f5\]). Following our previous studies [@39; @40; @41; @42], here we conduct a wormhole traversability analysis, which may be the most interesting and attractive consideration in wormhole physics. In general, three necessary ingredients are required for a human being in a spaceship who tries to successfully traverse a wormhole:
$\star$ The acceleration felt by the travelers should not exceed Earth’s gravitational acceleration $g_\oplus$.
$\star$ The tidal acceleration should not exceed Earth’s gravitational acceleration.
$\star$ The traversal time measured by the travelers and the observers who stay at rest at a space station should satisfy several quantitative relationships.
For the conveniences of calculations, we just derive the key formula obtained by some straightforward calculations in the following manner: $$v\leqslant r_0\sqrt{\frac{\omega_{eff}(z) g_\oplus}{\omega_{eff}(z)+1}}, \label{13}$$ where $v$ is the traversal velocity, $r_0$ is the throat radius of the traversable wormhole, and $g_\oplus$ is Earth’s gravitational acceleration. We can easily find that the traversal velocity depends on the redshift for the DGP scenario, which also implies that the wormhole space–time configuration evolves with cosmic time. As a concrete case, assuming $r_0=100$ m and taking the best-fitting values (0.2684, 0.1912) of the model parameter pair ($\Omega_{m0}$, $\Omega_{r_c}$) from the SNe Ia+OHD+Planck+GW constraints, we obtain a traversal velocity of $v\approx1192.6$ m/s at the present epoch. In what follows, choosing the matching radius $D=10000$ m, we can also obtain a traversal time of $\Delta\tau\approx\Delta t\approx2L/v\thickapprox16.77\;\rm s$.
A special shape function: $b(r)=r_0+\frac{1}{\omega_{eff}}(r_0-r)$
------------------------------------------------------------------
Considering a specific choice for the shape function $b(r)=r_0+\frac{1}{\omega_{eff}}(r_0-r)$ and utilizing Eq. (\[8\]), we can get $$\Phi'(r)=-\frac{1}{2r}. \label{14}$$ Integrating over $r$ on both sides gives $$\Phi(r)=-\frac{1}{2}\ln r+B, \label{15}$$ where $B$ is an integration constant. We can easily find that the solution is not asymptotically flat because it diverges when $r\rightarrow\infty$. Thus, the wormhole space–time configuration is not traversable for an interstellar traveler. However, in theory, we can construct a traversable wormhole by gluing an exterior flat space–time geometry onto the interior space–time geometry at a junction radius $r_m$. Hence, the integration constant $B$ can be expressed as $C=\Phi(r_m)+\frac{1}{2}\ln(\frac{r_m}{r})$. Furthermore, we can calculate the amounts of the exotic matter threading the wormhole by using the “volume integral quantifier ” (VIQ) method. It is noteworthy that the amounts of exotic matter can be described effectively by the definite integral $\int T_{\mu\nu}k^\mu k^\nu dV$ and that here we just consider the finite range of the traversable wormhole, $r\in[r_0, r_m]$. Subsequently, using the corresponding quantity $I_V=\int[p_r(r)+\rho]dV$, we can obtain the following relation: $$I_V=\int^{r_m}_{r_0}(r-b)\left[\ln\left(\frac{e^{2\Phi}}{1-b/r}\right)\right]'dr. \label{16}$$ It follows that $$I_V=\frac{[1+\omega_{eff}(z)](r_0-r_m)}{\omega_{eff}(z)}. \label{17}$$ Obviously, this physical quantity is sensitive to the redshift $z$. Like the case of the constant redshift function, we also take the best-fitting values (0.2684, 0.1912) of the model parameter pair ($\Omega_{m0}$, $\Omega_{r_c}$) from the SNe Ia+OHD+Planck+GW constraints and obtain $$I_V=0.0689013(r_0-r_m). \label{18}$$ It is not difficult to verify that the physical quantity $I_V\rightarrow0$ when $r_m\rightarrow r_0$, which means that, in theory, we can construct a traversable wormhole with infinitesimal amounts of averaged-NEC-violating dark energy fluid in the DGP braneworld scenario.
![Relations between different energy conditions and the wormhole radius $r$. The green (long-dashed) line represents the expression $(p+3\rho)/\rho=3\omega_{eff}+1$, the blue (short-dashed) line represents the expression $(p+\rho)/\rho=\omega_{eff}+1$, the pink (dot-dashed) line represents the expression $(\rho-p)/\rho=1-\omega_{eff}$, and the red (solid) line represents the expression $\rho/\rho=1$.[]{data-label="f6"}](6.jpg)
![ $p+\rho$ as a function of the redshift $z$ and the wormhole radius $r$.[]{data-label="f7"}](7.pdf "fig:") ![ $p+\rho$ as a function of the redshift $z$ and the wormhole radius $r$.[]{data-label="f7"}](8.pdf "fig:")
![Relations between different energy conditions and the wormhole radius $r$. The green (long-dashed) line represents the expression $p+3\rho$, the blue (short-dashed) line represents the expression $p+\rho$, the pink (dot-dashed) line represents the expression $\rho-p$, and the red (solid) line represents the expression $\rho$.[]{data-label="f8"}](9.jpg)
Energy conditions
=================
In general, there are two important types of energy conditions in classical general relativity, i.e., pointwise energy conditions and averaged energy conditions. Generally, the standard pointwise energy conditions contain the above-mentioned NEC, the weak energy condition (WEC), the strong energy condition (SEC), and the dominant energy condition (DEC). The mathematical description of different energy conditions in a spatially flat Friedmann–Robertson–Walker (FRW) universe can be expressed as follows: $${\rm NEC} \Leftrightarrow \rho+p\geqslant0, \label{19}$$ $${\rm WEC} \Leftrightarrow \rho+p\geqslant0\quad {\rm and} \quad\rho\geqslant0, \label{20}$$ $${\rm SEC} \Leftrightarrow \rho+p\geqslant0\quad {\rm and} \quad\rho+3p\geqslant0, \label{21}$$ and $${\rm DEC} \Leftrightarrow \rho\pm p\geqslant0\quad {\rm and} \quad\rho\geqslant0. \label{22}$$ It is worth noticing that the NECs are the necessary conditions of the other three energy conditions mathematically.
In the present work, we are dedicated to explore the relationships between the structure formation of traversable wormholes and energy conditions from the point of view of cosmology. Furthermore, we exhibit these underlying relations by using the DGP braneworld scenario in the framework of MOG. Substituting Eq. (\[8\]) into different conditional inequalities ([@19; @20; @21; @22]), we find that the model parameter ($\alpha$, $\beta$) and redshift $z$ will enter the energy conditions and affect the structure formation of traversable wormholes. More precisely, the WEC and DEC are automatically satisfied in the possible range \[0.2874, *z*\], where *z* represents the possible value of the low redshift (see Fig. \[f6\]). Note that we investigated the energy conditions in terms of the $2\sigma$ confidence level. In addition, we can easily find that the second inequality $\rho+3p\geqslant0$ of the SEC is always violated at low redshifts.
More physically, the DEC implies that the dark energy fluid cannot travel faster than the speed of light and that the nonviolation of the WEC indicates that the dark energy fluid in the DGP scenario has a nondiverging effect on congruences of null geodesics. Meanwhile, the SEC provides a tighter limitation than the WEC but it is still physically reasonable for the stress–energy tensor. In the DGP scenario, we can find that the pressure of dark energy from the gravity leakage of the extra dimensions is large enough at low redshifts. Therefore, the SEC is always violated until the end of the universe.
In what follows, it is very necessary and constructive to study the behaviors of different energy conditions on the astrophysical scale, namely the effects of different energy conditions on wormhole space–time configurations. Here, we just take into account the case of a constant redshift function, using the EoS parameter from Eq. (\[8\]) and Eq. (\[11\]), and we can express conveniently the NEC in the following manner: $$p+\rho=-\frac{1}{r^2}\left(\frac{1}{\omega_{eff}(z)}+1\right)\geqslant0. \label{23}$$ In Fig. \[f7\], we could find that the NEC violation is closely related to the dimension of the traversable wormhole and that the NEC violation occurs at a very small order of magnitude at low redshifts ($\sim$$10^{-6}$). To understand the size-dependent property of the traversable wormhole better, we depict the size-dependent behaviors of different energy conditions in Fig. \[f8\] at the present epoch (i.e., $\omega_{eff}(0)=-1.074$). It is easy to find that the behaviors of different energy conditions on the astrophysical scale is compatible with those on the cosmological scale. Moreover, with the gradually increasing radius of the traversable wormhole, the behaviors of different energy conditions in the DGP braneworld scenario will tend to be 0, which is completely consistent with those in the standard cosmological scenario ($p+\rho=0$). In fact, it is substantially reasonable because the energy density $\rho$ of the material threading the wormhole will approach 0 very fast with increasing radius ($\rho=-\frac{1}{\omega_{eff}(z) r^2}$).
Discussion and conclusions
==========================
In this work, for the first time, we investigated the characteristics and properties of a traversable wormhole constrained by the current astrophysical observations in the framework of MOG. As a concrete case, we studied traversable wormhole space–time configurations in the DGP braneworld scenario, which are supported by the effects of the gravity leakage of extra dimensions. As in our previous works [@39; @40; @41; @42], we first constrain the DGP braneworld scenario by using various data sets, including SNe Ia, OHD, Planck, and a single data point from the single event GW150914. We find that the two different joint constraints, i.e., SNe Ia+OHD+GW and SNe Ia+OHD+Planck+GW, share a substantially high degeneracy and that the wormhole space–time structure will open in terms of the $2\sigma$ confidence level when we take the joint constraints SNe Ia+OHD+Planck+GW and $z<0.2874$ (see Fig. \[f3\]). We then obtain two special traversable wormhole solutions supported by the current astrophysical observations: the case of a constant redshift function and that of a specific choice for the shape function. In what follows, utilizing the model parameter pair from the SNe Ia+OHD+Planck+GW constraint, we analyze the traversabilities of the first traversable wormhole solution and the amounts of exotic matter of the second solution.
In contrast to our previous studies [@16; @17; @18; @19], we explored the energy conditions from the point of view of observational cosmology. More precisely, we obtained several model-independent conclusions: (i) According to the violations of different energy conditions, the exotic matter threading the traversable wormhole can be divided into four classes during the evolutionary processes of the universe. (ii) We can impose a strong restriction to the local wormhole space–time structure by using the current astrophysical observations. (iii) A physically gravitational resource for the wormholes supported by astrophysical observations has been identified, i.e., the dark energy of the universe or equivalent space–time curvature effects from the framework of MOG.
We investigated the energy conditions on both astrophysical and cosmological scales and derived the underlying relations between energy conditions and wormhole structure formation for the DGP braneworld scenario from the point of view of observational cosmology. More specifically, we found that the WEC and the DEC are automatically satisfied in the possible range \[0.2874, *z*\] (see Fig. \[f6\]). Moreover, we can easily find that the second inequality $\rho+3p\geqslant0$ of the SEC is always violated at low redshifts. Furthermore, we also interpret clearly the physical implications of violations of different energy conditions for the DGP braneworld scenario.
With gradually increasing amounts of astrophysical data, we expect to test more cosmological scenarios, study the large-scale structure more thoroughly, and explore the evolving behaviors of local celestial bodies by adopting higher precision observations, particularly for the once purely theoretical concept of wormholes or even white holes physically.
Acknowledgments {#acknowledgments .unnumbered}
===============
We thank Professors Sergei. D. Odintsov and Bharat Ratra for beneficial feedback on astrophysics and cosmology. Deng Wang would like to thank Professor Jing-Ling Chen for helpful discussions about quantum information and quantum computation. This work is supported in part by the National Science Foundation of China.
[99]{} A. G. Riess et al., Observational evidence from supernovae for an accelerating universe and a cosmological constant, Astron. J. [**116**]{}, 1009 (1998).
S. Perlmutter, M. S. Turner and M. White, Constraining dark energy with SNe Ia and large scale structure, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**83**]{}, 670 (1999).
P. Ade et al., Planck 2015 results. XIII. Cosmological parameters, Astron. Astrophys. [**594**]{}, A13 (2016).
S. Weinberg, The Cosmological Constant Problem, Rev. Mod. Phy. [**61**]{}, 1 (1989).
E. Witten, Quantum gravity in de Sitter space, \[arXiv: hep-th/0106109\].
R. R. Caldwell, A Phantom menace? Phys. Lett. B [**545**]{} 23–29 (2002).
Y. Fujii, Origin of the gravitational constant and particle masses in a scale-invariant scalar-tensor theory, Phys. Rev. D [**26,**]{} 2580 (1982).
L. H. Ford, Cosmological-constant damping by unstable scalar fields, Phys. Rev. D [**35,**]{} 2339 (1987).
C. Wetterich, Cosmology and the Fate of Dilatation Symmetry, Nucl. Phys. B [**302,**]{} 668 (1988).
B. Ratra and P. J. E. Peebles, Cosmological consequences of a rolling homogeneous scalar field, Phys. Rev. D [**37,**]{} 3406 (1988).
S. M. Carroll, Quintessence and the Rest of the World: Suppressing Long-Range Interactions, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**81,**]{} 3067 (1998).
A. Hebecker, C. Witterich, Quintessential Adjustment of the Cosmological Constant, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**86,**]{} 3339 (2000).
A. Hebecker, C. Witterich, Natural quintessence? Phys. Lett. B [**497,**]{} 281 (2001).
R. R. Caldwell, M. Kamionkovski and N. N. Weinberg, Phantom energy and cosmic doomsday, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**91**]{}, 071301 (2003).
P. Wang and X. Meng, Can vacuum decay in our universe? Class. Quant. Grav. [**22,**]{} 283-294 (2005).
X. Meng, J. Ren and M. Hu, Friedmann cosmology with a generalized equation of state and bulk viscosity, Commun. Theor. Phys. [**47,**]{} 379 (2007).
J. Ren and X. Meng, Modified equation of state, scalar field and bulk viscosity in Friedmann universe, Phys. Lett. B [**636,**]{} 5 (2006).
J. Ren and X. Meng, Cosmological model with viscosity media (dark fluid) described by an effective equation of state, Phys. Lett. B [**633,**]{} 1 (2006).
M. Hu and X. Meng, Bulk viscous cosmology: statefinder and entropy, Phys. Lett. B [**635,**]{} 186 (2006).
X. Meng and X. Dou, Friedmann cosmology with bulk viscosity: a concrete model for dark energy, Commun. Theor. Phys. [**52,**]{} 377 (2009).
X. Dou and X. Meng, Bulk viscous cosmology: unified dark matter, Adv. Astron. [**1155,**]{} 829340 (2011).
A. Kamenshchik, U. Moschella and V. Pasquier, An Alternative to quintessence, Phys. Lett. B [**511**]{}, 265 (2001).
S. Capozziello, Curvature quintessence, Int. J. Mod. Phys. D [**11,**]{} 483 (2002).
S. Capozziello et al., Curvature quintessence matched with observational data, Int. J. Mod. Phys. D [**12,**]{} 1969 (2003).
S. M. Carroll et al., Is cosmic speed - up due to new gravitational physics? Phys. Rev. D [**70,**]{} 043528 (2004).
S. Nojiri and Sergei D. Odintsov, Modified gravity with negative and positive powers of the curvature: Unification of the inflation and of the cosmic acceleration, Phys. Rev. D [**68,**]{} 123512 (2003).
S. Nojiri and Sergei D. Odintsov, Unified cosmic history in modified gravity: from F(R) theory to Lorentz non-invariant models, Phys. Rept. [**505**]{}, 59-144 (2011).
S. Nojiri and Sergei D. Odintsov, Cosmological reconstruction of realistic modified F(R) gravities, Phys. Lett. B [**681**]{}, 74-80 (2009).
J. P. Uzan, Cosmological scaling solutions of nonminimally coupled scalar fields, Phys. Rev. D [**59,**]{} 123510 (1999).
T. Chiba, Quintessence, The gravitational constant, and gravity, Phys. Rev. D [**60,**]{} 083508 (1999).
V. Sahni and A. A. Starobinsky, Reconstructing Dark Energy, Int. J. Mod. Phys. D [**15,**]{} 2105 (2006).
P. Ruiz-Lapuente, Dark energy, gravitation and supernovae, Class. Quant. Grav. [**24,**]{} R91 (2007).
L. Randall and R. Sundrum, A Large mass hierarchy from a small extra dimension, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**83,**]{} 3370 (1999).
L. Randall and R. Sundrum, An Alternative to compactification, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**83,**]{} 4690 (1999).
G. R. Davli, G. Gabadadze and M. Porrati, 4-D gravity on a brane in 5-D Minkowski space, Phys. Lett. B [**485,**]{} 208 (2000).
T. Jacobson, Einstein-aether gravity: a status report, PoS QG-PH: 020 (2007).
T. Jacobson, Extended Horava gravity and Einstein-aether theory, Phys. Rev. D [**81**]{}, 101502 (2010).
Fernando Izaurieta et al., Standard General Relativity from Chern-Simons Gravity, Phys. Lett. B [**678**]{}, 213-217 (2009).
G. Dvali and G. Gabadadze, Gravity on a brane in infinite volume extra space, Phys. Rev. D [**63**]{}, 065007 (2001).
C. Deffayet, Cosmology on a brane in Minkowski bulk, Phys. Lett. B [**502**]{}, 199 (2001).
D. Wang and X. Meng, Wormholes supported by phantom energy from Shan–Chen cosmological fluids, Eur. Phys. J. C [**76**]{}, 171 (2016).
D. Wang and X. Meng, Modeling phantom energy wormholes from Shan–Chen fluids, \[arXiv: 1512.03097\].
D. Wang and X. Meng, Traversable geometric dark energy wormholes constrained by astrophysical observations, Eur. Phys. J. C [**76**]{}, 484 (2016).
D. Wang and X. Meng, Traversable holographic dark energy wormholes constrained by astronomical observations, \[arXiv: 1602.04699\].
L. Flamm, Beitr¨¢ge zur Einsteinschen Gravitationstheorie, Phys. Z. [**17**]{}, 448 (1916).
A. Einstein and N. Rosen, The Particle Problem in the General Theory of Relativity, Phys. Rev. [**48**]{}, 73-77 (1935).
J. A. Wheeler, Geons, Phys. Rev. [**97**]{}, 511-536 (1955).
C. W. Misner and J. A. Wheeler, Classical physics as geometry: Gravitation, electromagnetism, unquantized charge, and mass as properties of curved empty space, Annals Phys. [**2**]{}, 525 (1957).
K. A. Bronnikov, Scalar-tensor theory and scalar charge, Acta Phys. Pol. B [**4**]{}, 251 (1973).
H. G. Ellis, Ether flow through a drainhole - a particle model in general relativity, J. Math. Phys. [**14**]{}, 104 (1973).
H. G. Ellis, The Evolving, Flowless Drain Hole: A Nongravitating Particle Model In General Relativity Theory, Gen. Rel. Grav. [**10**]{}, 105–123 (1979).
M. S. Moris and K. S. Thorne, Wormholes in space-time and their use for interstellar travel: A tool for teaching general relativity, Am. J. Phys. [**56,**]{} 395 (1988).
M. Visser, Traversable wormholes: Some simple examples, Phys. Rev. D [**39**]{}, 3182 (1989).
M. Visser, Traversable wormholes from surgically modified Schwarzschild space-times, Nucl. Phys. B [**328**]{}, 203 (1989).
M. Visser, Quantum Mechanical Stabilization of Minkowski Signature Wormholes, Phys. Lett. B [**242**]{}, 24 (1990).
E. Poisson and M. Visser, Thin shell wormholes: Linearization stability, Phys. Rev. D [**52**]{}, 7318 (1995).
S. V. Sushkov, Wormholes supported by a phantom energy, Phys. Rev. D [**71**]{}, 043520 (2005).
F. S. N. Lobo, Phantom energy traversable wormholes, Phys. Rev. D [**71**]{}, 084011 (2005).
D. Wang and X. Meng, Observational constraints and diagnostics for time-dependent dark energy models, \[arXiv: 1603.00699\].
D. Wang and X. Meng, Observational constraints and differential diagnosis for cosmic evolutionary models, \[arXiv: 1603.08112\].
D. Wang and X. Meng, Reconstructing f(R) gravity from viscous cosmology constrained by observations, \[arXiv: 1604.02951\].
C. Deffayet et al., Accelerated universe from gravity leaking to extra dimensions, Phys. Rev. D [**65**]{}, 044023 (2002).
B. P. Abbott et al, Observation of Gravitational Waves from a Binary Black Hole Merger, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**116**]{}, 061102 (2016).
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'Stack Overflow (SO) is the largest Q&A website for developers, providing a huge amount of copyable code snippets. Using these snippets raises various maintenance and legal issues. The SO license requires attribution, i.e., referencing the original question or answer, and requires derived work to adopt a compatible license. While there is a heated debate on SO’s license model for code snippets and the required attribution, little is known about the extent to which snippets are copied from SO without proper attribution. In this paper, we present the research design and summarized results of an empirical study analyzing attributed and unattributed usages of SO code snippets in GitHub projects. On average, 3.22% of all analyzed repositories and 7.33% of the popular ones contained a reference to SO. Further, we found that developers rather refer to the whole thread on SO than to a specific answer. For Java, at least two thirds of the copied snippets were not attributed.'
author:
-
bibliography:
- 'literature-short.bib'
title: 'Attribution Required: Stack Overflow Code Snippets in GitHub Projects'
---
empirical study; code snippets; copy-and-paste programming; licensing; stack overflow; github; survey
Introduction {#sec:introduction}
============
Stack Overflow is the largest Question and Answer (Q&A) website for software developers. As of February 2017, its public data dump [@StackExchange16d] lists 11.5 million answered questions and 6.7 million registered users. Many of the answers contain code snippets together with explanations [@Yang16]. The availability of this huge amount of code snippets lead to changes in software developers’ behavior: Nowadays, they regularly face the “build or borrow” question [@Brandt10]: Should they try to understand and solve an issue on their own or just copy and adapt a solution from Stack Overflow (SO)? Assuming that developers also copy and paste snippets from SO without trying to thoroughly understand them, *maintenance issues* may arise. For instance, it will later be difficult for developers to refactor or debug code that they did not write themselves. Moreover, if no link to the SO question or answer is added to the copied code, it is not possible to check the SO thread for a corrected or improved solution in case problems occur. Beside these maintainability implications, copying and pasting code from SO may also lead to *licensing issues*: All SO content is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 license (CC BY-SA 3.0). This license allows to share and adapt the content, but requires attribution and demands contributions based on the content to be published under a compatible license. Licensing issues of source code posted on SO have been controversially discussed on different sites of the Stack Exchange network [@StackExchangeCommunityWiki13; @Ruport15; @Csharptest13], but attempts to change the license failed [@Samthebrand15; @Samthebrand16]. Besides attribution, CC BY-SA requires derived work to use a compatible license. However, CC licenses are not common for software [@Vendome15] and there is currently no non-CC license that Creative Commons considers compatible [@CreativeCommons17]. This makes the usage of code snippets from SO problematic in terms of licensing conflicts. With more than 33 million repositories, GitHub (GH) is one of the most popular code hosting platforms. To the best of our knowledge, there is currently no empirical evidence on how common it is to copy&paste code from SO into GH projects, and in particular, how often content from SO is attributed as required by the license. In the following, we present the research design and summarized results of a first thorough analysis on the usage and attribution of SO code snippets in public software projects hosted on GH. To complement our results, we conducted two surveys with software developers on their attribution practice and their awareness regarding the licensing of code from SO posts. With our research, we want to take a first step towards quantifying the impact of SO on open-source software development. We also want to make developers aware of their attribution practice and possible licensing and maintainability issues.
Research Design
===============
The overall goal of our research was to analyze the *usage* and *attribution* of code snippets from Stack Overflow in GitHub projects. By usage we mean copying (and possibly adapting) the code snippet from an answer on SO and then pasting it into a public GH project. Figure \[fig:research-design\] depicts the high-level research design. We started our research with a preliminary study to get first insights into if and how developers copy code snippets from SO. To validate the preliminary result that many developers do not attribute code copied from SO, we utilized six data sources: the *GitHub* [@GitHub16] and *Stack Exchange* APIs [@StackExchange16b], the *GHTorrent* [@Gousios13] and *Stack Overflow* [@StackExchange16c] data dumps, and the *BigQuery GitHub* [@Google16] and *BigQuery GHTorrent* [@Gousios17] data sets. For our quantitative analyses, we mainly used data from the BigQuery GH data set, retrieved July 20, 2016 and February 9, 2017. To estimate how often developers use snippets from SO without attribution (RQ2), we followed two different approaches. First, we used a token-based code clone detector, the *PMD Copy-Paste Detector* (CPD, version 5.4.1) [@PMD16], to find unreferenced usages of three different sets of SO code snippets in a random sample of popular GH Java projects. Second, we created regular expressions matching the code snippets of the ten most frequently referenced Java answers on SO. With the help of BigQuery, we utilized these regular expressions to find unreferenced usages in all Java projects in the data set.
Summarized Results {#sec:methods+results}
==================
In this section, we summarize the results of each study. We provide the raw data and all analysis scripts as supplementary material [@SupplementaryMaterial].
### Preliminary Study (RQ1+2) {#sec:preliminary-study}
The goal of the preliminary study was to get first insights into developers’ practices regarding the usage and attribution of code from SO. We contacted 1,000 randomly selected users who were active on both SO and GH and received 122 responses (12.2% response rate). Participants reported that the last time they copied or adapted a code snippet from SO, half of them (49%) did not attribute its origin; 40% added a source code comment with a link to the corresponding question or answer.
### Quantitative Analysis I+III (RQ1+3) {#sec:quantitative-analysis-I+III}
Using BigQuery and a regular expression, we searched all source code files of different programming languages in non-fork GH repositories for references to SO. There were on average twice as many references to whole SO threads than to specific answers. On average, 3.22% of all repositories and 7.33% of all popular repositories (more than 21 watchers, 99% quantile for all languages) contained a reference to SO. R, Python, C\#, and Objective-C files contained more references to SO compared to the other analyzed languages. Frequently referenced questions and answers had a significantly higher view count and score ($p_w {<} 0.001$, $|d| {\ge} 0.5$); frequently referenced answers had significantly more code blocks, but the effect was only small.
### Code Clone Analysis (RQ2.1) {#sec:code-clone-analysis}
We used CPD to find unreferenced usages of three sets of SO code snippets in a sample of popular GH Java projects (more than 29 watchers, 99% quantile for Java). We found that in our sample of Java projects (n=2,313), 207 repositories (9%) contained a copy of a snippet from one of the three SO snippet sets. Only 23% of the matched files contained a reference to SO.
### Quantitative Analysis II (RQ2.2) {#sec:quantitative-analysis-II}
To complement the above results, we applied a second approach for finding unreferenced usages of SO code snippets using regular expressions and the BigQuery GH data set. We searched for copies of the snippets from the ten most frequently referenced SO Java answers in all non-fork Java GH projects. At most 27% of the identified usages were attributed.
### Qualitative Analysis (RQ1.3) {#sec:qualitative-analysis}
We manually analyzed a random sample of SO references in Java files to assess how developers refer to SO content in source code comments (n=100). Most comments included only a link to the corresponding answer without naming the author of the code. Only 11 out of 97 analyzed comments explicitly named SO as the source.
### Awareness and Validation Survey (RQ4) {#sec:awareness-survey}
To complement the quantitative results, we conducted a second online survey to investigate the awareness of developers regarding the licensing of SO content. We further used this survey to detect false positives in our analysis for RQ2.2. We contacted 739 owners of GH repos in which we found matches of SO snippets (87 responses, 11.8%). Most developers (75%) were not aware of the licensing of code published on SO; only 32% of the participants were aware of the attribution requirement. Most participants answered that the code has either been copied from SO, or they did not remember.
Conclusion and Future Work
==========================
In our analysis of unattributed usages of SO code snippets, we always chose the most conservative estimates. Using CPD, we found that only 23% of the identified clones of Java snippets included a reference to SO. Using BigQuery and regular expressions for the ten most frequently referenced Java snippets, our estimate was 27% attributed usages. Thus, we think that one third is a reasonable upper bound for the amount of attributed usages. We further investigated how often SO URLs are present in source code files of different programming languages. On average, 3.22% of all analyzed repositories and 7.33% of the popular ones contained a file with a reference to SO. Depending on the project’s license, this may lead to legal issues for the projects. Our second survey has shown that many developers admit copying code from SO without attribution, but they are not aware of the licensing and its implications. The next steps of our research are to automate and scale the extraction of copyable snippets form SO and the detection of unattributed usages in GH projects. This ‘reverse engineering’ of the missing link to SO can help developers mitigating possible maintenance and legal issues as described in the introduction.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'We show how adaptive protocols of quantum and private communication through bosonic Gaussian channels can be simplified into much easier block versions that involve resource states with finite energy. This is achieved by combining the adaptive-to-block reduction technique devised earlier \[S. Pirandola *et al.*, Nat. Commun. **8**, 15043 (2017)\], based on teleportation stretching and relative entropy of entanglement, with an alternative simulation of Gaussian channels recently introduced by Liuzzo-Scorpo *et al.* \[Phys. Rev. Lett. **119**, 120503 (2017)\]. In this way, we derive weak converse upper bounds for the secret-key capacity of phase-insensitive Gaussian channels, which approximate the optimal limit for infinite energy. Our results apply to both point-to-point and repeater-assisted private communications.'
author:
- Riccardo Laurenza
- 'Samuel L. Braunstein'
- Stefano Pirandola
title: 'Finite-resource teleportation stretching for continuous-variable systems'
---
Introduction
============
Establishing the ultimate limits of quantum and private communications is important [@kimbleQnet; @pirsQnet], not only to explore the boundary of quantum mechanics but also to provide benchmarks for testing the practical performance of experimental and technological implementations. This problem is important for quantum systems of any dimension [@NiCh; @QIbook; @Watrous] and, in particular, for infinite-dimensional ones, also known as continuous-variable (CV) systems [@SamRMPm; @RMP; @Alex; @Gerry]. In quantum information and quantum optics, the most important CV systems are the bosonic modes of the electromagnetic field [@SamRMPm], which are typically used at the optical or telecom wavelengths. In any protocol of quantum communication, such modes are subject to loss and noise, and the most typical and basic model for such kind of decoherence is the single-mode Gaussian channel.
It is known that protocols of private communication and quantum key distribution (QKD) are limited in both rate and distance due to decoherence, no matter if the communication line is a free-space link or a fiber connection. This limitation is perhaps best simplified by the rate-loss scaling of ideal single-photon BB84 protocol [@BB84] whose optimal rate scales as $\eta/2$ secret bits per channel use, where $\eta$ is the transmissivity of the channel. Recently, this fundamental rate-loss limit has been fully characterized. By optimizing over the most general key-generation protocols, in Ref. [@PLOB] we established the secret-key capacity of the lossy channel to be $K(\eta)=-\log_{2}(1-\eta)$, which is about $1.44\eta$ secret bits per channel use at long distances ($\eta\simeq0$). This result sets a general benchmark for quantum repeaters [@Rep1; @Rep2; @Rep3; @Rep4; @Rep5; @Rep6; @Rep7; @Rep8; @Rep9; @Rep10; @Rep12; @Rep13; @Rep14; @Rep15; @Rep16; @Rep18; @Rep13bis; @bench5; @LoPiparo1; @LoPiparo1bis; @LoPiparo2; @MihirRouting] and completes a long-standing investigation started back in 2009 [@RevCohINFO; @ReverseCAP], when the best known lower bound was discovered.
The main technique that led to establishing the previous capacity is based on a suitable combination of two ingredients, the relative entropy of entanglement (REE) [@RMPrelent; @VedFORMm; @Pleniom] suitably extended from states to channels (using results from Refs. [@Donaldmain; @Matthias1a; @Matthias2a]), and teleportation stretching, which reduces any adaptive (feedback-assisted) quantum protocol over an arbitrary channel into a much simpler block version. This latter technique is a full extension and generalization of previous approaches [@B2main; @MHthesis; @Niset; @Wolfnotes] that only worked for specific classes of channels and were designed to reduce quantum error correcting code protocols into entanglement distillation. Without doubts, the generalization to an arbitrary task over an arbitrary quantum channel has been one of the key insights of Ref. [@PLOB], and this has been widely exploited in recent literature, with a number of follow-up papers in the area of quantum Shannon theory [@QIbook], e.g., on strong converse rates, broadcast capacities, etc. See Ref. [@TQCreview] for a recent review on these topics and Refs. [@TQCreview; @PLB] for rigorous proofs of some related claims.
The core of teleportation stretching is the idea of channel simulation, where an arbitrary quantum channel is replaced by local operations and classical communication (LOCC) applied to the input and a suitable resource state [@PLOB]. This powerful idea is rooted in the protocol of teleportation [@tele; @telereview] and first proposed in Ref. [@B2main], despite originally limited to the simulation of Pauli channels [@SougatoBowen] (see also Ref. [@nonPauli]). Later, this core idea was extended to generalized teleportation protocols [@MHthesis; @Leung; @Wolfnotes] and CV teleportation [@teleCV] in Refs. [@Niset; @CiracCV]. The final and more general form involves a simulation via arbitrary LOCCs, as formulated in Ref. [@PLOB]. In particular, the simulation of bosonic channels is typically asymptotic, which means that they need a suitable limit over sequences of resource states, which comes from the fact that the Choi matrices of such channels are asymptotic states [@PLOB]. Most importantly, such a simulation needs a careful control of the simulation error as first considered in Ref. [@PLOB], otherwise technical divergences may appear in the results. This crucial aspect is discussed in detail in Ref. [@TQCreview], which also provides a direct comparison of the various simulation techniques appeared in the literature.
Here we consider a different type of simulation for bosonic Gaussian channels, which is based on finite-energy two-mode Gaussian states as recently introduced in Ref. [@GerLimited]. We use this particular simulation at the core of teleportation stretching in order to simplify adaptive protocols. This not only represents an interesting design (with potential applications beyond this work) but also allows us to derive upper bounds for the secret-key capacities of phase-insensitive Gaussian channels which approximate well the asymptotic results of Ref. [@PLOB].
The paper is organized as follows. In Sec. \[sec1\], we review the tool of channel simulation. In Sec. \[sec2\] we use this tool with teleportation stretching, deriving a single-letter bound for single-mode Gaussian channels. This bound is explicitly computed in Sec. \[sec3\], where it is also compared with the infinite-energy one of Ref. [@PLOB]. Theory is then extended to a chain of quantum repeaters in Sec. \[sec4\]. Finally, Sec. \[sec5\] is for conclusions.
Simulation of bosonic channels\[sec1\]
======================================
Preliminaries
-------------
As discussed in Ref. [@PLOB] an arbitrary quantum channel $\mathcal{E}$ can be simulated by a trace-preserving LOCC $\mathcal{T}$ and a suitable resource state $\sigma$, i.e. $$\mathcal{E}(\rho)=\mathcal{T}(\rho\otimes\sigma)~. \label{locc}$$ A channel is called $\sigma$-stretchable if it has $\sigma$ as a resource state via some LOCC simulation as in Eq. (\[locc\]). An important case is when the channel is Choi-stretchable, which means that the resource state can be chosen to be its Choi matrix $\sigma=\rho_{\mathcal{E}}:=\mathcal{I}\otimes\mathcal{E}(\Phi)$, with $\Phi$ being a maximally entangled state. For a bosonic channel, the maximally entangled state is an Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen (EPR) state with infinite energy, so that the Choi matrix of a bosonic channel is energy-unbounded. For this reason one has to work with a sequence of two-mode squeezed vacuum states [@RMP] $\Phi^{\mu}$ with variance $\mu=\bar{n}+1/2$, where $\bar{n}$ is the average number of thermal photons in each mode. By definition, the EPR state is defined as $\Phi:=\lim_{\mu}\Phi^{\mu}$ and the Choi matrix of a bosonic channel $\mathcal{E}$ is defined by $$\rho_{\mathcal{E}}:=\lim_{\mu}\rho_{\mathcal{E}}^{\mu},~~\rho{_{\mathcal{E}}^{\mu}}=\mathcal{I}\otimes\mathcal{E}(\Phi^{\mu})~. \label{seqq}$$ This means that the simulation needs to be asymptotic, i.e., of the type [@NoteBELL] $$\mathcal{E}(\rho)=\lim_{\mu}\mathcal{T}(\rho\otimes\rho{_{\mathcal{E}}^{\mu})}~. \label{asyCC}$$
In Ref. [@PLOB], we identified a simple sufficient condition for a quantum channel to be Choi-stretchable, even asymptotically as in Eq. (\[asyCC\]): teleportation covariance. In the bosonic case, a channel $\mathcal{E}$ is teleportation-covariant if, for any random displacement $D$ (as induced by CV teleportation [@teleCV; @telereview]), we may write $$\mathcal{E}(D\rho D^{\dagger})=V\mathcal{E}(\rho)V^{\dagger},$$ for some unitary $V$. It is clear that bosonic Gaussian channels are teleportation covariant and, therefore, Choi-stretchable, with asymptotic simulation as in Eq. (\[asyCC\]).
Simulation of Gaussian channels with finite-energy resource states
------------------------------------------------------------------
Recently, Ref. [@GerLimited] has shown that all single-mode phase-insensitive Gaussian channels can be simulated by applying CV teleportation to a particular class of Gaussian states as the resource. Consider a single-mode Gaussian state with mean value $\bar{x}$ and covariance matrix (CM) $\mathbf{V}$ [@RMP]. The action of a single-mode Gaussian channel can be expressed in terms of the statistical moments as $$\bar{x}\rightarrow\mathbf{T}\bar{x},~~\mathbf{V}\rightarrow\mathbf{TV}\mathbf{T}^{T}+\mathbf{N,} \label{Act}$$ where $\mathbf{T}$ and $\mathbf{N}=\mathbf{N}^{T}$ are $2\times2$ real matrices satisfying suitable conditions [@RMP]. In particular, the channel is called [phase-insensitive if these two matrices take the specific diagonal forms]{} $$\mathbf{T}=\sqrt{\eta}\mathbf{I},~~\mathbf{N}=\nu\mathbf{I} \label{1mode}$$ where $\eta\in\mathbb{R}$ is a transmissivity parameter, while $\nu\geq
0$ represents added noise.
According to Ref. [@GerLimited], a phase-insensitive Gaussian channel $\mathcal{E}_{\eta,\nu}$ can be simulated as follows [@NoteBELL2] $$\mathcal{E}_{\eta,\nu}(\rho)=\mathcal{T}_{\eta}(\rho\otimes\sigma_{\nu}),
\label{Finn}$$ where $\mathcal{T}_{\eta}$ is the Braunstein-Kimble protocol with gain $\sqrt{\eta}$ [@teleCV; @teleMANCIO], and $\sigma_{\nu}$ is a zero-mean two-mode Gaussian state with CM [@Notation]$$\mathbf{V}(\sigma_{\nu})=\left(
\begin{array}
[c]{cc}a\mathbf{I} & c\mathbf{Z}\\
c\mathbf{Z} & b\mathbf{I}\end{array}
\right) , \label{resState}$$ where [@GerLimited] $$\begin{aligned}
a & =\frac{2b+(\eta-1)e^{-2r}}{2\eta},~~c=\frac{2b-e^{-2r}}{2\sqrt{\eta}},\label{eq1}\\
b & =\frac{-\left\vert \eta-1\right\vert +\eta e^{2r}+e^{-2r}}{2[-e^{2r}\left\vert \eta-1\right\vert +\eta+1]}, \label{eq2}$$ and the entanglement parameter $r\geq0$ is connected to the channel parameter via the relation [@Notation] $$\nu=\frac{e^{-2r}}{2}(\eta+1). \label{eq3}$$
Finite-resource teleportation stretching of an adaptive protocol\[sec2\]
========================================================================
Here we plug the previous finite-resource simulation into the tool of teleportation stretching. We start by providing some necessary definitions on adaptive protocols and secret-key capacity. Then, we review a general upper bound (weak converse) based on the REE. Finally, following the recipe of Ref. [@PLOB; @Ricc] we show how to use the finite-resource simulation to simplify an adaptive protocol and reduce the REE bound to a single-letter quantity.
Adaptive protocols and secret-key capacity
------------------------------------------
The most general protocol for key generation is based on adaptive LOCCs, i.e., local operations assisted by unlimited and two-way classical communication. Each transmission through the quantum channel is interleaved by two of such LOCCs. The general formalism can be found in Ref. [@PLOB] and goes as follows. Assume that two remote users, Alice and Bob, have two local registers of quantum systems (modes), $\mathbf{a}$ and $\mathbf{b}$, which are in some fundamental state $\rho_{\mathbf{a}}\otimes\rho_{\mathbf{b}}$. The two parties applies an adaptive LOCC $\Lambda_{0}$ before the first transmission.
In the first use of the channel, Alice picks a mode $a_{1}$ from her register $\mathbf{a}$ and sends it through the channel $\mathcal{E}$. Bob gets the output mode $b_{1}$ which is included in his local register $\mathbf{b}$. The parties apply another adaptive LOCC $\Lambda_{1}$. Then, there is the second transmission and so on. After $n$ uses, we have a sequence of LOCCs $\{\Lambda_{0},\Lambda_{1},\ldots,\Lambda_{n}\}$ characterizing the protocol $\mathcal{L}$ and an output state $\rho_{\mathbf{ab}}^{n}$ which is $\varepsilon$-close to a target private state [@KD] with $nR_{n}$ bits. Taking the limit of large $n$ and optimizing over the protocols, we define the secret-key capacity of the channel $$K(\mathcal{E})=\sup_{\mathcal{L}}\lim_{n}R_{n}~.$$
General upper bound
-------------------
According to Theorem $1$ (weak converse) in Ref. [@PLOB], a general upper bound for $K(\mathcal{E})$ is given in terms of the REE of the output state $\rho_{\mathbf{ab}}^{n}$ $$K(\mathcal{E})\leq E_{R}^{\star}(\mathcal{E}):=\sup_{\mathcal{L}}\lim_{n}\frac{E_{R}(\rho_{\mathbf{ab}}^{n})}{n}~. \label{REEbound}$$ Recall that the REE of a state $\rho$ is defined as $E_{R}(\rho)=\inf
_{\sigma_{\text{\textrm{sep}}}}S(\rho||\sigma_{\text{\textrm{sep}}})$, where $\sigma_{\text{\textrm{sep}}}$ is a separable state and the relative entropy is defined by $S(\rho||\sigma_{\text{\textrm{sep}}}):=\mathrm{Tr}[\rho
(\log_{2}\rho-\log_{2}\sigma_{\text{\textrm{sep}}})]$. These definitions can be easily adapted for asymptotic states of bosonic systems.
Note that the first and simplest proof of Eq. (\[REEbound\]) can be found in Ref. [@PLOBv2] (the second arxiv version of Ref. [@PLOB]). To avoid potential misunderstandings or misinterpretations of this proof, we report here the main points. For any protocol whose output $\rho_{\mathbf{ab}}^{n}$ is $\varepsilon$-close (in trace norm) to target private state with rate $R_{n}$ and dimension $d$, we may write$$nR_{n}\leq E_{R}(\rho_{\mathbf{ab}}^{n})+4\varepsilon\log_{2}d+2H_{2}(\varepsilon), \label{main}$$ where $H_{2}$ is the binary Shannon entropy. For distribution through a discrete variable (DV) channel, whose output is a DV state, we may write $$\log_{2}d\leq\alpha nR_{n}, \label{shieldUSED}$$ for some constant $\alpha$ \[see also Eq. (21) of Ref. [@PLOBv2]\]. The exponential scaling in Eq. (\[shieldUSED\]) comes from previous results in Refs. [@Matthias1a; @Matthias2a]. The latter showed that, for any adaptive protocol with rate $R_{n}$, there is another protocol with the same asymptotic rate while having an exponential scaling for $d$.
The extension to a CV channel is achieved by a standard argument of truncation of the output Hilbert space. After the last LOCC $\Lambda_{n}$, Alice and Bob apply a truncation LOCC $\mathbb{T}_{d}$ which maps the output state $\rho_{\mathbf{ab}}^{n}$ into a truncated version $\rho_{\mathbf{ab}}^{n,d}=\mathbb{T}_{d}(\rho_{\mathbf{ab}}^{n})$ with total dimension $d$. The total protocol $\mathbb{T}_{d}\circ\mathcal{L}=\{\Lambda_{0},\Lambda
_{1},\cdots,\Lambda_{n},\mathbb{T}_{d}\}$ generates an output that is $\varepsilon$-close to a DV private state with $nR_{n,d}$ bits. Therefore, we may directly re-write Eq. (\[main\]) as$$nR_{n,d}\leq E_{R}(\rho_{\mathbf{ab}}^{n,d})+4\varepsilon\log_{2}d+2H_{2}(\varepsilon). \label{eeee}$$ Both the output and the target are DV states, so that we may again write Eq. (\[shieldUSED\]) [@Notaprova]. Because $\mathbb{T}_{d}$ is a trace-preserving LOCC, we exploit the monotonicity of the REE $E_{R}(\rho_{\mathbf{ab}}^{n,d})\leq E_{R}(\rho_{\mathbf{ab}}^{n})$ and rewrite Eq. (\[eeee\]) as$$R_{n,d}\leq\frac{E_{R}(\rho_{\mathbf{ab}}^{n})+2H_{2}(\varepsilon
)}{n(1-4\alpha\varepsilon)}~.$$ Taking the limit for large $n$ and small $\varepsilon$ (weak converse), this leads to $$\lim_{n}R_{n,d}\leq\lim_{n}n^{-1}E_{R}(\rho_{\mathbf{ab}}^{n}).$$ The crucial observation is that in the right-hand side of the latter expression, there is no longer dependence on the truncation $d$. Therefore, in the optimization of $R_{n,d}$ over all protocols $\mathbb{T}_{d}\circ\mathcal{L}$ we can implicitly remove the truncation. Pedantically, we may write$$\begin{aligned}
K(\mathcal{E}) & =\sup_{d}\sup_{\mathbb{T}_{d}\circ\mathcal{L}}\lim
_{n}R_{n,d}\nonumber\\
& \leq\sup_{\mathcal{L}}\lim_{n}n^{-1}E_{R}(\rho_{\mathbf{ab}}^{n}):=E_{R}^{\star}(\mathcal{E}). \label{main2}$$
Note that the truncation argument was explicitly used in Ref. [@PLOBv2] to extend the bound to CV channels. See discussion after Eq. (23) of Ref. [@PLOBv2]. There a cut-off was introduced for the total CV Hilbert space at the output. Under this cutoff, the derivation for DV systems was repeated, finding an upper bound which does not depend on the truncated dimension (this was done by using the monotonicity of the REE exactly as here). The cutoff was then relaxed in the final expression as above. The published version [@PLOB] includes other equivalent proofs but they have been just given for completeness.
Simplification via teleportation stretching
-------------------------------------------
One of the key insights of Ref. [@PLOB] has been the simplification of the general bound in Eq. (\[REEbound\]) to a single-letter quantity. For bosonic Gaussian channels, this was achieved by using teleportation stretching with asymptotic simulations, where a channel is reproduced by CV teleportation over a sequence of Choi-approximating resource states. Here we repeat the procedure but we adopt the finite-resource simulation of Ref. [@GerLimited]. Recall that, differently from previous approaches [@B2main; @Niset; @MHthesis; @Wolfnotes], teleportation stretching does not reduce a protocol into entanglement distillation but maintains the task of the original protocol, so that adaptive key generation is reduced to block (non-adaptive) key generation. See Ref. [@TQCreview] for comparisons and clarifications.
Assume that the adaptive protocol is performed over a phase-insensitive Gaussian channel $\mathcal{E}_{\eta,\nu}$, so that we may use the simulation in Eq. (\[Finn\]), where $\mathcal{T}_{\eta}$ is the Braunstein-Kimble protocol with gain $\sqrt{\eta}$ and $\sigma_{\nu}$ is a zero-mean two-mode Gaussian state, specified by Eqs. (\[resState\])-(\[eq3\]). We may re-organize an adaptive protocol in such a way that each transmission through $\mathcal{E}_{\eta,\nu}$ is replaced by its resource state $\sigma_{\nu}$. At the same time, each teleportation-LOCC $\mathcal{T}_{\eta}$ is included in the adaptive LOCCs of the protocol, which are all collapsed into a single LOCC $\bar{\Lambda}_{\eta}$ (trace-preserving after averaging over all measurements). In this way, we may decompose the output state $\rho
_{\mathbf{ab}}^{n}:=\rho_{\mathbf{ab}}(\mathcal{E}_{\eta,\nu}^{\otimes n})$ as $$\rho_{\mathbf{ab}}^{n}=\bar{\Lambda}_{\eta}(\sigma_{\nu}^{\otimes n})~.
\label{ggg}$$
The computation of $E_{R}(\rho_{\mathbf{ab}}^{n})$ can now be remarkably simplified. In fact, we may write$$\begin{aligned}
E_{R}(\rho_{\mathbf{ab}}^{n}) & =\inf_{\sigma_{\text{\textrm{sep}}}}S(\rho_{\mathbf{ab}}^{n}||\sigma_{\text{\textrm{sep}}})\nonumber\\
& \overset{(1)}{\leq}\inf_{\sigma_{\text{\textrm{sep}}}}S[\bar{\Lambda}_{\eta}(\sigma_{\nu}^{\otimes n})||\bar{\Lambda}_{\eta}(\sigma
_{\text{\textrm{sep}}})]\nonumber\\
& \overset{(2)}{\leq}\inf_{\sigma_{\text{\textrm{sep}}}}S(\sigma_{\nu
}^{\otimes n}||\sigma_{\text{\textrm{sep}}})=E_{R}(\sigma_{\nu}^{\otimes n}),\end{aligned}$$ where: $(1)$ we consider the fact that $\bar{\Lambda}_{\eta}(\sigma
_{\text{\textrm{sep}}})$ form a subset of specific separable states, and $(2)$ we use the monotonicity of the relative entropy under the trace-preserving LOCC $\bar{\Lambda}_{\eta}$. Therefore, by replacing in Eq. (\[REEbound\]), we get rid of the optimization over the protocol (disappearing with $\bar{\Lambda}_{\eta}$) and we may write $$K(\mathcal{E}_{\eta,\nu})\leq\lim_{n}\frac{E_{R}(\sigma_{\nu}^{\otimes n})}{n}:=E_{R}^{\infty}(\sigma_{\nu})\leq E_{R}(\sigma_{\nu})~, \label{hhh}$$ where we use the fact that the regularized REE is less than or equal to the REE. Thus, we may write the following theorem:
Consider a phase-insensitive bosonic Gaussian channel $\mathcal{E}_{\eta,\nu}$, which is stretchable into a two-mode Gaussian state $\sigma_{\nu}$ as given in Eqs. (\[resState\])-(\[eq3\]). Its secret-key capacity must satisfy the bound$$K(\mathcal{E}_{\eta,\nu})\leq E_{R}(\sigma_{\nu}):=\inf_{\sigma
_{\text{\textrm{sep}}}}S(\sigma_{\nu}||\sigma_{\text{\textrm{sep}}})~.
\label{plpl}$$
Note that the new bound in Eq. (\[plpl\]) cannot beat the asymptotic bound established by Ref. [@PLOB] for bosonic channels, i.e., $$K(\mathcal{E}_{\eta,\nu})\leq\inf_{\sigma_{\text{\textrm{sep}}}^{\mu}}\underset{\mu\rightarrow+\infty}{\lim\inf}S(\rho{_{\mathcal{E}_{\eta,\nu}}^{\mu}}||\sigma_{\text{\textrm{sep}}}^{\mu}), \label{REE_weaker}$$ where $\rho{_{\mathcal{E}_{\eta,\nu}}^{\mu}}$ is a Choi-approximating sequence as in Eq. (\[seqq\]), and $\sigma_{\text{\textrm{sep}}}^{\mu}$ is an arbitrary sequence of separable states converging in trace norm. This can be seen from a quite simple argument [@Andrea]. In fact, according to Eqs. (\[seqq\]) and (\[Finn\]), we may write$$\begin{aligned}
\rho{_{\mathcal{E}_{\eta,\nu}}^{\mu}} & =\mathcal{I}\otimes\mathcal{E}_{\eta,\nu}(\Phi^{\mu})\nonumber\\
& =\mathcal{I}\otimes\mathcal{T}_{\eta}(\Phi^{\mu}\otimes\sigma_{\nu})=\Delta(\sigma_{\nu}),\end{aligned}$$ where $\Delta$ is a trace-preserving LOCC. Therefore, $E_{R}(\rho
{_{\mathcal{E}_{\eta,\nu}}^{\mu}})\leq E_{R}(\sigma_{\nu})$ and this relation is inherited by the bounds above. Notwithstanding this *no go* for the finite-resource simulation, we show that its performance is good and reasonably approximates the infinite-energy bounds that are found via Eq. (\[REE\_weaker\]).
Finite-resource bounds for phase insensitive Gaussian channels\[sec3\]
======================================================================
We now proceed by computing the REE in Eq. (\[plpl\]) for the class of single-mode phase-insensitive Gaussian channels. For this, we exploit the closed formula for the quantum relative entropy between Gaussian states which has been derived in Ref. [@PLOB] by using the Gibbs representation for Gaussian states [@Banchi]. Given two Gaussian states $\rho_{1}(u_{1},V_{1})$ and $\rho_{2}(u_{2},V_{2})$, with respective statistical moments $u_{i}$ and $V_{i}$, their relative entropy is $$S(\rho_{1}||\rho_{2})=-\Sigma(V_{1},V_{1})+\Sigma(V_{1},V_{2})~,$$ where we have defined $$\Sigma(V_{1},V_{2}):=\frac{\ln\det\left( V_{2}+\frac{i\Omega}{2}\right)
+\operatorname*{Tr}(V_{1}G_{2})+\delta^{T}G_{2}\delta}{2\ln2}$$ with $\delta=u_{1}-u_{2}$ and $G_{2}=2i\Omega\coth^{-1}(2iV_{2}\Omega
)$ [@Banchi], where the matrix $\Omega$ is the symplectic form.
The computation of the REE involves an optimization over the set of separable states. Following the recipe of Ref. [@PLOB] we may construct a good candidate directly starting from the CM in Eq. (\[resState\]). This separable state has CM with the same diagonal blocks as in Eq. (\[resState\]), but where the off-diagonal term is replaced as follows $$c\rightarrow c_{\text{sep}}:=\sqrt{(a-1/2)(b-1/2)}~.$$ By using this separable state $\tilde{\sigma}_{\text{sep}}$ we may write the further upper bound $$E_{R}(\sigma_{\nu})\leq\Psi(\mathcal{E}):=S(\sigma_{\nu}||\tilde{\sigma
}_{\text{sep}}).$$ In the following, we compute this bound for the various types of phase-insensitive Gaussian channels.
[Thermal-loss channel]{}
------------------------
This channel can be modelled as a beam splitter of transmissivity $\eta$ where the input signals are combined with a thermal environment such that the quadratures transform according to $\hat{\mathbf{x}}\rightarrow\sqrt{\eta}\hat{\mathbf{x}}+\sqrt{1-\eta}\hat{\mathbf{x}}_{th}$, where $\hat{\mathbf{x}}_{th}$ is in a thermal state with $\bar{n}$ photons. In terms of the statistical moments, the action of the thermal-loss channel $\mathcal{E}_{\eta,\bar{n}}$ can be described by the matrices in Eq. (\[1mode\]) with parameter $\nu=(1-\eta)(\bar{n}+1/2)$. This means that the squeezing parameter $r$ of the resource state now reads $$r=\frac{1}{2}\ln\left[ \frac{\eta+1}{\left( 2\bar{n}+1\right) (1-\eta
)}\right] ~.$$
By combining this relation with the ones in Eq. (\[eq2\]) and computing the relative entropy, we find [@analy] the finite-resource bound $\Psi(\mathcal{E}_{\eta,\bar{n}})$ which is plotted in Fig. \[Th\] and therein compared with the infinite-energy bound $\Phi(\mathcal{E}_{\eta
,\bar{n}})$ derived in Ref. [@PLOB]. The latter is given by [@PLOB] $$\Phi(\mathcal{E}_{\eta,\bar{n}})=-\log_{2}[(1-\eta)\eta^{\bar{n}}]-h(\bar{n}),$$ for $\bar{n}<\eta/(1-\eta)$ and zero otherwise, and we set $h(x):=(x+1)\log
_{2}(x+1)-x\log_{2}x$. It is clear that we have $$K(\mathcal{E}_{\eta,\bar{n}})\leq\Phi(\mathcal{E}_{\eta,\bar{n}})\leq
\Psi(\mathcal{E}_{\eta,\bar{n}}),$$ but the two upper bounds are reasonably close.
![Finite-resource bound $\Psi(\mathcal{E}_{\eta,\bar{n}})$ on the secret-key capacity of the thermal loss channel (red upper curve) as a function of the transmissivity $\eta$, compared with the infinite-energy bound $\Phi(\mathcal{E}_{\eta,\bar{n}})$ (blue lower curve) derived in Ref. [@PLOB]. The curves are plotted for $\bar{n}=1$ thermal photons.[]{data-label="Th"}](Thloss_finiteEn.eps){width="40.00000%"}
Noisy [amplifier channel]{}
---------------------------
A noisy quantum amplifier is described by $\hat{\mathbf{x}}\rightarrow
\sqrt{\eta}\hat{\mathbf{x}}+\sqrt{\eta-1}\hat{\mathbf{x}}_{th}$, where $\eta>1$ is the gain and $\hat{\mathbf{x}}_{th}$ is in a thermal state with $\bar{n}$ photons. This channel $\mathcal{E}_{\eta,\bar{n}}$ is described by the matrices in Eq. (\[1mode\]) with parameter $\nu=(\eta-1)(\bar{n}+1/2)$. By repeating the previous calculations, we find [@analy] the finite-resource bound $\Psi(\mathcal{E}_{\eta,\bar{n}})$ plotted in Fig. \[Ampli\] and where it is compared with the infinite-energy bound [@PLOB]$$\Phi(\mathcal{E}_{\eta,\bar{n}})=\log_{2}\left( \frac{\eta^{\bar{n}+1}}{\eta-1}\right) -h(\bar{n}),$$ for $\bar{n}<(\eta-1)^{-1}$ and zero otherwise.
![Finite-resource bound $\Psi(\mathcal{E}_{\eta,\bar{n}})$ on the secret-key capacity of the noisy amplifier channel (red upper curve) as a function of the gain $\eta$, compared with the optimal bound for infinite energy $\Phi(\mathcal{E}_{\eta,\bar{n}})$ (blue lower curve). The two curves are plotted for $\bar{n}=1$ thermal photons.[]{data-label="Ampli"}](amplifier_finiteEn.eps){width="43.00000%"}
[Additive-noise Gaussian channel]{}
-----------------------------------
Another important channel is represented by the additive-noise Gaussian channel, which is the simplest model of bosonic decoherence. In terms of the input-output transformations, the quadratures transforms according to $\hat{\mathbf{x}}\rightarrow\hat{\mathbf{x}}+(z,z)^{T}$ where $z$ is a classical Gaussian variable with zero mean and variance $\xi\geq0$. This channel $\mathcal{E}_{\xi}$ is described by the matrices in Eq. (\[1mode\]) with $\eta=1$ and $\nu=\xi$. The finite-resource bound [@analy] $\Psi(\mathcal{E}_{\xi})$ on the secret key capacity is plotted in Fig. \[AddNoise\] and compared with the infinite-energy bound [@PLOB] $$\Phi(\mathcal{E}_{\xi})=\frac{\xi-1}{\ln2}-\log_{2}\xi,$$ for $\xi<1$, while zero otherwise.
![Finite-resource bound $\Psi(\mathcal{E}_{\xi})$ on the secret-key capacity of the additive noise Gaussian channel (red upper curve) as a function of the added noise $\xi$, compared with the optimal bound for infinite energy $\Phi(\mathcal{E}_{\xi})$ (blue lower curve).[]{data-label="AddNoise"}](Additive_finiteEn.eps){width="42.00000%"}
[Pure-loss channel]{}
---------------------
For the pure-loss channel, the upper bound derived in the limit of infinite energy [@PLOB] coincides with the lower bound computed with the reverse coherent information [@RevCohINFO; @ReverseCAP]. This means that we are able to fully characterize the secret-key capacity for this specific bosonic channel. This is also known as the Pirandola-Laurenza-Ottaviani-Banchi (PLOB) bound [@PLOB] $$\mathcal{K}(\eta)=-\log_{2}(1-\eta)\simeq1.44\eta\text{ for }\eta\simeq0~,$$ and fully characterizes the fundamental rate-loss scaling of point-to-point quantum optical communications.
Consider now the finite-resource teleportation simulation of a pure-loss channel. It is easy to check that we cannot use the parametrization in Eq. (\[eq2\]). In fact, for a pure-loss channel, we have $\nu=(1-\eta)/2$ so that Eq. (\[eq3\]) provides $e^{2r}=(1+\eta)/(1-\eta)$. Replacing the latter in Eq. (\[eq2\]), we easily see that we have divergences (e.g., the denominator of $b$ becomes zero). For the pure loss channel, we therefore use a different simulation, where the resource state is a two-mode squeezed state with CM [@Andrea]$$\sigma_{\eta}=\left(
\begin{array}
[c]{cc}a\mathbf{I} & \sqrt{a^{2}-1/4}\mathbf{Z}\\
\sqrt{a^{2}-1/4}\mathbf{Z} & a\mathbf{I}\end{array}
\right) ,~a=\frac{\eta+1}{2(1-\eta)}~.$$ By exploiting this resource state, we derive [@analy] the bound $\Psi(\mathcal{E}_{\eta})$ shown in Fig. \[pureloss\], where it is compared with the secret-key capacity $K(\eta)$.
![Finite-resource bound $\Psi(\mathcal{E}_{\eta})$ on the secret-key capacity of the pure-loss channel (red upper curve) as a function of the transmissivity $\eta$, compared with its secret key capacity or PLOB bound $K(\eta)=-\log_{2}(1-\eta)$ (blue lower curve).[]{data-label="pureloss"}](lossy_finiteEn.eps){width="42.00000%"}
Extension to repeater-assisted private communication\[sec4\]
============================================================
Here we extend the previous treatment to repeater-assisted private communication. We consider the basic scenario where Alice $\mathbf{a}$ and Bob $\mathbf{b}$ are connected by a chain of $N$ quantum repeaters $\{\mathbf{r}_{1},\ldots,\mathbf{r}_{N}\}$, so that there are a total of $N+1$ quantum channels $\{\mathcal{E}_{i}\}$ between them. Assume that these are phase-insensitive Gaussian channels $\mathcal{E}_{i}:=\mathcal{E}_{\eta
_{i},\nu_{i}}$ with parameters $(\eta_{i},\nu_{i})$. The most general adaptive protocol for key distribution through the chain is described in Ref. [@networkPIRS] and goes as follows.
Alice, Bob and all the repeaters prepare their local registers $\{\mathbf{a},\mathbf{r}_{1},\ldots,\mathbf{r}_{N},\mathbf{b}\}$ into a global initial state $\rho^{0}$ by means of a network LOCC $\Lambda_{0}$, where each node in the chain applies LOs assisted by unlimited and two-way CCs with all the other nodes. In the first transmission, Alice picks a system $a_{1}\in\mathbf{a}$ and sends it to the first repeater; after another network LOCC $\Lambda_{1}$, the first repeater communicates with the second repeater; then there is another network LOCC $\Lambda_{2}$ and so on, until Bob is eventually reached, which terminates the first use of the chain.
After $n$ uses of the chain, we have a sequence of network LOCCs $\mathcal{L}$ defining the protocol and an output state $\rho_{\mathbf{ab}}^{n}$ for Alice and Bob which approximates some target private state with $nR_{n}$ bits. By taking the limit for large $n$ and optimizing over the protocols, we define the end-to-end or repeater-assisted secret-key capacity [@networkPIRS]$$K(\{\mathcal{E}_{i}\})=\sup_{\mathcal{L}}\lim_{n}R_{n}~.$$ As shown in Ref. [@networkPIRS], we may extend the upper bound of Eq. (\[REEbound\]). Then, we may use teleportation stretching and optimize over cuts of the chain, to simplify the bound to a single-letter quantity.
The network-reduction technique of Ref. [@networkPIRS] can be implemented by using the specific finite-resource simulation of Eq. (\[Finn\]), which leads to the following possible decompositions of the output state$$\rho_{\mathbf{ab}}^{n}=\bar{\Lambda}_{i}(\sigma_{\nu_{i}}^{\otimes
n}),~~\text{for any }i=1,\ldots,N,$$ where $\bar{\Lambda}_{i}$ is a trace-preserving LOCC and $\sigma_{\nu_{i}}$ is the resource state associated with the $i$th Gaussian channel. By repeating the derivation of Ref. [@networkPIRS], this leads to$$K(\{\mathcal{E}_{i}\})\leq\min_{i}E_{R}(\sigma_{\nu_{i}})\leq\min_{i}S(\sigma_{\nu_{i}}||\tilde{\sigma}_{i,\text{sep}}):=\Psi(\{\mathcal{E}_{i}\})~, \label{rete}$$ where $\Psi$ is the upper bound coming from our choice of the separable state $\tilde{\sigma}_{i,\text{sep}}$ in the REE. This upper bound needs to be compared with the one $\Phi(\{\mathcal{E}_{i}\})$ obtained in the limit of infinite energy [@networkPIRS]. As an example, consider an additive-noise Gaussian channel with noise variance $\xi$. Let us split the communication line by using $N$ equidistant repeaters, in such a way that each link is an additive-noise Gaussian channel $\mathcal{E}_{i}$ with the same variance $\xi_{i}=\xi/(N+1)$. It is easy to check that this is the optimal configuration for the repeaters. From Eq. (\[rete\]), we derive $\Psi(\{\mathcal{E}_{i}\})=\Psi(\mathcal{E}_{\xi/(N+1)})$. This bound is plotted in Fig. \[lklk\] where we can se an acceptable approximation of the corresponding infinite-energy bound $\Phi(\{\mathcal{E}_{i}\})$.
![Secret-key capacity of a chain of $N$ equidistant repeaters creating $N+1$ additive-noise Gaussian channels with variances $\xi_{i}=\xi/(N+1)$. We compare the finite-resource upper bound $\Psi(\{\mathcal{E}_{i}\})$ (solid lines) with the infinite-energy upper bound $\Phi(\{\mathcal{E}_{i}\})$ (dashed lines) for different values of $N$ as a function of the overall added noise of the chain $\xi$.[]{data-label="lklk"}](Additive_chain.eps){width="42.00000%"}
Conclusion\[sec5\]
==================
In this work we have presented a design for the technique of teleportation stretching [@PLOB] for single-mode bosonic Gaussian channels, where the core channel simulation [@GerLimited] is based on a finite-energy two-mode Gaussian state processed by the Braunstein-Kimble protocol [@teleCV] with suitable gains. Such an approach removes the need for using an asymptotic simulation where the sequence of states approximates the energy-unbounded Choi matrix of a Gaussian channel, even though the infinite energy limit remains at the level of Alice’s quantum measurement which is ideally a CV Bell detection (i.e., a projection onto displaced EPR states).
Using this approach we compute the weak converse bound for the secret key capacity of all phase-insensitive single-mode Gaussian channels, which include the thermal-loss channel, the quantum amplifier and the additive-noise Gaussian channel. We find that the bounds so derived are reasonably close to the tightest known bound established in Ref. [@PLOB] by using asymptotic Choi matrices. We considered not only for point-to-point communication but also a repeater-assisted scenario where Alice and Bob are connected by a chain of quantum repeaters. The tools developed here may have other applications; they may be applied to multi-point protocols [@Multipoint] or to quantum metrology [@reviewMETRO], e.g., to approximate the bounds for the adaptive estimation of Gaussian channels established in Ref. [@PirCo].
*Note added*. Our work first appeared on the arXiv in June 2017 [@erxiv]. It has been revised after an imprecision in Ref. [@GerLimited] was fixed in Ref. [@erratum]. Independently, a related work [@Kaur] directly built on the techniques of Ref. [@PLOB], but its claims are restricted to a point-to-point thermal-loss channel in the non-asymptotic scenario.
*Acknowledgments.* This work has been supported by the EPSRC via the ‘UK Quantum Communications Hub’ (EP/M013472/1). The authors would like to thank G. Adesso for comments on our first developments soon after the appearance of Ref. [@GerLimited], and A. Mari for discussions on the relations between the various bounds, and the finite-resource simulation of the pure-loss channel. The authors also thank C. Lupo, G. Spedalieri, C. Ottaviani, S. Tserkis, T. Ralph, and S. Lloyd.
[99]{}
H. J. Kimble, Nature **453**, 1023 (2008).
S. Pirandola and S. L. Braunstein, Nature **532**, 169 (2016).
J. Watrous, *The theory of quantum information* (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2018).
M. A. Nielsen, and I. L. Chuang, *Quantum computation and quantum information* (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2000).
M. Hayashi, *Quantum Information Theory: Mathematical Foundation* (Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg, 2017).
C. Weedbrook *et al.,* Rev. Mod. Phys. **84**, 621 (2012).
S. L. Braunstein, and P. Van Loock, Rev. Mod. Phys. **77**, 513 (2005).
A. Serafini, F. Illuminati, and S. De Siena, Journal of Physics B: Atomic, Molecular and Optical Physics **37**, L21 (2004).
G. Adesso, S. Ragy, and A. R. Lee, Open Systems and Information Dynamics **21**, 1440001 (2014).
C. H. Bennett, and G. Brassard, Proc. IEEE International Conf. on Computers, Systems, and Signal Processing, Bangalore, pp. 175–179 (1984).
S. Pirandola, R. Laurenza, C. Ottaviani, and L. Banchi, Nat. Commun. **8**, 15043 (2017). See also arXiv:1510.08863 (2015).
H.-J. Briegel, W. Dür, J. I. Cirac, and P. Zoller, Phys. Rev. Lett. **81**, 5932-5935 (1998).
W. Dür, H.-J. Briegel, J. I. Cirac, and P. Zoller, Phys. Rev. A **59**, 169 (1999).
L. M. Duan, M. D. Lukin, J. I. Cirac, and P. Zoller,Nature (London) **414**, 413 (2001).
Z. Zhao, T. Yang, Y.-A. Chen, A.-N. Zhang, and J.-W. Pan, Phys. Rev. Lett. **90**, 207901 (2003).
C. Simon, H. de Riedmatten, M. Afzelius, N. Sangouard, H. Zbinden, and N. Gisin*,* Phys. Rev. Lett. **98**, 190503 (2007).
Z.-S. Yuan, Y.-A. Chen, B. Zhao, S. Chen, J. Schmiedmayer, and J.-W. Pan, Nature **454**, 1098-1101 (2008).
P. van Loock, N. Lütkenhaus, W. J. Munro, and K. Nemoto, Phys. Rev. A **78**, 062319 (2008).
R. Alleaume, F. Roueff, E. Diamanti, and N. Lütkenhaus, New J. Phys. **11**, 075002 (2009).
N. Sangouard, C. Simon, H. de Riedmatten, and N. Gisin, Rev. Mod. Phys. **83**, 33 (2011).
D. E. Bruschi, T. M. Barlow, M. Razavi, and A. Beige*,* Phys. Rev. A **90**, 032306 (2014).
S. Muralidharan, J. Kim, N. Lütkenhaus, M. D. Lukin, and L. Jiang, Phys. Rev. Lett. **112**, 250501 (2014).
K. Azuma, K. Tamaki, and W. J. Munro, Nature Comm. **6**, 10171 (2015).
S. Bäuml, M. Christandl, K. Horodecki, and A. Winter, Nature Comm. **6**, 6908 (2015).
D. Luong, L. Jiang, J. Kim, and N. Lütkenhaus*,* Appl. Phys. B **122**, 96 (2016).
J. Dias and T. C. Ralph, Phys. Rev. A **95**, 022312 (2017).
M. Pant, H. Krovi, D. Englund, and S. Guha, Phys. Rev. A **95**, 012304 (2017).
M. Christandl and A. Muller-Hermes, Communications in Mathematical Physics **353**, 821-852 (2017).
F. Rozpedek, K. Goodenough, J. Ribeiro, N. Kalb, V. Caprara Vivoli, A. Reiserer, R. Hanson, S. Wehner, and D. Elkouss, Quantum Sci. Technol. **3**, 034002 (2018).
N. Lo Piparo, N. Sinclair, and M. Razavi, arXiv:1707.07814 (2017).
N. Lo Piparo, and M. Razavi, *Memory-assisted quantum key distribution immune to multiple-excitation effects*, Conference on Lasers and Electro-Optics (CLEO), 5-10 June 2016.
N. Lo Piparo, M. Razavi, W. J. Munro, Phys. Rev. A **96**, 052313 (2017).
M. Pant, H. Krovi, D. Towsley, L. Tassiulas, L. Jiang, P. Basu, D. Englund, and S. Guha, arXiv:1708.07142 (2017).
R. García-Patrón, S. Pirandola, S. Lloyd, and J. H. Shapiro, Phys. Rev. Lett. **102**, 210501 (2009).
S. Pirandola, R. García-Patrón, S. L. Braunstein, and S. Lloyd, Phys. Rev. Lett. **102**, 050503 (2009).
V. Vedral, Rev. Mod. Phys. ** **74**, 197 (2002).
V. Vedral, M. B. Plenio, M. A. Rippin, and P. L. Knight, Phys. Rev. Lett. **78**, 2275-2279 (1997).
V. Vedral, and M. B. Plenio, Phys. Rev. A **57**, 1619 (1998).
B. Synak-Radtke and M. Horodecki, J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. **39**, L423-L437 (2006).
M. Christandl, A. Ekert, M. Horodecki, P. Horodecki, J. Oppenheim, and R. Renner, Lecture Notes in Computer Science **4392**, 456-478 (2007). See also arXiv:quant-ph/0608199v3 for a more extended version.
M. Christandl, N. Schuch, and A. Winter, Comm. Math. Phys. **311**, 397-422 (2012).
C. H. Bennett, D. P. DiVincenzo, J. A. Smolin, and W. K. Wootters, Phys. Rev. A **54**, 3824-3851 (1996).
J. Niset, J. Fiurasek, and N. J. Cerf, Phys. Rev. Lett. **102**, 120501 (2009).
A. Müller-Hermes, Master’s thesis (Technical University of Munich, 2012).
M. M. Wolf,*Quantum Channels & Operations*, available at https://www-m5.ma.tum.de/foswiki/pub/M5/ Allgemeines/MichaelWolf/QChannelLecture.pdf.
S. Pirandola, S. L. Braunstein, R. Laurenza, C. Ottaviani, T. P. W. Cope, G. Spedalieri, and L. Banchi, Quantum Sci. Technol. **3**, 035009 (2018).
S. Pirandola, R. Laurenza, and S. L. Braunstein, *Teleportation simulation of bosonic Gaussian channels: Strong and uniform convergence*, arXiv:1712.01615 (2017).
C. H. Bennett, G. Brassard, C. Crepeau, R. Jozsa, A. Peres, and W. K. Wootters, Phys. Rev. Lett. **70**, 1895 (1993).
S. Pirandola *et al.*, Nature Photon. **9**, 641-652 (2015).
G. Bowen and S. Bose, Phys. Rev. Lett. **87**, 267901 (2001).
T. P. W. Cope, L. Hetzel, L. Banchi, and S. Pirandola, Phys. Rev. A **96**, 022323 (2017).
D. Leung and W. Matthews, IEEE Trans. Info. Theory **61**, 4486-4499 (2015).
S. L. Braunstein and H. J. Kimble, Phys. Rev. Lett. **80**, 869–872 (1998).
G. Giedke and J. I. Cirac, Phys. Rev. A **66**, 032316 (2002).
P. Liuzzo-Scorpo, A. Mari, V. Giovannetti, and G. Adesso, Phys. Rev. Lett. **119**, 120503 (2017).
More generally, one also needs to consider sequences of LOCCs $\mathcal{T}^{\mu}$, so that the asymptotic simulation reads $\mathcal{E}(\rho)=\lim_{\mu}\mathcal{T}^{\mu}(\rho\otimes\rho_{\mathcal{E}}^{\mu})$. For simplicity we omit this technicality, referring the reader to Ref. [@PLOB] for more details.
Note that, in the simulation of Eq. (\[Finn\]), one uses a Braunstein-Kimble protocol with an ideal CV Bell detection. The latter is an asymptotic measurement defined in the limit of infinite squeezing, i.e., infinite energy. For this reason, the finite-energy aspect of the simulation in Eq. (\[Finn\]) only refers to the resource state.
S. Pirandola, and S. Mancini, Laser Physics **16**, 1418 (2006).
Note that, with respect to the fomulas of Ref. [@GerLimited], we have an extra $1/2$ factor in Eqs. (\[resState\]) and (\[eq3\]). This is due to the different notation we adopt here. We set the quadrature variance of the vacuum state to be $1/2$, while it was equal to $1$ in Ref. [@GerLimited].
S. Pirandola and R. Laurenza, *General Benchmarks for Quantum Repeaters*, arXiv:1512.04945 (15 Dec 2015).
K. Horodecki, M. Horodecki, P. Horodecki, and J. Oppenheim, Phys. Rev. Lett. **94**, 160502 (2005).
S. Pirandola, R. Laurenza, C. Ottaviani, and L. Banchi, *The Ultimate Rate of Quantum Communications*, arXiv:1510.08863v2 (8 Dec 2015).
Since the Hilbert space is finite-dimensional, the proof of Refs. [@Matthias1a; @Matthias2a] automatically applies, i.e., the protocol can be stopped after $n_{0}$ uses, and then repeated $m$ times in an i.i.d. fashion, with $n=n_{0}m$. Key distillation applied to the $m$ DV output copies implies a number of bits of CCs which is linear in $m$ which, in turn, leads to an exponential scaling of $d$ in $n$.
Andrea Mari, private communication.
L. Banchi, S. L. Braunstein, and S. Pirandola, Phys. Rev. Lett. **115**, 260501 (2015).
The analytical expression is too cumbersome to be reported here.
S. Pirandola, S. *Capacities of repeater-assisted quantum communications*, arXiv:1601.00966 (5 Jan 2016).
It is easy to check that this is the optimal configuration for the repeaters.
R. Laurenza, and S. Pirandola, Phys. Rev. A **96**, 032318 (2017).
R. Laurenza, C. Lupo, G. Spedalieri, S. L. Braunstein, and S. Pirandola, Quantum Meas. Quantum Metrol. **5**, 1-12 (2018).
S. Pirandola, and C. Lupo, Phys. Rev. Lett. **118**, 100502 (2017).
R. Laurenza, S. L. Braunstein, and S. Pirandola, arXiv:1706.06065v1 (June 2017).
P. Liuzzo-Scorpo, A. Mari, V. Giovannetti, and G. Adesso, Phys. Rev. Lett. **120**, 029904(E) (2018).
E. Kaur, and M. M. Wilde, arXiv:1706.04590v2.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'Mirror symmetry suggests unexpected relationships between arithmetic properties of distinct families of algebraic varieties. For example, Wan and others have shown that for some mirror pairs, the number of rational points over a finite field matches modulo the order of the field. In this paper, we obtain a similar result for certain mirror pairs of toric hypersurfaces. We use recent results by Huang, Lian, Yau and Yu describing the relationship between the Picard-Fuchs equations of these varieties and their Hasse–Witt matrices, which encapsulate information about the number of points. The result allows us to compute the number of points modulo the order of the field explicitly. We illustrate this by computing K3 surface examples related to hypergeometric functions.'
author:
- Adriana Salerno and Ursula Whitcher
title: 'Hasse-Witt matrices and mirror toric pencils'
---
Introduction
============
Toric hypersurfaces and Picard–Fuchs equations {#S:toric}
==============================================
We review Batyrev mirror symmetry for toric Calabi-Yau hypersurfaces, establish notation, and describe the particular hypersurfaces that we will study. See [@CK] for a more general expository treatment, or [@k3expository] for a discussion focused on K3 hypersurfaces.
Let $N \cong \mathbb{Z}^k$ be a lattice, and let $M \cong \mathrm{Hom}(N, \mathbb{Z})$ be the dual lattice. Write $N_\mathbb{R}$ and $M_\mathbb{R}$ for the associated real vector spaces, and let $\langle \; , \; \rangle$ represent the bilinear pairing on $N_\mathbb{R}$ and $M_\mathbb{R}$ induced by the duality of $N$ and $M$. Let $\Delta$ be a polytope in $N_\mathbb{R}$, and assume that $\Delta$ contains the origin strictly in its interior. The *polar polytope* of $\Delta$ is given by $$\Delta^\circ = \{ w \in M_\mathbb{R} \mid \langle v, w \rangle \geq -1 \text{ for all } v \in \Delta\}.$$ Note that $(\Delta^\circ)^\circ = \Delta$. If $\Delta$ and $\Delta^\circ$ have vertices in the lattices $N$ and $M$ respectively, each polytope is a *reflexive polytope* and we say that $\Delta$ and $\Delta^\circ$ are a *mirror pair* of polytopes.
We may use a lattice polytope to define a fan in two ways: by taking the fan over the faces of the polytope, or by taking the *normal fan* to the polytope, whose cones consist of the normal cones to each face of the polytope. If $\Delta$ and $\Delta^\circ$ are a mirror pair, then these notions are dual: the fan over the faces of $\Delta$ is identical to the normal fan of $\Delta^\circ$. One may also refine the fan over the faces of a polytope using new one-dimensional cones corresponding to the lattice points of a polytope.
The fan $R$ over the faces of a reflexive polytope $\Delta$ determines a $k$-dimensional Gorenstein Fano toric variety $V_R$. A general anticanonical hypersurface in $V_R$ is a Calabi-Yau variety. We may resolve singularities of the ambient toric variety by refining the fan. In dimension $k \leq 4$, if we take a maximal simplicial refinement of $R$ (using all of the lattice points of $\diamond$), the resulting anticanonical hypersurface is a smooth $k-1$-dimensional Calabi-Yau manifold. In particular, three-dimensional reflexive polytopes yield K3 surfaces. A mirror pair of reflexive polytopes $\Delta$ and $\Delta^\circ$ yields mirror families of Calabi-Yau varieties.
One may describe a toric variety using *generalized homogeneous coordinates*, so named because they generalize the homogeneous coordinates used in projective space. In this construction, if a fan $\Sigma$ has $q$ one-dimensional cones, the toric variety $V_\Sigma$ is realized as a $k$-dimensional quotient of a subset of $\mathbb{C}^q$, and we have $q$ generalized homogeneous coordinates $z_1, \dots, z_q$. Let us assume that $\Sigma$ is a maximal simplicial refinement of the fan $R$ over the faces of $\Delta$. In this case, the coordinates $z_i$ correspond to the non-origin lattice points of $\Delta$. We may use these coordinates to write explicit expressions for our Calabi-Yau hypersurfaces. Each lattice point $m$ in $\Delta^\circ$ will determine a monomial in the $z_i$. Let us choose a coefficient $\alpha_m$ associated to each monomial and use this information to define a polynomial associated to the vector of coefficients $\bm{\alpha}$:
$$\label{E:fHat} \hat{f}_{\bm{\alpha}} = \sum_{m \; \in \; M \cap \Delta^\circ} \alpha_m \prod_{j=1}^q z_j^{\langle v_j, m \rangle + 1}.$$
For a general choice of the $\alpha_m$, $\hat{f}_\alpha$ defines a smooth Calabi-Yau hypersurface. For computational convenience, we will often work with the Laurent polynomial $f_{\bm{\alpha}}$ obtained by restriction to the open torus. Explicitly, the Laurent polynomial is given by:
$$\label{E:fLaurent} f_{\bm{\alpha}} = \sum_{m \; \in \; M \cap \Delta^\circ} \alpha_m \prod_{i=1}^k x_i^{\langle e_i, m \rangle},$$
where the $e_i$ are standard basis vectors.
We may obtain interesting subfamilies of hypersurfaces by specializing the $\alpha_m$ in combinatorially natural ways, a strategy pursued for example in [@KLMSW]. In particular, we may construct a one-parameter family by taking the sum of the monomials corresponding to the vertices of $\Delta^\circ$ and deforming by the monomial corresponding to the origin:
\[D:vertexPencil\] Let $\Delta$ and $\Delta^\circ$ be a mirror pair of reflexive polytopes. The *vertex pencil* $X_{\Delta, \psi}$ of Calabi-Yau hypersurfaces is the one-parameter family given by solutions to the equation:
$$\hat{f}_{\Delta,\psi} = \left(\sum_{x \; \in \; \mathrm{vertices}(\Delta^\circ)} \prod_{i=1}^k z_i^{\langle v_i, x \rangle + 1}\right) + \psi \prod_{i=1}^k z_i.$$
If $\Delta$ is the simplex with vertices $(1,0,\dots, 0)$, …, $(0, \dots, 0, 1)$, $(-1,\dots,-1)$ in $\mathbb{R}^k$, then $\hat{f}_{\Delta,\psi}$ determines a one-parameter deformation of the Fermat hypersurface $z_1^{k+1}+\dots+z_{k+1}^{k+1}$; we view the vertex pencil as a combinatorial generalization of this construction.
One may use these explicit expressions for Calabi-Yau hypersurfaces to compute their Picard–Fuchs equations. Recall that a *period* is the integral of a differential form with respect to a specified homology class. In particular, periods of holomorphic forms encode the complex structure of varieties. The Picard–Fuchs differential equation of a family of varieties is a differential equation that describes the way the value of a period changes as we move through the family. Solutions to Picard–Fuchs equations for holomorphic forms on Calabi-Yau varieties define the *mirror map*, which relates variations of complex structure of a family to variations of complexified symplectic structure of the mirror family. Using the construction in [@MW], one may show that certain combinatorially equivalent reflexive polytopes yield vertex pencils with identical Picard–Fuchs equations:
\[L:samePF\] Let $\Delta$ and $\Gamma$ be combinatorially equivalent reflexive polytopes. Fix an ordering of the vertices that respects the combinatorial equivalence, and let $M_\Delta$ and $M_\Gamma$ be the matrices whose columns are given by the vertices in this ordering. Suppose the kernels of $\mathrm{Mat}_\Delta$ and $\mathrm{Mat}_\Gamma$ are the same submodule of $\mathbb{Z}^q$. Then the Picard–Fuchs equations of the vertex pencils $\hat{f}_{\Delta,\psi}$ and $\hat{f}_{\Gamma,\psi}$ are the same.
By [@MW Lemma 4.1], if $R$ and $T$ are the fans over the faces of $\Delta$ and $\Gamma$ respectively, then there exists a toric variety $W$ and finite abelian subgroups of the torus $A$ and $B$ such that $V(R) = W/A$ and $V(T) = W/B$. The Picard–Fuchs equation is preserved under finite quotient maps, so it is the same in all cases.
Hasse-Witt matrices for Calabi-Yau toric hypersurfaces
======================================================
In this section, we combine results of [@HLYY] with the analysis of Picard–Fuchs equations in the previous section to prove our main theorems.
Katz gave an algorithm for the Hasse-Witt matrix of a Calabi-Yau hypersurface in projective space:
Let $X$ be a smooth Calabi-Yau hypersurface of degree $d = n+1$ in ${\mathbb{P}}^{n}$ that is given by an equation $\hat{f}$. Then the Hasse-Witt matrix $\mathrm{HW}_p(X)$ is given by the coefficient of $(z_0 \cdots z_{n})^{p-1}$ in $\hat{f}^{p-1}$.
Huang, Lian, Yau, and Yu extended this algorithm to the case of a toric Calabi-Yau hypersurface, writing their result in terms of Laurent polynomials.
\[A:HLYY\] Let $f_{\bm{\alpha}}$ be a Laurent polynomial determining a smooth toric Calabi-Yau hypersurface. Then the Hasse-Witt matrix $\mathrm{HW}_p(X)$ is given by the coefficient of the constant term of $f_{\bm{\alpha}}^{p-1}$.
The constant term of $f_{\bm{\alpha}}^{p-1}$ corresponds to the $(z_0 \cdots z_{q})^{p-1}$ term in generalized homogeneous coordinates. Samol and van Straten studied congruences for the constant term of $f_{\bm{\alpha}}^{p-1}$ in [@samolstraten], using an analogy to periods that the results of [@HLYY] and [@BV] make precise.
Huang, Lian, Yau, and Yu showed that the Hasse-Witt matrix of a Calabi-Yau variety realized as a hypersurface in a toric variety can be described $\pmod{p}$ as the truncation of a series expansion of the period integral.
\[T:HLYY\] Let $f_{\bm{\alpha}}$ be a family of Laurent polynomials determining a family of toric Calabi-Yau hypersurfaces, as in Equation \[E:fLaurent\]. Suppose $\bm{\gamma}$ is a large complex structure limit point, that is, $f_{\bm{\gamma}}$ has maximally unipotent monodromy.
1. The Hasse-Witt matrix $\mathrm{HW}_p$ is a polynomial in $\alpha_m$ of degree $p-1$.
2. The period integral $\mathcal{I}$ for the holomorphic form can be extended as a holomorphic function at ${\bm{\gamma}}$ and has the form $\frac{1}{\alpha_{\bm{0}}} T\left(\frac{\alpha_m}{\alpha_{\bm{0}}}\right)$, where $T\left(\frac{\alpha_m}{\alpha_{\bm{0}}}\right)$ is a Taylor series in ${\{ \frac{\alpha_m}{\alpha_{\bm{0}}} \mid m \neq \bm{0} \}}$ with integer coefficients.
3. The Hasse-Witt matrix satisfies the truncation relation $$\mathrm{HW}_p \equiv \left[ T\left(\frac{\alpha_m}{\alpha_{\bm{0}}}\right) \right]^{p-1} \pmod{p},$$ where $[\cdot]^{p-1}$ represents the truncation of a series at degree $p-1$.
We now apply Theorem \[T:HLYY\] to vertex pencils obtained from combinatorially equivalent reflexive polytopes to prove our main theorem.
\[T:mainProof\]
Let $\Delta$ and $\Gamma$ be combinatorially equivalent $n$-dimensional reflexive polytopes with $k$ vertices and $\ell$ facets. Let $V_\Delta$ and $V_\Gamma$ be toric varieties determined by maximal simplicial refinements of the fans over the faces of $\Delta$ and $\Gamma$, respectively. Let $X_{\Delta,\psi}$ and $X_{\Gamma, \psi}$ be the corresponding vertex pencils. Then:
1. If the kernels of the matrices whose columns are given by the vertices of the polytopes $\Delta^\circ$ and $\Gamma^\circ$ are the same submodule of $\mathbb{Z}^k$, then for any rational $\psi$ and prime $p$ such that $X_{\Delta,\psi}$ and $X_{\Gamma, \psi}$ are smooth, their Hasse–Witt matrices are the same.
2. If the kernels of the matrices whose columns are given by the vertices of the polar polytopes $\Delta$ and $\Gamma$ are the same submodule of $\mathbb{Z}^\ell$, then for any rational $\psi$ and prime $p$ such that $X_{\Delta,\psi}$ and $X_{\Gamma, \psi}$ are smooth, their Hasse–Witt matrices differ $\pmod{p}$ by an element $N$ of ${\mathbb{Z}}/p{\mathbb{Z}}$ not depending on $\psi$: $$\mathrm{HW}_p(X_{\Delta,\psi}) \equiv \mathrm{HW}_p(X_{\Gamma,\psi}) + N \pmod{p}.$$
To prove part (1), let $B_\Delta^\circ$ and $B_\Gamma^\circ$ be the matrices whose columns are given by the vertices of the polytopes $\Delta^\circ$ and $\Gamma^\circ$, respectively. Consider the diagonal pencils $f_\Delta$ and $f_\Gamma$. We may write $f_{\Delta, \psi}$ as the Laurent polynomial $\bm{z}^{w_1} + \dots + \bm{z}^{w_\ell}+\psi \bm{z}^{\bm{0}}$ and $\bm{z}^{w_1} + \dots + \bm{z}^{w_\ell}+\psi \bm{z}^{\bm{0}}$ and $f_{\Gamma, \psi}$ as the Laurent polynomial $\bm{z}^{w_1'} + \dots + \bm{z}^{w_\ell'}+\psi \bm{z}^{\bm{0}}$, where $\{w_1, \dots, w_\ell\}$ are the vertices of $\Delta^\circ$ and $\{w_1', \dots, w_\ell'\}$ are the vertices of $\Gamma^\circ$. By Algorithm \[A:HLYY\], $\mathrm{HW}_p(X_{\Delta,\psi})$ is given by the constant term of $(\bm{z}^{w_1} + \dots + \bm{z}^{w_\ell}+\psi \bm{z}^{\bm{0}})^{p-1}$. Contributions to the constant term are given by nonnegative integers $\alpha_1, \dots, \alpha_\ell$ such that $\alpha_1 w_1 + \dots + \alpha_\ell w_\ell = 0$. Thus, the vector $(\alpha_1, \dots, \alpha_\ell)$ is an element of the kernel of $B_\Delta^\circ$. Meanwhile, $\mathrm{HW}_p(X_{\Gamma,\psi})$ is given by the constant term of $(\bm{z}^{w_1'} + \dots + \bm{z}^{w_\ell'}+\psi \bm{z}^{\bm{0}})^{p-1}$. We see that the vector $(\alpha_1, \dots, \alpha_\ell)$ yields a contribution to $\mathrm{HW}_p(X_{\Delta,\psi})$ if and only if it yields a contribution to $\mathrm{HW}_p(X_{\Gamma,\psi})$.
To prove part (2), we observe that $X_{\Delta,\psi}$ and $X_{\Gamma, \psi}$ have the same Picard–Fuchs equation by Lemma \[L:samePF\]. We make the change of variables $\lambda = 1/\psi$. In this new coordinate system, $\lambda=0$ is a point of maximally unipotent monodromy for both families. By uniqueness of ODEs, the period integrals $X_{\Delta,\lambda}$ and $X_{\Gamma, \lambda}$ must differ by a constant. By part (2) of Theorem \[T:HLYY\], this constant must be an integer; applying the truncation result from part (3) of Theorem \[T:HLYY\], we obtain the desired result.
Theorem \[T:mainProof\] immediately yields a relationship between point counts $\pmod{p}$.
\[C:pointCountsModp\] Let $\Delta$ and $\Gamma$ be combinatorially equivalent $n$-dimensional reflexive polytopes with $k$ vertices and $\ell$ facets. Let $V_\Delta$ and $V_\Gamma$ be toric varieties determined by maximal simplicial refinements of the fans over the faces of $\Delta$ and $\Gamma$, respectively. Let $X_{\Delta,\psi}$ and $X_{\Gamma, \psi}$ be the corresponding vertex pencils. If the kernels of the matrices whose columns are given by the vertices of the polytopes $\Delta^\circ$ and $\Gamma^\circ$ are the same submodule of $\mathbb{Z}^k$, then for any rational $\psi$ and prime $p$ such that $X_{\Delta,\psi}$ and $X_{\Gamma, \psi}$ are smooth, $\# X_{\Delta,\psi} \equiv X_{\Gamma, \psi} \pmod{p}$.
One common situation where the hypotheses of Theorem \[T:mainProof\] and Corollary \[C:pointCountsModp\] apply is that of reflexive simplices. Up to resolution of singularities, the toric variety determined by a reflexive simplex is either a Gorenstein Fano weighted projective space or a quotient of such a projective space by a finite abelian group. In particular, Theorem \[T:mainProof\] applies to the Greene–Plesser mirrors of Calabi-Yau hypersurfaces in Gorenstein Fano weighted projective spaces.
\[Ex:weighted\] The weighted projective space $\mathbb{WP}(1,1,1,2,5)$ is a Gorenstein Fano fourfold. As a toric variety, this space is determined by the four-dimensional reflexive polytope $\Delta$ with vertices $(1,0,0,0)$, $(0,1,0,0)$, $(0,0,1,0)$, $(0,0,0,1)$, and $(-5,-2,-1,-1)$. The polar dual $\Delta^\circ$ has vertices $(1, -1, -1, -1)$, $(-1, 4, -1, -1)$, $(-1, -1, 9, -1)$, $(-1, -1, -1, 9)$, and $(-1, -1, -1, -1)$. $\Delta$ and $\Delta^\circ$ are combinatorially equivalent, and the kernels of the matrices whose columns are given by their vertices form the same submodule of $\mathbb{Z}^5$.
The pencil of Calabi-Yau threefolds $X_{\Delta,\psi}$ is a resolution of singularities of the diagonal pencil given by solutions to $z_0^{10}+z_1^{10}+z_2^{10}+z_3^5+z_4^2+\psi z_0\cdots z_4=0$. Let $G$ be the group of diagonal symmetries of the pencil that preserve the holomorphic $(3,0)$-form. Then $G$ is a finite abelian group of order $\mathbb{Z}/10 \times \mathbb{Z}/10$. The Greene–Plesser mirror of $X_{\Delta,\psi}$ is the resolution of singularities of the quotient $X_{\Delta,\psi}/G$. But we may also obtain this mirror by taking the diagonal pencil $X_{{\Delta^\circ},\psi}$ within the toric variety corresponding to $\Delta^\circ$. We conclude that, for any rational $\psi$ and prime $p$ such that both $X_{\Delta,\psi}$ and its Greene-Plesser mirror are smooth, both threefolds have the same Hasse–Witt matrix and $\# X_{\Delta,\psi} \equiv X_{{\Delta^\circ}, \psi} \pmod{p}$.
Theorem \[T:mainProof\] is powered by the relationship between periods and point counts over finite fields. The periods of a general anticanonical Calabi-Yau hypersurface in a Gorenstein Fano toric variety satisfy a GKZ generalized hypergeometric system. When we specialize to a vertex pencil, we obtain varieties with special geometric and arithmetic properties. In the next section, we study specific examples of elliptic curve and K3 surface vertex pencils whose Picard–Fuchs equations are classical hypergeometric differential equations, and remark on the relationships between geometric and arithmetic properties in this context.
Explicit examples and hypergeometric structures
===============================================
[DKSSVW18a]{}
Jeffrey Achter and Everett Howe, *Hasse-[W]{}itt and [C]{}artier-[M]{}anin matrices: a warning and a request*, in *Arithmetic geometry: computation and applications*, Contemp. Math. 722, Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI, 2019, 1–18.
Alan Adolphson and Steven Sperber, *[$A$]{}-hypergeometric series and the [H]{}asse-[W]{}itt matrix of a hypersurface*, Finite Fields Appl. 41 (2016), 55–63.
M. Aldi, A. Peruničić. *$p$-adic Berglund-Hübsch duality.* Adv. Theor. Math. Phys. 19 (2015), no. 5, 1115-1139.
Wilfrid Norman Bailey. *Generalized hypergeometric series*. Cambridge Tracts in Mathematics and Mathematical Physics, No. 32. Stechert-Hafner, Inc., New York, 1964.
Frits Beukers, *Notes on differential equations and hypergeometric functions*, Course Lecture Notes (2009).
F. Beukers and G. Heckman, *Monodromy for the hypergeometric function ${}_nF_{n-1}$*, Invent. Math. 95, 325–354 (1989).
Frits Beukers and Masha Vlasenko, *Dwork crystals [I]{}*, <https://arxiv.org/abs/1903.11155> (2019).
Philip Candelas, Xenia de la Ossa, and Fernando Rodríguez Villegas, *Calabi–Yau manifolds over finite fields, [I]{}*. <https://arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/0012233> (2000).
Philip Candelas, Xenia de la Ossa, and Fernando Rodríguez Villegas, *Calabi–Yau manifolds over finite fields II*. In: Calabi–Yau varieties and mirror symmetry. Fields Inst. Commun., vol. 38, pp. 121-157. Amer. Math. Soc., Providence (2003).
John H. Conway and Simon P. Norton, *Monstrous Moonshine*, Bull. London Math. Soc., 11 (1979), 308–339.
David A. Cox and Sheldon Katz. *Mirror symmetry and algebraic geometry*. Mathematical Surveys and Monographs **68**, American Mathematical Society, 1999.
Charles F. Doran, *Picard-Fuchs Uniformization and Modularity of the Mirror Map*, Commun. Math. Phys. 212, 625 – 647 (2000).
Charles F. Doran, Tyler L. Kelly, Adriana Salerno, Steven Sperber, John Voight, and Ursula Whitcher, *Zeta functions of alternate mirror Calabi-Yau families*. Israel J. Math. 228, no. 2, 665–705 (2018).
Charles F. Doran, Tyler L. Kelly, Adriana Salerno, Steven Sperber, John Voight, and Ursula Whitcher, *Hypergeometric decomposition of symmetric K3 quartic pencils*. <https://arxiv.org/abs/1810.06254> (2020). To appear in Res. Math. Sci.
B. Dwork, *[$p$]{}-adic cycles*, Inst. Hautes Études Sci. Publ. Math. **37** (1969) 27–115.
B.R. Greene and M.R. Plesser, *Duality in [C]{}alabi-[Y]{}au moduli space*, Nuclear Phys. B 338 (1990), 1, 15–37.
J. Harnad, *Picard-Fuchs Equations, Hauptmoduls and Integrable Systems*, CRM report, 1998.
An Huang, Bong Lian, Shing-Tung Yau, and Chenglong Yu, *Hasse-Witt matrices, unit roots and period integrals*. <https://arxiv.org/abs/1801.01189> (2018).
Jun-Ichi Igusa, *Class Number of a Definite Quaternion with Prime Discriminant*, Proc. of the Nat. Acad. Sci. 44, 312–314 (1958).
S. Kadir, *Arithmetic mirror symmetry for a two-parameter family of [C]{}alabi-[Y]{}au manifolds*, in *Mirror symmetry. [V]{}*, AMS/IP Stud. Adv. Math., **38**, 35–86, Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI, 2006.
Dagan Karp, Jacob Lewis, Daniel Moore, Dmitri Skjorshammer, and Ursula Whitcher. *On a family of K3 surfaces with $\mathcal{S}_4$ symmetry*, in *Arithmetic and geometry of K3 surfaces and Calabi-Yau threefolds*, 367–386, Fields Inst. Commun., 67, Springer, New York, 2013.
Nicholas M. Katz, *Algebraic solutions of differential equations ([$p$]{}-curvature and the [H]{}odge filtration)*, Invent. Math. [18]{}, 1–118, 1972.
Nicholas M. Katz, *Une formule de congruence pour la fonction $\zeta$*, S.G.A. 7 II, Lecture Notes in Mathematics 340, Springer, 1973.
R. Kloosterman, *Zeta functions of monomial deformations of [D]{}elsarte hypersurfaces*, SIGMA Symmetry Integrability Geom. Methods Appl. **13** (2017), Paper No. 087.
C. Magyar and U. Whitcher. *Strong arithmetic mirror symmetry and toric isogenies*. *Proceedings of the AMS Special Session on Higher Genus Curves and Fibrations of Higher Genus Curves in Mathematical Physics and Arithmetic Geometry*, Contemporary Mathematics, American Mathematical Society, 2018.
*[S]{}ageMath, the [S]{}age [M]{}athematics [S]{}oftware [S]{}ystem ([V]{}ersion 9.1)*, The Sage Developers, 2020, <https://www.sagemath.org>.
Adriana Salerno. *An algorithmic approach to the Dwork family*. *Women in Numbers 2: Research Directions in Number Theory*, Contemporary Mathematics **606**, American Mathematical Society, 2013.
K. Samol and D. van Straten, *Dwork congruences and reflexive polytopes*, Ann. Math. Qué. 39 (2015) 2, 185–203.
M. Vlasenko, *Higher Hasse–Witt matrices*, Indag. Math. 29 (2018), 1411–1424.
Daqing Wan, *Mirror symmetry for zeta functions*, Mirror symmetry. [V]{}, AMS/IP Stud. Adv. Math., 38, 2006.
Ursula Whitcher. *Reflexive polytopes and lattice-polarized [K]{}3 surfaces*. *Calabi-[Y]{}au varieties: arithmetic, geometry and physics*, Fields Inst. Monogr. 34, 65–79, Fields Inst. Res. Math. Sci., Toronto, ON, 2015.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'Let $E/{{\mathbb Q}}$ and $A/{{\mathbb Q}}$ be elliptic curves. We can construct modular points derived from $A$ via the modular parametrisation of $E$. With certain assumptions we can show that these points are of infinite order and are not divisible by a prime $p$. In particular, using Kolyvagin’s construction of derivative classes, we can find elements in certain Shafarevich-Tate groups of order $p^{n}$.'
author:
- Richard Hatton
bibliography:
- 'potpap.bib'
title: Kolyvagin Derivatives of Modular Points on Elliptic Curves
---
\[section\] \[theorem\][Lemma]{} \[theorem\][Definition]{} \[theorem\][Proposition]{} \[theorem\][Conjecture]{}
INTRODUCTION {#introduction .unnumbered}
============
Let $E/{{\mathbb Q}}$ be an elliptic curve with conductor $N_{E}$. Then due to the modularity theorem, there exists a surjective morphism $$\phi_{E}:X_{0}(N_{E}) {{\rightarrow}}E$$ defined over ${{\mathbb Q}}$ known as the modular parametrisation of $E$, where $\infty$ on the modular curve $X_{0}(N_{E})$ is mapped to $O$. We can view $X_{0}(N_{E})$ as a moduli space of points $x_{A,C}=(A,C)$ for $A$ an elliptic curve and $C$ a cyclic subgroup of $A$ of order $N_{E}$. Fixing $A/{{\mathbb Q}},$ the image of $x_{A,C}$ under $\phi_{E}$ is known as a *modular point*, which we will denote $P_{A,C} \in E({{\mathbb Q}}(C))$ where ${{\mathbb Q}}(C)$ is the field of definition of $C$. We denote the compositium of all such ${{\mathbb Q}}(C)$ as $K_{N_{E}}$. This is the smallest field $K$ such that its absolute Galois group $G_{K}$ acts by scalars on $A[N_{E}].$ This has Galois group $G_{N_{E}}:=\operatorname{Gal}(K_{N_{E}}/{{\mathbb Q}})$ which can be identified as a subgroup of $\operatorname{PGL}_{2}({{\mathbb Z}}/N_{E}{{\mathbb Z}})$ via the mapping $$\overline{\tau}_{{{\mathbb Q}},A,N_{E}}:G_{{{\mathbb Q}}} {{\rightarrow}}\operatorname{Aut}(A[N_{E}])\cong \operatorname{GL}_{2}({{\mathbb Z}}/N_{E}{{\mathbb Z}}) {{\rightarrow}}\operatorname{PGL}_{2}({{\mathbb Z}}/N_{E}{{\mathbb Z}}).$$
We can also define *higher modular points* above $P_{A,C}$. These are points of the form $\phi_{E}(B,D)$ for an elliptic curve $B$ isogenous to $A$ over $\overline{{{\mathbb Q}}}$ and $D \leq B$ cyclic of order $N_{E}$. We look at isogenies of degree $p^{n}$ for some prime $p$ of good or multiplicative reduction with respect to $E$ and $n \ge 1$.
Kolyvagin initially looked at how Heegner points can be used to bound Selmer groups in [@VK90]. This involved creating cohomology classes coming from these points and using the classes to bound the Selmer groups from above.
Wuthrich then worked on an analogue system to Kolyvagin’s work in [@CW09] where he uses a type of modular point known as self points to create derivative classes and finds lower bounds of Selmer groups over certain fields. In this paper, we look to extend the idea of self points to a general modular point. We end up with similar findings to that in [@CW09] but can also show further that Selmer groups over certain fields must contain points of prime power order when the higher modular points satisfy certain conditions.
In the first section, we look at the divisibility of the modular points in $E({{\mathbb Q}}(C))$. Initially, we want to see when the modular points are of infinite order. We obtain the following result.
Let $E/{{\mathbb Q}}$ be an elliptic curve of conductor $N_{E}$. Let $A/{{\mathbb Q}}$ be an elliptic curve such that the $j$ invariant of $A$ is not in $\frac{1}{2}{{\mathbb Z}}$ and the degree of any isogeny of $A$ defined over ${{\mathbb Q}}$ is coprime to $N_{E}$. Then the modular points $P_{A,C}$ are of infinite order for all cyclic subgroups $C$ of order $N_{E}$ in $A$.
From this, we can show that if $p$ is a prime with specific conditions related to $E$, then $P_{A,C}$ is not $p$-divisible in $E({{\mathbb Q}}(C))$ as seen in . We also find relationships between the modular points. That is, if $d$ is a divisor of $N_{E}$ and $B \leq A$ is cyclic of order $d$, then the sum of $P_{A,C}$ over $C \supset B$ is torsion. This reduces the rank of the group generated by these points.
If we let ${G_{n}}:=\operatorname{PGL}_{2}({{\mathbb Z}}/p^{n+1}{{\mathbb Z}})$ for $n \ge 0$, we will see that we can relate the group generated by the modular points to certain ${{\mathbb Z}}_{p}[{G_{n}}]$-lattices in $$V_{n}=\ker\Big({{\mathbb Q}}_{p}\big[{{}^{{G_{n}}}\!/_{{B_{n}}}}\big] {{\rightarrow}}{{\mathbb Q}}_{p}\Big)$$ for $p$ prime and ${B_{n}}$ a Borel subgroup of ${G_{n}}$. We can view $V_{n}$ in the following way $$V_{n}=\bigg\{f:{{{{\mathbb P}}^{1}_{n}}}{{\rightarrow}}{{\mathbb Q}}_{p}:\sum\limits_{C}f(C)=0\bigg\}$$ where ${{{{\mathbb P}}^{1}_{n}}}:={{\mathbb P}}^{1}({{\mathbb Z}}/p^{n+1}{{\mathbb Z}})$. This contains the standard lattice $$T_{n}=\ker\Big({{\mathbb Z}}_{p}\big[{{}^{{G_{n}}}\!/_{{B_{n}}}}\big] {{\rightarrow}}{{\mathbb Z}}_{p}\Big),$$ which we can easily understand the cohomology of with respect to subgroups of ${G_{n}}$. Hence, we take a look at the representation theory of ${G_{n}}$ and will later look at the application of this to the modular points.
We then take a look at a specific case of creating higher modular points for a prime $p$ of either good ordinary or multiplicative reduction with respect to $E$. Here, we will look at the case where $p$ is coprime to $N_{E}$. Let $D$ be a cyclic subgroup of $A$ of order $p^{n+1}$ for prime $p$ and $n \ge 0$. We look at the higher modular point coming from $(A/D,\psi(C))$ where $\psi:A {{\rightarrow}}A/D$ is the isogeny defined by $D$. We define $Q_{A,D}=\phi_{E}(A/D,\psi(C)) \in E({{\mathbb Q}}(C,D))$. We see that the higher modular points form a trace-compatible system with $$a_{p}(E) \cdot Q_{A,D}=\sum\limits_{D' \supset D}Q_{A,D'}$$ where the sum is taken over the subgroups $D'$ of $A$ of order $p^{n+2}$ containing $D$ and $a_{p}(E)$ is the $p$-th Fourier coefficient for the modular form associated to the isogeny class of $E$. This results in showing that the higher modular points generate a group of rank $p^{n+1}+p^{n}$ as seen in .
We then look to follow a similar procedure to Wuthrich in [@CW09] from the ideas of Kolyvagin in [@VK90]. We create derivative classes coming from higher modular points of infinite order which are not $p$-divisible over $E({{\mathbb Q}}(C))$ as shown in .
Let $p$ be a prime such that it is one of the following:
- A prime of non-split multiplicative reduction for $E$,
- A prime of split multiplicative reduction for $E$ and $p \nmid \operatorname{ord}_{p}(\Delta_{E})$,
- A non-anomalous prime of good ordinary reduction for $E$,
where $\Delta_{E}$ is the minimal discriminant of $E$. This ensures that the higher modular points are not $p$-divisible in $E({{\mathbb Q}}(C))$. Let $$\ F_{n}:= \left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
K_{p^{n+1}N_{E}} & \text{if $p\nmid N_{E}$},\\
K_{p^{n}N_{E}} & \text{if $p || N_{E}$},
\end{array}
\right.$$ for $n \ge -1$ with $F:=F_{-1}$. We assume $$\tau_{F,A,p}:\operatorname{Gal}(\overline{F}/F) {{\rightarrow}}\operatorname{PGL}_{2}({{\mathbb Z}}_{p})$$ is surjective giving $\operatorname{Gal}(F_{n}/F)={G_{n}}$. We let $A_{n}$ be a non-split Cartan subgroup of ${G_{n}}$. This is a cyclic subgroup of order $p^{n+1}+p^{n}$. Then we define $L_{n}$ to be the subfield of $F_{n}$ fixed by $A_{n}$. We are able to construct a mapping $$\delta_{n}:\operatorname{H}^{1}(A_{n},S_{n}) {{\rightarrow}}\Sh(E/L_{n})$$ where $S_{n}$ denotes the saturated group generated by the higher modular points in $E(F_{n})$. This leads to the following.
Let $p>2$ be a prime. Let $E/{{\mathbb Q}}$ and $A/{{\mathbb Q}}$ be elliptic curves of conductor $N_{E}$ and $N_{A}$ respectively. Let $F_{n}$ be as defined above. Assume that:
1. $A$ is semistable,
2. $E$ has either split multiplicative reduction at $p$ with $p \nmid \operatorname{ord}_{p}(\Delta_{E})$, non-split multiplicative reduction at $p$ or good ordinary non-anomalous reduction at $p$,
3. The degree of any isogeny of $A$ defined over ${{\mathbb Q}}$ is coprime to $N_{E}$,
4. $\overline{\rho}_{{{\mathbb Q}},A,p}:G_{{{\mathbb Q}}} {{\rightarrow}}\operatorname{Aut}(A[p]) \cong \operatorname{GL}_{2}({{\mathbb F}}_{p})$ is surjective,
5. $\overline{\rho}_{{{\mathbb Q}},E,p}:G_{{{\mathbb Q}}} {{\rightarrow}}\operatorname{Aut}(E[p]) \cong \operatorname{GL}_{2}({{\mathbb F}}_{p})$ is surjective,
6. Any prime $\ell$ of bad reduction of $E$ and good reduction of $A$ such that $\ell \neq p$ has $a_{\ell}(A)^{2}-4\ell$ square modulo $p$.
Then there exists an element of order $p^{n}$ in $\operatorname{Sel}^{p^{n}}(E/L_{n})$.
With the conditions on $p$, we can show that the source of $\delta_{n}$ is a cyclic group of order $p^{n}$. This result comes from the link between the construction of the derivative classes and modular representation theory. The group $S_{n}$ defined earlier is isomorphic to a ${{\mathbb Z}}_{p}[{G_{n}}]$-lattice containing $T_{n}$. Due to the structure of $S_{n}$, we can use the following.
Let $U$ be a ${{\mathbb Z}}_{p}[{G_{n}}]$-lattice of $V_{n}$ such that $U^{{B_{n}}}=T_{n}^{{B_{n}}}$ where ${B_{n}}$ is a Borel subgroup of ${G_{n}}$. Then $U \cong T_{n}$.
Hence, we have $S_{n} \cong T_{n}$ under the conditions we have stated and as we understand the cohomology of $T_{n}$ associated to subgroups for ${G_{n}}$, we obtain this result.
However, we still do not fully understand all potential ${{\mathbb Z}}_{p}[{G_{n}}]$-lattices $S_{n}$ could be isomorphic to. Further research into the modular representation theory of ${{\mathbb F}}_{p}[{G_{n}}]$ would improve our understanding of the structure of the saturated group of higher modular points and further still, understand the properties of the derivative classes constructed.
PRELIMINARIES
=============
Let $K$ be a number field. For an elliptic curve $E$ over $K$ and $m>1$ an integer, we let $E[m]$ be the $m$-torsion subgroup of $E(\overline{K})$. We have $G_{K}$ acting on $E[m]$ where $G_{K}:=\operatorname{Gal}(\overline{K}/K)$ is the absolute Galois group of $K$. This leads to a Galois representation $$\overline{\rho}_{K,E,m}:G_{K} {{\rightarrow}}\operatorname{Aut}(E[m]) \cong \operatorname{GL}_{2}({{\mathbb Z}}/m{{\mathbb Z}}).$$
Let $T_{p}E=\varprojlim\limits_{n}E[p^{n}]$ be the $p$-adic Tate module of $E$ for a prime $p$. Then $G_{K}$ acts on $T_{p}E$ which leads to the Galois representation $$\rho_{K,E,p}:G_{K} {{\rightarrow}}\operatorname{Aut}(T_{p}E) \cong \operatorname{GL}_{2}({{\mathbb Z}}_{p}).$$ We define the mapping $\overline{\tau}_{K,E,m}:= s_{m} \circ \overline{\rho}_{K,E,m}$ where $s_{m}$ is the quotient mapping to $\operatorname{PGL}_{2}({{\mathbb Z}}/m{{\mathbb Z}})$ and the mapping $\tau_{K,E,p}:= s \circ \rho_{K,E,p}$ where $p$ is prime and $s$ is the quotient mapping to $\operatorname{PGL}({{\mathbb Z}}_{p})$. Throughout, we will denote the centre of $\operatorname{GL}_{2}({{\mathbb Z}}/m{{\mathbb Z}})$ as $Z_{m}$ and define ${G_{n}}:=\operatorname{PGL}_{2}({{\mathbb Z}}/p^{n+1}{{\mathbb Z}})$ for a prime $p$ and $n \ge 0$.
In this article, we will be looking at the links between the modular points we have constructed and the representation theory associated to ${G_{n}}$. We let ${B_{n}}$ denote a Borel subgroup of ${G_{n}}$. We see that ${G_{n}}$ acts on the projective line over ${{\mathbb Z}}/p^{n+1}{{\mathbb Z}}$ for $n \ge 0$ via linear substitution, which will be denoted ${{{{\mathbb P}}^{1}_{n}}}$ throughout.
MODULAR POINTS ON ELLIPTIC CURVES
=================================
We would like to understand when the modular points are of infinite order over certain fields. We prove the following.
Let $A/{{\mathbb Q}}$ and $E/{{\mathbb Q}}$ be elliptic curves of conductor $N_{A}$ and $N_{E}$ respectively. Suppose the $j$ invariant of $A$ is not in $\frac{1}{2}{{\mathbb Z}}$. Then there exists a $C \leq A$ cyclic of order $N_{E}$ such that $P_{A,C} \in E(\overline{{{\mathbb Q}}}_{p})$ is non-torsion.
Let $p$ be a prime which divides the denominator of the $j$-invariant of $A$. If $p^{2} \mid N_{A}$, we know $A$ acquires multiplicative reduction at $p$ over some extension of ${{\mathbb Q}}$. Fix an embedding of $\overline{{{\mathbb Q}}}$ into $\overline{{{\mathbb Q}}}_{p}$. We consider the modular parametrisation over $\overline{{{\mathbb Z}}}_{p}$. The modular curve $X_{0}(N_{E})$ over $\overline{{{\mathbb Z}}}_{p}$ has a neighbourhood of the cusp $\infty$ consisting of couples $(J,C)$ of the Tate curve of the form $J(\overline{{{\mathbb Q}}}_{p})=\overline{{{\mathbb Q}}}_{p}^{\times}/q^{{{\mathbb Z}}}$ together with a cyclic subgroup $C$ of order $N_{E}$ generated by the $N_{E}^{\text{th}}$ root of unity. The parameter $q$ is a $p$-adic analytic uniformiser at $\infty$, so that the Spf $\overline{{{\mathbb Z}}}_{p}[[q]]$ is the formal completion of $X_{0}(N_{E})/\overline{{{\mathbb Z}}}_{p}$ at the cusp $\infty$, as seen in [@KM85 Chapter 8].
Since $A$ has multiplicative reduction over $\overline{{{\mathbb Z}}}_{p}$, there is exactly one point $x_{A,C}$ in the neighbourhood of $\infty$ on $X_{0}(N_{E})$ which is represented by the $p$-adic Tate parameter $q_{A}$ associated to $A$ and $C$ is isomorphic to $\mu[N_{E}]$. Let $f_{E}=\sum a_{n}(E)q^{n}$ be the normalised newform associated to $E$ and let $\omega_{E}$ be the invariant differential on $E$. Then we have $\phi_{E}^{*}(\omega_{E})=c_{E} \cdot f_{E}/q \cdot dq$ where $c_{E}$ is the Manin constant of $E$. Hence $$\log_{E}(\phi_{E}(x_{A,C}))=\int^{\phi_{E}(x_{A,C})}_{O}\omega_{E}=c_{E} \cdot \int^{q_{A}}_{0}f_{E}\frac{dq}{q}=c_{E} \cdot \sum\limits_{n=1}^{\infty}\frac{a_{n}(E)}{n} \cdot q^{n}_{A}$$ where $\log_{E}$ is the formal logarithm associated to $E$ from the formal group $\hat{E}(\m)$ to the maximal ideal $\m$ of $\overline{{{\mathbb Z}}}_{p}$. We let $|\cdot |_{p}$ be the normalised absolute value such that $|p|_{p}=p^{-1}$. We then have the following lemma.
[@CW09 Lemma 6] Let $(J,C)$ be a point on $Y_{0}(N_{E})(\overline{{{\mathbb Q}}}_{p})$ such that $J$ is isomorphic to the Tate curve with parameter $q_{0} \neq 0$ and $C$ is isomorphic to $\mu[N_{E}]$. If $|q_{0}|_{p}<p^{-\frac{1}{p-1}}$ then $\phi_{E}(J,C)$ is a point of infinite order on $E(\overline{{{\mathbb Q}}}_{p})$.
Hence, we have for $p \neq 2$ that $$|q_{A}|_{p}=|j(A)|_{p}^{-1} \leq p^{-1}<p^{-\frac{1}{p-1}}$$ and if $p=2$ then $$|q_{A}|_{2}=|j(A)|_{2}^{-1} \leq p^{-2}<p^{-\frac{1}{p-1}}.$$ Therefore, by , we have that $P_{A,C}=\phi_{E}(x_{A,C})$ is a point of infinite order in $E(\overline{{{\mathbb Q}}}_{p})$.
We assume for primes $\ell$ of bad reduction for $E$, there exists no $\ell$-isogeny on $A$. Hence the set of modular points $\{P_{A,C}\}_{C}$ form a single orbit under the action of $G_{N_{E}}$ and so for all $C$, $P_{A,C}$ is of infinite order in $E({{\mathbb Q}}(C))$. However, we do have a relation with respect to sums of these modular points.
The sum of the modular points $P_{A,C}$ as $C$ varies through all cyclic subgroups of $A$ of order $N_{E}$ is a torsion point defined over ${{\mathbb Q}}$. Let $d \neq N_{E}$ be an integer dividing $N_{E}$. Then $$\sum\limits_{C \supset B}P_{A,C} \in E(K_{d})$$ is a torsion point where $B$ is a cyclic subgroup of $A$ of order $d$ and the sum is taken over all cyclic subgroups of $A$ of order $N_{E}$ containing $B$.
Identical to the proof of [@CW09 Proposition 7].
Hence, we know that there exists at least one $P_{A,C} \in E({{\mathbb Q}}(C))$ of infinite order and there is a relationship between them. We next observe the divisibility of the points in $E({{\mathbb Q}}(C))$.
Suppose $j(A) \notin \frac{1}{2}{{\mathbb Z}}$ and $p>2$ is a prime such that its satisfies one of the following:
- A prime of non-split multiplicative reduction for $E$,
- A prime of split multiplicative reduction for $E$ and $p \nmid \operatorname{ord}_{p}(\Delta_{E})$,
- A non-anomalous prime of good reduction for $E$.
Then $P_{A,C} \notin p^{c_{p}(A)} \cdot E({{\mathbb Q}}(C))$.
Let $\mathfrak{p}$ be the place ${{\mathbb Q}}(C)$ corresponding to the chosen embedding $\overline{{{\mathbb Q}}}$ to $\overline{{{\mathbb Q}}}_{p}$. Then we have ${{\mathbb Q}}(C)_{\mathfrak{p}}={{\mathbb Q}}_{p}$. As $p$ is one of the primes in the lemma with respect to $E$, then the order of the group of components of $E$ over ${{\mathbb Q}}_{p}$ and the number of non-singular points in the reduction $E({{\mathbb F}}_{p})$ are both prime to $p$. Hence, if $P_{A,C}$ is divisible by $p$ in $E({{\mathbb Q}}_{p})$ then it is divisible by $p$ in $\hat{E}(p{{\mathbb Z}}_{p})$. But the valuation of $\log_{E}(P_{A,C})$ shows this cannot happen. Let $z=\log_{E}(P_{A,C})$ and denote $c_{p}(A)$ as the Tamagawa number for $A$ at $p$. As ${{\mathbb Q}}(C)_{\mathfrak{p}}={{\mathbb Q}}_{p}$, then we have $\operatorname{ord}_{p}(q_{A})= c_{p}(A)$. We then see that $$\begin{aligned}
\operatorname{ord}_{p}(z) &=\min\{\operatorname{ord}_{p}(q_{A}),\operatorname{ord}_{p}(a_{p}(E)) +
p \cdot \operatorname{ord}_{p}(q_{A})-\operatorname{ord}_{p}(p)\} \\
&=\min\{c_{p}(A),\operatorname{ord}_{p}(a_{p}(E)) +p \cdot c_{p}(A)-1\}=c_{p}(A)\end{aligned}$$ as $a_{p}(E)$ is an integer. Therefore, we have that $P_{A,C} \in \hat{E}(p^{c_{p}(A)}{{\mathbb Z}}_{p})$. If $p \neq 2$, then we have $$\begin{aligned}
\operatorname{ord}_{p}(z-q_{A}) &=\operatorname{ord}_{p}(a_{p}(E)) +p \cdot \operatorname{ord}_{p}(q_{A})-1 \\
&=\operatorname{ord}_{p}(a_{p}(E)) +p \cdot c_{p}(A)-1 \\
&\ge (p-1)c_{p}(A) \\
&\ge 2c_{p}(A).\end{aligned}$$ Hence, we have $z$ is congruent to $q_{A}$ modulo $p^{2c_{p}(A)}$. So the value $z$ is non zero and hence $P_{A,C} \notin p^{c_{p}(A)} \cdot E({{\mathbb Q}}(C))$.
We have now seen the divisibility of the modular points in $E({{\mathbb Q}}(C))$. This will become important when we study the representation theory of the group generated by the modular points on $E$.
REPRESENTATIONS OF [$\operatorname{PGL}_{2}({{\mathbb Z}}/p^{n+1}{{\mathbb Z}})$]{}
===================================================================================
We are interested in the representations that will appear in the study of modular points. We let $$V_{(n)}={{\mathbb Q}}_{p}\big[{{}^{{G_{n}}}\!/_{{B_{n}}}}\big]$$ which is a ${{\mathbb Q}}_{p}[{G_{n}}]$-module of dimension $p^{n+1}+p^{n}$. We can view $V_{(n)}=\text{Maps}({{{{\mathbb P}}^{1}_{n}}}{{\rightarrow}}{{\mathbb Q}}_{p})$. This decomposes as $$V_{(n)}:=\bigoplus_{i=-1}^{n}W_{i}$$ where $W_{i}$ are irreducible ${{\mathbb Q}}_{p}[{G_{n}}]$-modules as seen in [@CW09 Theorem 8]. These take the form $W_{-1}={{\mathbb Q}}_{p}$ and $$\begin{split}
W_{i} &=\ker\Big({{\mathbb Q}}_{p}\big[{{}^{G_{i}}\!/_{B_{i}}}\big]{{\rightarrow}}{{\mathbb Q}}_{p}\big[{{}^{G_{i-1}}\!/_{B_{i-1}}}\big]\Big)\\
&=\bigg\{f:{{\mathbb P}}^{1}_{i} {{\rightarrow}}{{\mathbb Q}}_{p}:\sum\limits_{C \supset D}f(C)=0\text{ for all }D \in {{\mathbb P}}^{1}_{i-1}\bigg\}
\end{split}$$ for $i \ge 0$ . We define the standard ${{\mathbb Z}}_{p}[{G_{n}}]$-lattice inside $V_{(n)}$ as $$T_{(n)}={{\mathbb Z}}_{p}\big[{{}^{{G_{n}}}\!/_{{B_{n}}}}\big]=\text{Maps}({{{{\mathbb P}}^{1}_{n}}}{{\rightarrow}}{{\mathbb Z}}_{p}).$$ Define $$V_{n}:=V_{(n)}/W_{-1}=\ker\Big({{\mathbb Q}}_{p}\big[{{}^{{G_{n}}}\!/_{{B_{n}}}}\big]{{\rightarrow}}{{\mathbb Q}}_{p}\Big)$$ and let $$T_{n}:=\ker\Big({{\mathbb Z}}_{p}\big[{{}^{{G_{n}}}\!/_{{B_{n}}}}\big]{{\rightarrow}}{{\mathbb Z}}_{p}\Big)=\bigg\{f:{{{{\mathbb P}}^{1}_{n}}}{{\rightarrow}}{{\mathbb Z}}_{p}:\sum\limits_{C}f(C)=0\bigg\}$$ be the standard ${{\mathbb Z}}_{p}[{G_{n}}]$-lattice in $V_{n}$. We initially look at the cohomology of ${B_{n}}$ with respect to the lattice $T_{(n)}$.
For all $n \ge 0$, we have $\operatorname{H}^{1}({B_{n}},T_{(n)})=0$.
We know that $T_{(n)} \cong \operatorname{Ind}_{{B_{n}}}^{{G_{n}}}({{\mathbb Z}}_{p})$. Then $$\operatorname{H}^{1}({B_{n}},T_{(n)}) \cong \operatorname{Ext}_{{{\mathbb Z}}_{p}{B_{n}}}^{1}(T_{(n)},{{\mathbb Z}}_{p}) \cong \operatorname{Ext}_{{{\mathbb Z}}_{p}{G_{n}}}^{1}(T_{(n)},T_{(n)}).$$ We see by [@DJB91 Corollary 3.3.5 (vi)] that $$\begin{split}
\operatorname{Ext}_{{{\mathbb Z}}_{p}{G_{n}}}^{1}(T_{(n)},T_{(n)}) &\cong \bigoplus_{{B_{n}}g {B_{n}}}
\operatorname{Ext}_{{{\mathbb Z}}_{p}[B_{n} \cap g {B_{n}}g^{-1}]}^{1}(
\operatorname{Res}^{g {B_{n}}g^{-1}}_{B_{n} \cap
g {B_{n}}g^{-1}}({{\mathbb Z}}_{p}),\operatorname{Res}^{{B_{n}}}
_{B_{n} \cap g {B_{n}}g^{-1}}({{\mathbb Z}}_{p})) \\
&\cong \bigoplus_{{B_{n}}g {B_{n}}}
\operatorname{Ext}_{{{\mathbb Z}}_{p}[B_{n} \cap g {B_{n}}g^{-1}]}^{1}(
{{\mathbb Z}}_{p},{{\mathbb Z}}_{p})
\end{split}$$ where the sum is taken over the double cosets ${B_{n}}g {B_{n}}$. However, for all such double cosets, we have ${B_{n}}\cap g {B_{n}}g^{-1} \leq {G_{n}}$ and acts trivially on ${{\mathbb Z}}_{p}$. Therefore we have $$\begin{split}
\operatorname{Ext}_{{{\mathbb Z}}_{p}[B_{n} \cap g {B_{n}}g^{-1}]}^{1}({{\mathbb Z}}_{p},{{\mathbb Z}}_{p}) &\cong \operatorname{H}^{1}(B_{n} \cap
g {B_{n}}g^{-1},{{\mathbb Z}}_{p}) \\
&\cong \operatorname{Hom}(B_{n} \cap
g {B_{n}}g^{-1},{{\mathbb Z}}_{p})=0.
\end{split}$$ for all double cosets ${B_{n}}g {B_{n}}$. Hence we have $\operatorname{Ext}_{{{\mathbb Z}}_{p}{G_{n}}}^{1}(T_{(n)},T_{(n)})=0$.
We then use this for the following.
For all $n \ge 0$, we have $\operatorname{H}^{1}({B_{n}},T_{n})=0$.
We have the short exact sequence $$0 {{\rightarrow}}T_{n} {{\rightarrow}}T_{(n)} \xrightarrow{g} {{\mathbb Z}}_{p} {{\rightarrow}}0$$ which induces $$0 {{\rightarrow}}T_{n}^{B_{n}} {{\rightarrow}}T_{(n)}^{B_{n}} \xrightarrow{g} {{\mathbb Z}}_{p} \rightarrow \operatorname{H}^{1}(B_{n},T_{n}) {{\rightarrow}}0$$ as $B_{n}$ acts trivially on ${{\mathbb Z}}_{p}$ and $\operatorname{H}^{1}({B_{n}},T_{(n)})=0$ by . As ${B_{n}}$ fixes a point of ${{{{\mathbb P}}^{1}_{n}}}$, let $C \in {{{{\mathbb P}}^{1}_{n}}}$ be the fixed point. The characteristic function $e_{C}:{{{{\mathbb P}}^{1}_{n}}}{{\rightarrow}}{{\mathbb Z}}_{p}$ in $T_{(n)}^{{B_{n}}}$ is mapped to $1 \in {{\mathbb Z}}_{p}$ by $g$. Therefore, $g$ is surjective and $\operatorname{H}^{1}({B_{n}},T_{n})=0$.
We would like to focus on the ${{\mathbb Z}}_{p}[{G_{n}}]$-lattices $U$ of $V_{n}$ such that $U^{{B_{n}}} \cong T_{n}^{{B_{n}}}$. All such lattices can be scaled such that they contain $T_{n}$ and are contained in $\frac{1}{p^{k}}T_{n}$ for some $k \ge 1$. We have the exact sequence $$0 {{\rightarrow}}T_{n} {{\rightarrow}}U {{\rightarrow}}{{}^{U}\!/_{T_{n}}} {{\rightarrow}}0.$$ By , if $U^{{B_{n}}} \cong T_{n}^{{B_{n}}}$ then $({{}^{U}\!/_{T_{n}}})^{B_{n}}=0.$ We will initially focus on the $k=1$ case. We now define $\overline{X}:=X \otimes_{{{\mathbb Z}}_{p}} {{\mathbb F}}_{p}$ for any ${{\mathbb Z}}_{p}[{G_{n}}]$-module $X$. We look at the fixed part by $B_{n}$ of the ${{\mathbb F}}_{p}[{G_{n}}]$-submodules of $\overline{T}_{(n)}:={{\mathbb F}}_{p}\big[{{}^{{G_{n}}}\!/_{{B_{n}}}}\big]$.
Let $W$ be a non-trivial ${{\mathbb F}}_{p}[{G_{n}}]$-submodule of $\overline{T}_{(n)}$. Then $W^{B_{n}} \neq 0$.
Let $W$ be a non-trivial ${{\mathbb F}}_{p}[{G_{n}}]$-submodule of $\overline{T}_{(n)}$. We will show that the only irreducible submodules of $\overline{T}_{(n)}$ are the trivial module and the Steinberg representation $$W_{st}=\bigg\{f:{{{{\mathbb P}}^{1}_{n}}}{{\rightarrow}}{{\mathbb F}}_{p}: f(C)=t_{D}\text{ for $C \supset D \in {{{{\mathbb P}}^{1}_{0}}}$ and $\sum\limits_{D}t_{D}=0$}\bigg\}$$ and these modules have non-trivial fixed part by a Borel subgroup.
We will first show these are the only irreducible ${{\mathbb F}}_{p}[{G_{n}}]$-submodules of $\overline{T}_{(n)}$. Let $W$ be an irreducible ${{\mathbb F}}_{p}[{G_{n}}]$-module and let $$W_{H}={{}^{W}\!/_{\langle (h-1)W:\text{ }h \in H\rangle}}$$ where $H \leq {G_{n}}$. We let ${B_{n}}$ be a Borel subgroup and $$\Pi_{n}=\Bigg\{\begin{pmatrix} a & b \\ 0 & 1 \end{pmatrix} \in {G_{n}}:a \equiv 1 \pmod{p} \Bigg\}.$$ This is a Sylow $p$-subgroup of ${B_{n}}$. We will look at the $n=0$ case first. Then $\Pi_{0}$ is generated by $u=(\begin{smallmatrix} 1 & 1 \\ 0 & 1 \end{smallmatrix})$. We see that $$\begin{split}
\operatorname{Hom}_{{{\mathbb F}}_{p}[{G_{0}}]}(W,\overline{T}_{(0)}) &\cong \operatorname{Hom}_{{{\mathbb F}}_{p} [B_{0}]}(W,{{\mathbb F}}_{p})\\
&\cong\operatorname{Hom}_{{{\mathbb F}}_{p}}(W_{B_{0}}
,{{\mathbb F}}_{p})\\
&\cong\operatorname{Hom}_{{{\mathbb F}}_{p}
[{{}^{B_{0}}\!/_{\Pi_{0}}}]}
(W_{\Pi_{0}},{{\mathbb F}}_{p}).
\end{split}$$ We see in [@RG11 pg. 87] that the irreducible ${{\mathbb F}}_{p}[{G_{0}}]$ representations take either the form $$\tau_{j,1}=\operatorname{Sym}^{j-1} \otimes \text{det}^{-\frac{j-1}{2}} \quad \text{or} \quad \tau_{j,2}=\tau_{j,1} \otimes \tau_{1}$$ where $\tau_{1}$ is the unique non-trivial $1$-dimensional ${{\mathbb F}}_{p}[{G_{0}}]$-representation and $j \in \{1,3,...,p\}$. We can view $\operatorname{Sym}^{j-1}$ as an ${{\mathbb F}}_{p}$-subspace of ${{\mathbb F}}_{p}[x,y]$ of degree $j-1$ homogeneous polynomials where $\operatorname{GL}_{2}({{\mathbb F}}_{p})$ acts on $\operatorname{Sym}^{j-1}$ by linear substitution. Then $$(u-1)\operatorname{Sym}^{j-1} \oplus {{\mathbb F}}_{p}y^{j-1}=\operatorname{Sym}^{j-1}.$$ Therefore if we twist by $\det^{-\frac{j-1}{2}}$, we have $\big(\operatorname{Sym}^{j-1} \otimes \text{det}^{-\frac{j-1}{2}}\big)_{\Pi_{0}} \cong {{\mathbb F}}_{p}y^{j-1} \otimes \text{det}^{-\frac{j-1}{2}}$. This means that if $W$ is an irreducible ${{\mathbb F}}_{p}[{G_{0}}]$-module, then $W$ must have the underlying representation $\tau_{j,1}$ or $\tau_{j,2}$ for $j \in \{1,3,...,p\}$. Hence $W_{\Pi_{0}}$ is a $1$-dimensional irreducible ${{\mathbb F}}_{p}[{{}^{{B_{0}}}\!/_{\Pi_{0}}}]$-module. We see that $${{}^{{B_{0}}}\!/_{\Pi_{0}}} \cong \Bigg\{\begin{pmatrix} a & 0 \\ 0 & 1 \end{pmatrix} \in {G_{0}}\Bigg\}$$ and $y^{j-1} \in \operatorname{Sym}^{j-1} \otimes \text{det}^{-\frac{j-1}{2}}$ is an eigenvector of $(\begin{smallmatrix} a & 0 \\ 0 & 1 \end{smallmatrix})$ with eigenvalue $a^{-\frac{j-1}{2}}$. We also have $$\tau_{1} \begin{pmatrix} a & 0 \\ 0 & 1 \end{pmatrix}=a^{\frac{p-1}{2}}.$$ We see from [@RG11] that ${{\mathbb F}}_{p}$ and $W_{st}$ have underlying representations $\tau_{1,1}$ and $\tau_{p,2}$ respectively. Therefore, $W_{\Pi_{0}}={{\mathbb F}}_{p} \iff W={{\mathbb F}}_{p}$ or $W=W_{st}$.
For $n \ge 1$, we see that $\operatorname{Irr}_{{{\mathbb F}}_{p}}({G_{n}})=\operatorname{Irr}_{{{\mathbb F}}_{p}}({G_{0}})$ where $\operatorname{Irr}_{{{\mathbb F}}_{p}}(G)$ are the irreducible representations for the group $G$ over ${{\mathbb F}}_{p}$. As $W$ is an irreducible ${{\mathbb F}}_{p}[{G_{n}}]$-module, then we can again view $W$ having an underlying representation isomorphic to either $\tau_{j,1}=\operatorname{Sym}^{j-1} \otimes \det^{-\frac{j-1}{2}}$ or $\tau_{j,2}=\tau_{j,1} \otimes \tau_{1}$ for $j \in \{1,3,...,p\}$. We have ${G_{n}}$ acting on it by linear substitution. We also see that $$\Pi_{n} = \Bigg\langle\begin{pmatrix} 1 & 1 \\ 0 & 1 \end{pmatrix}\Bigg\rangle \rtimes \Bigg\{\begin{pmatrix} a & 0 \\ 0 & 1 \end{pmatrix} \in {G_{n}}: a \equiv 1 \pmod{p}\Bigg\}$$ which is no longer cyclic. We therefore need to look at the action of the right hand side group on $\operatorname{Sym}^{j-1}$. Let $\overline{a}$ represent the element $(\begin{smallmatrix} a & 0 \\ 0 & 1 \end{smallmatrix}) \in \Pi_{n}$ where $a \equiv 1 \pmod{p}$. Looking at the $1$-dimensional ${{\mathbb F}}_{p}[{G_{n}}]$-representation $\det:{G_{n}}{{\rightarrow}}{{\mathbb F}}^{\times}_{p}$, we see that $\det^{-\frac{j-1}{2}}(\overline{a})=1$ as $a \equiv 1 \pmod{p}$. Also, as $\operatorname{Sym}^{j-1}$ can be viewed as degree $j-1$ homogeneous polynomials over ${{\mathbb F}}_{p}$, then $$\overline{a} \cdot x^{j-1-i}y^{i}=a^{j-1-i}x^{j-1-i}y^{i}=x^{j-1-i}y^{i}$$ as $a \equiv 1 \pmod{p}$. Therefore, this shows that $\overline{a}$ fixes $\operatorname{Sym}^{j-1} \otimes \text{det}^{-\frac{j-1}{2}}$ and so $$\big(\operatorname{Sym}^{j-1} \otimes \text{det}^{-\frac{j-1}{2}}\big)_{\Pi_{n}}=\big(\operatorname{Sym}^{j-1} \otimes \text{det}^{-\frac{j-1}{2}}\big)_{H_{n}}$$ where $H_{n} \leq {G_{n}}$ is generated by $u=(\begin{smallmatrix} 1 & 1 \\ 0 & 1 \end{smallmatrix})$. Hence we have $$\begin{split}
\operatorname{Hom}_{{{\mathbb F}}_{p}[{G_{n}}]}(W,\overline{T}_{(n)}) &\cong \operatorname{Hom}_{{{\mathbb F}}_{p}[B_{n}]}(W,{{\mathbb F}}_{p})\\
&\cong\operatorname{Hom}_{{{\mathbb F}}_{p}}(W_{B_{n}},{{\mathbb F}}_{p})\\
&\cong\operatorname{Hom}_{{{\mathbb F}}_{p}[{{}^{B_{n}}\!/_{\Pi_{n}}}]}
(W_{\Pi_{n}},{{\mathbb F}}_{p}) \\
&\cong\operatorname{Hom}_{{{\mathbb F}}_{p}[{{}^{B_{n}}\!/_{\Pi_{n}}}]}
(W_{H_{n}},{{\mathbb F}}_{p}). \\
\end{split}$$ We see that if $\overline{a}$ is a representative of a coset in ${{}^{{B_{n}}}\!/_{\Pi_{n}}}$, the representation underlying $\operatorname{Sym}^{j-1} \otimes \text{det}^{-\frac{j-1}{2}}$ maps $\overline{a}$ to $a^{-\frac{j-1}{2}}$ and the representation underlying $\big(\operatorname{Sym}^{j-1} \otimes \text{det}^{-\frac{j-1}{2}}\big) \otimes \tau_{1}$ maps $\overline{a}$ to $a^{\frac{p-j}{2}}$. Hence for $W_{H_{n}}={{\mathbb F}}_{p}$, we need $j=1$ in the first case or $j=p$ in the second, so $W$ is either ${{\mathbb F}}_{p}$ or $W_{st}$.
We finally need to show these irreducible modules have non-trivial fixed part by a Borel subgroup. The trivial ${{\mathbb F}}_{p}[{G_{n}}]$-module has ${G_{n}}$ acting trivially on it and hence so does every Borel subgroup. Also, for a fixed element of ${{{{\mathbb P}}^{1}_{0}}}$, denoted $D_{0}$, then a Borel subgroup acts transitively on the set of $C \not\supset D_{0}$ for $C \in {{{{\mathbb P}}^{1}_{n}}}$. As the number of all elements $C \not\supset D_{0}$ is divisible by $p$, then the fixed part of $W_{st}$ by a Borel subgroup contains the function $f$ such that $$\ f(C)= \left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
1 & \text{if $C \not\supset D_{0}$},\\
0 & \text{otherwise},
\end{array}
\right.$$ and hence is non-trivial.
Therefore, if $U$ is a ${{\mathbb Z}}_{p}[{G_{n}}]$-lattice inside $\frac{1}{p}T_{n}$ containing $T_{n}$ with $U^{{B_{n}}}=T_{n}^{{B_{n}}}$, then we know that $({{}^{U}\!/_{T_{n}}})^{{B_{n}}}=0$. Hence by we have ${{}^{U}\!/_{T_{n}}}=0$ meaning $U \cong T_{n}$.
We now look at the ${{\mathbb Z}}_{p}[{G_{n}}]$-lattices containing $T_{n}$ that are contained in $\frac{1}{p^{k}}T_{n}$ for some $k \ge 1$. We would like to see when these lattices have non-trivial fixed part by a Borel subgroup.
Let $W$ be a non-trivial ${{\mathbb Z}}/p^{k}{{\mathbb Z}}[{G_{n}}]$-module contained in ${{}^{T_{(n)}}\!/_{p^{k}T_{(n)}}}$ for $k \ge 1$. Then $W^{B_{n}} \neq 0$.
We do this by induction. The $k=1$ case is so assume this is true for $k$. We have a short exact sequence $$0 {{\rightarrow}}\overline{T}_{(n)} {{\rightarrow}}{{}^{T_{(n)}}\!/_{p^{k+1}T_{(n)}}} {{\rightarrow}}{{}^{T_{(n)}}\!/_{p^{k}T_{(n)}}}{{\rightarrow}}0$$ so we can view $\overline{T}_{(n)}$ as a ${{\mathbb Z}}/p^{k+1}{{\mathbb Z}}[{G_{n}}]$-submodule of ${{}^{T_{(n)}}\!/_{p^{k+1}T_{(n)}}}.$ Let $W$ be a non-trivial ${{\mathbb Z}}/p^{k+1}{{\mathbb Z}}[{G_{n}}]$-module contained in ${{}^{T_{(n)}}\!/_{p^{k+1}T_{(n)}}}$. If $W \cap \overline{T}_{(n)} \neq 0$, then $W$ contains an irreducible ${{\mathbb F}}_{p}[{G_{n}}]$-module $U$ such that $U^{B_{n}} \neq 0$ by . Hence we can assume $W \cap \overline{T}_{(n)}=0$. Then by the second isomorphism theorem, we have $$\frac{W+\overline{T}_{(n)}}{\overline{T}_{(n)}}\cong \frac{W}{W \cap \overline{T}_{(n)}} \cong W.$$ Hence $$W \cong \frac{W+\overline{T}_{(n)}}{\overline{T}_{(n)}} \leq \frac{{{}^{T_{(n)}}\!/_{p^{k+1}T_{(n)}}}}{\overline{T}_{(n)}} \cong {{}^{T_{(n)}}\!/_{p^{k}T_{(n)}}}.$$ As $W \neq 0$, then by induction, $W^{B_{n}} \neq 0$.
Therefore we can prove the following.
Let $U$ be a ${{\mathbb Z}}_{p}[{G_{n}}]$-lattice of $V_{n}$ such that $U^{B_{n}}=T_{n}^{B_{n}}$. Then $U \cong T_{n}$.
We see there exists a $k \ge 1$ such that $U \subseteq \frac{1}{p^{k}}T_{n}$. As $U^{{B_{n}}}=T_{n}^{{B_{n}}}$, then we have seen that $({{}^{U}\!/_{T_{n}}})^{{B_{n}}}=0$. Therefore by , $U \cong T_{n}$.
HIGHER MODULAR POINTS
=====================
We now investigate the properties of higher modular points and their relationship with the representation theory we have looked at in the previous section. Let $E/{{\mathbb Q}}$ and $A/{{\mathbb Q}}$ be elliptic curves of conductor $N_{E}$ and $N_{A}$ respectively and $D$ a cyclic subgroup of $A$. We then take the isogenous curve $A/D$ and a cyclic subgroup of order $N_{E}$ in this isogenous curve. We look at two cases of these higher modular points.
MULTIPLICATIVE CASE
-------------------
Let $E/{{\mathbb Q}}$ be an elliptic curve of conductor $N_{E}$ and let $p$ be a prime of multiplicative reduction. We let $N_{E}=pM$ and define $F_{n}:=K_{p^{n+1}M}$ for all $n \ge -1$ with $F:=F_{-1}$. We can view ${\Delta_{n}}=\operatorname{Gal}(F_{n}/F)$ as a subgroup of ${G_{n}}$.
Let $B \leq A$ be cyclic of order $M$. Let $n \ge 0$ and $D \leq A$ be a cyclic subgroup of order $p^{n+1}$. Let $C=D[p] \oplus B$ which is a cyclic subgroup of order $N_{E}$ and let $\psi:A {{\rightarrow}}A/D$ be the isogeny associated with $D$ with dual $\hat{\psi}$. We define $$C'=\ker(\hat{\psi})[p] \oplus \psi(B).$$ This is a cyclic subgroup of $A/D$ of order $N_{E}$. We then define $y_{A,D}=(A/D,C') \in X_{0}(N_{E})$. We define a higher modular point above $P_{A,C}$ as the point $Q_{A,D}=\phi_{E}(y_{A,D}) \in E(F_{n}).$
When $n=0$, we see from above that we have $y_{A,D}=w_{p}(x_{A,C})$ where $w_{p}$ is the Atkin-Lehner involution on $X_{0}(N_{E})$. Therefore, we have $Q_{A,D}=-a_{p}(E) \cdot P_{A,C} +T$ for some $T \in E({{\mathbb Q}})[2]$ and $a_{p}(E) \in \{\pm 1\}$ is the Hecke eigenvalue of the newform $f$ attached to $E$.
Let $D \leq A$ be cyclic of order $p^{n+1}$. Let $T_{p}$ be the Hecke operator $T_{p}$ on $J_{0}(N_{E})$. Then $$T_{p}((y_{A,D})-(\infty))=\sum\limits_{D' \supset D}((y_{A,D'})-(\infty))$$ where the sum runs over all cyclic subgroups $D'$ of order $p^{n+2}$ in $A$. This then leads to the trace relation $$a_{p}(E) \cdot Q_{A,D}=\sum\limits_{D'\supset D}Q_{A,D'}.$$ Hence, by induction, if $P_{A,C}$ is of infinite order then so is $Q_{A,D}$. In particular, if $P_{A,C} \notin p \cdot E(F_{0})$ then $Q_{A,D} \notin p \cdot E(F_{n})$.
Fix a cyclic subgroup $B$ of $A$ of order $M$ and let $n \ge 0$. Then $\sum\limits_{D}Q_{A,D}$ is a torsion point in $E(F)$ where the sum is over all cyclic subgroups $D$ of $A$ of order $p^{n+1}$ such that $D[p] \oplus B$ is a cyclic subgroup of $A$ of order $N_{E}$.
This is proven identically to [@CW09 Lemma 19]. If we fix a cyclic subgroup $B$ of order $M$ in $A$, then we have a ${\Delta_{n}}$-morphism $$V_{n} {{\rightarrow}}E(F_{n}) \otimes {{\mathbb Q}}_{p}$$$$e_{D} \mapsto Q_{A,D}$$ where $e_{D}$ is the characteristic function on $D$. If we then assume that $\tau_{F,A,p}$ is surjective, then we have ${\Delta_{n}}\cong {G_{n}}$.
Let $E/{{\mathbb Q}}$ and $A/{{\mathbb Q}}$ be elliptic curves of conductor $N_{E}$ and $N_{A}$ respectively. Let $p$ be a prime of multiplicative reduction of $E$ and let $P_{A,C} \in E(F_{0})$ have infinite order. Suppose $\tau_{F,A,p}$ is surjective. Then all higher modular points $Q_{A,D}$ above $P_{A,C}$ are of infinite order and generate a group of rank $p^{n+1}+p^{n}-1$ in $E(F_{n}) \otimes {{\mathbb Q}}_{p}$.
GOOD CASE
---------
Let $p$ be a prime of good reduction for $E$. We define $F_{n}:=K_{p^{n+1}N_{E}}$ where $F:=F_{-1}$ is a number field such that $P_{A,C}$ is of infinite order in $E(F)$. Hence, we can view ${\Delta_{n}}=\operatorname{Gal}(F_{n}/F)$ as a subgroup of ${G_{n}}$.
For $n \ge 0$, we let $D$ be a cyclic subgroup of $A$ of order $p^{n+1}$ and then we can construct the higher modular points. We let $\psi:A {{\rightarrow}}A/D$ be the isogeny associated to $D$. Then we have $y_{A,D}=(A/D,\psi(C)) \in X_{0}(N_{E}).$ We then define the higher modular point above $P_{A,C}$ as $Q_{A,D}=\phi_{E}(y_{A,D}) \in E(F_{n})$.
As before, if we use the Hecke operator $T_{p}$, we obtain the trace relation $$a_{p}(E) \cdot Q_{A,D}=\sum\limits_{D' \supset D}Q_{A,D'}$$ for all $n \ge 0$ and $D$ as defined before. Here, the sum runs over all cyclic subgroups $D'$ of order $p^{n+2}$. Hence, this means that we have $$a_{p}(E) \cdot P_{A,C}=\sum\limits_{D}Q_{A,D}$$ where the sum runs over all cyclic subgroups of order $p$. Therefore, as $P_{A,C}$ is of infinite order in $E(F)$, then for all cyclic subgroups $D$ of order $p^{n+1}$ and all $n \ge 0$, $Q_{A,D}$ is of infinite order in $E(F_{n})$.
Therefore, we can define a ${\Delta_{n}}$-morphism $$V_{(n)} {{\rightarrow}}E(F_{n}) \otimes {{\mathbb Q}}_{p}$$$$e_{D} \mapsto Q_{A,D}.$$ If we then assume that $\tau_{F,A,p}$ is surjective, then we have ${\Delta_{n}}\cong {G_{n}}$.
Let $E/{{\mathbb Q}}$ and $A/{{\mathbb Q}}$ be elliptic curves of conductor $N_{E}$ and $N_{A}$ respectively. Let $p$ be a prime of good ordinary reduction of $E$ ensuring $a_{p}(E) \neq 0$ and let $P_{A,C} \in E(F)$ have infinite order. Suppose $\tau_{F,A,p}$ is surjective. Then all higher modular points $Q_{A,D}$ above $P_{A,C}$ are of infinite order and generate a group of rank $p^{n+1}+p^{n}$ in $E(F_{n}) \otimes {{\mathbb Q}}_{p}$.
DERIVATIVES
===========
Let $E/{{\mathbb Q}}$ and $A/{{\mathbb Q}}$ be elliptic curves of conductors $N_{E}$ and $N_{A}$ respectively. Let $p$ be a prime of good ordinary or multiplicative reduction with respect to $E$. We assume that $\tau_{F,A,p}$ is surjective. Hence, if we let $F_{n}$ be the smallest field extension of $F$ such that ${\Delta_{n}}:=\operatorname{Gal}(F_{n}/F)$ acts as scalars on $E[p^{n+1}]$, then we have ${\Delta_{n}}\cong {G_{n}}$.
We define $A_{n}$ to be a non-split Cartan subgroup of ${G_{n}}$. This is a cyclic subgroup of order $p^{n+1}+p^{n}$. We then let $L_{n}$ be the subfield of $F_{n}$ fixed by $A_{n}$.
Let $p>2$ be a prime. Let $E/{{\mathbb Q}}$ and $A/{{\mathbb Q}}$ be elliptic curves of conductor $N_{E}$ and $N_{A}$ respectively and let $F$ be as defined above. Assume that:
1. $A$ does not have potentially good supersingular reduction for any prime of additive reduction,
2. $E$ has either split multiplicative reduction at $p$ with $p \nmid \operatorname{ord}_{p}(\Delta_{E})$, non-split multiplicative reduction at $p$ or good ordinary non-anomalous reduction at $p$,
3. The degree of any isogeny of $A$ defined over ${{\mathbb Q}}$ is coprime to $N_{E}$,
4. $\tau_{F,A,p}$ is surjective,
5. $\overline{\rho}_{{{\mathbb Q}},E,p}$ is surjective,
6. Any prime $\ell$ of bad reduction of $E$ and good reduction of $A$ such that $\ell \neq p$ has $a_{\ell}(A)^{2}-4\ell$ square modulo $p$.
Then there exists an element of order $p^{n}$ in $\operatorname{Sel}^{p^{n}}(E/L_{n})$.
We show that the elements in the Selmer groups in the above theorem originate from non-trivial elements in $\Sh(E/L_{n})[p^{n}]$. In order to show this, we need to look at the splitting of primes in the field extension $F_{n}/L_{n}$.
[@CW09 Lemma 25] $A_{n}$ intersects trivially with any Borel subgroup in ${G_{n}}$.
This then implies that any generator of $A_{n}$ acts transitively on ${{{{\mathbb P}}^{1}_{n}}}$. We want to prove the following.
Suppose none of the primes of additive reduction for $A$ are potentially good supersingular. Then the extension $F_{n}/L_{n}$ is nowhere ramified. Furthermore, all places above $\infty$, $p$ and $N_{A}$ split completely in the extension as well as all places above a prime $\ell$ dividing $N_{E}$ but not $p$ or $N_{A}$ such that $a_{\ell}(A)^{2}-4\ell$ is a square modulo $p$.
We will first need the following lemma.
[@CW09 Lemma 26] Let $\nu$ be either a place of ordinary reduction above $p$, an infinite place or a place of potentially multiplicative reduction all with respect to $A$. Then the image of $\overline{\tau}_{F_{\nu},A,p^{n+1}}$ lies in a Borel subgroup of ${G_{n}}$.
Therefore, we now need to look at the places of $F$ of bad reduction with respect to $E$ such that they are not above $p$ or $N_{A}$. Let $\nu$ be such a place. Then the Frobenius element $\operatorname{Fr}_{\nu}$ of ${\Delta_{n}}$ generates the decomposition group.
Let $A_{\nu}$ be the reduced elliptic curve at $\nu$ and $R_{\nu}$ the subring of $\operatorname{End}(A_{\nu})$ generated by the Frobenius endomorphism. We define $$u_{\nu}:=\operatorname{disc}(R_{\nu}), \qquad \delta_{\nu}:=0,1\text{ depending on when }u_{\nu}\equiv 0,1 \pmod{4},$$ and $b_{\nu}$ the unique positive integer such that $u_{\nu}b_{\nu}^{2}=a_{\nu}(A)^{2}-4q_{\nu}$. We then associate to $\nu$ the integral matrix $$M_{\nu}=\begin{pmatrix} \frac{a_{\nu}(A)+b_{\nu}\delta_{\nu}}{2} & b_{\nu} \\ \frac{b_{\nu}(u_{\nu}-\delta_{\nu})}{4} & \frac{a_{\nu}(A)-b_{\nu}\delta_{\nu}}{2} \end{pmatrix}.$$
[@DT02 Theorem 2.1] Let $A$ be an elliptic curve over $F$. Let $\nu$ be a place of $F$ of good reduction for $A$ such that $\nu \nmid p$. Then $\nu$ is unramified in $F(A[p^{n+1}])$ and the integral matrix $M_{\nu},$ when reduced modulo $p^{n+1}$, represents the conjugacy class of the Frobenius of $\nu$ in $\operatorname{Gal}(F(A[p^{n+1}])/F)$.
Thus, we want to see when $M_{\nu}$ reduced modulo $p^{n+1}$ lies in a Borel subgroup. To do this, we look at the conjugacy classes of $M_{\nu}$ in $\operatorname{GL}_{2}({{\mathbb Z}}/p^{n+1}{{\mathbb Z}})$.
A matrix $A \in \operatorname{GL}_{2}({{\mathbb Z}}/p^{n+1}{{\mathbb Z}})$ is *cyclic* if $A$ is not a scalar matrix modulo any power of $p$.
Using this we are able to write each matrix of $\operatorname{GL}_{2}({{\mathbb Z}}/p^{n+1}{{\mathbb Z}})$ in a specific form.
[@AOPV09 Lemma 2.1] Let $X \in \operatorname{GL}_{2}({{\mathbb Z}}/p^{n+1}{{\mathbb Z}}).$ Then $X$ is either cyclic or can be written in the form $dI_{2}+p^{j}\beta$ for some $1 \leq j \leq n+1$ such that $d \in ({{\mathbb Z}}/p^{n+1}{{\mathbb Z}})^{\times}$ and $\beta \in \operatorname{M}_{2}({{\mathbb Z}}/p^{n+1-j}{{\mathbb Z}})$ cyclic.
Then we can find a representative of the conjugacy class each matrix in $\operatorname{GL}_{2}({{\mathbb Z}}/p^{n+1}{{\mathbb Z}})$ lies in.
[@AOPV09 Theorem 2.2] Let $A \in \operatorname{GL}_{2}({{\mathbb Z}}/p^{n+1}{{\mathbb Z}})$ be of the form $dI_{2}+p^{j}\beta$. Then $A$ is conjugate to $$\begin{pmatrix} d & p^{j} \\ -p^{j} \cdot \det(\beta) & d+p^{j} \cdot \operatorname{tr}(\beta) \end{pmatrix}.$$
We can use this form on $M_{\nu}$ to prove the following.
If $a_{\nu}(A)^{2}-4q_{\nu}$ is a square modulo $p$ then $M_{\nu}$ reduced modulo $p^{n+1}$ lies in a Borel subgroup of $\operatorname{GL}_{2}({{\mathbb Z}}/p^{n+1}{{\mathbb Z}})$.
First assume $(b_{\nu},p)=1$. Then $M_{\nu}$ is conjugate to $$\begin{pmatrix} 0 & 1 \\ -q_{\nu} & a_{\nu}(A) \end{pmatrix}.$$ This matrix lies in a Borel subgroup if $a_{\nu}(A)^{2}-4q_{\nu}$ is a square modulo $p$.
If $b_{\nu}=p^{j}t$ for some $j \ge 1$ and $(t,p)=1$ then as $\det(M_{\nu})=q_{\nu}$ is not divisible by $p$ then neither is $a_{\nu}(A)$. Therefore, $M_{\nu}$ is conjugate to $$\begin{pmatrix} \frac{a_{\nu}(A)}{2} & p^{j} \\[4pt] \frac{p^{j}t^{2}u_{\nu}}{4} & \frac{a_{\nu}(A)}{2} \end{pmatrix}.$$ This matrix lies in a Borel subgroup if $u_{\nu}$ is a square modulo $p$. But as $u_{\nu}b_{\nu}^{2}=a_{\nu}(A)^{2}-4q_{\nu}$, this is true if $a_{\nu}(A)^{2}-4q_{\nu}$ is a square mod $p$.
We would like to find conditions for $a_{\nu}(A)^{2}-4q_{\nu}$ to be a square modulo $p$. We let $\ell$ be a prime of good reduction with respect to $A$. Then the arithmetic Frobenius $\operatorname{Fr}_{\ell}$ has characteristic polynomial $x^{2}-a_{\ell}(A)x+\ell$ with roots $\alpha$ and $\beta$. Then we obtain $a_{\ell^{n}}(A)=\alpha^{n}+\beta^{n}$ and $\ell^{n}=\alpha^{n}\beta^{n}$ for $n \ge 1$.
Let $A/{{\mathbb Q}}$ be an elliptic curve and $p$ a prime. Let $\ell$ be a prime of good reduction with respect to $A$ such that $\ell \neq p$. Then for all $n\ge 1$ $$a_{\ell}(A)-4\ell\text{ is a square mod $p$ if and only if $a_{\ell^{n}}(A)-4\ell^{n}$ is a square mod $p$.}$$
The proof will follow later. From now on, we let $t_{n}:=\operatorname{tr}(\operatorname{Fr}_{\ell}^{n})$.
We have $t_{n}=t_{1}t_{n-1}-\ell t_{n-2}$ for $n \ge 3$.
For $n\ge 3$, we have $$t_{n}=\alpha^{n}+\beta^{n}=(\alpha+\beta)(\alpha^{n-1}+\beta^{n-1})-\alpha\beta(\alpha^{n-2}+\beta^{n-2})=t_{1}t_{n-1}-\ell t_{n-2}$$ which gives our formula.
We will first look at the cases where $n$ is odd.
For all $n \ge 0$ $$t_{2n+1}^{2}-4\ell ^{2n+1}=(t_{1}^{2}-4\ell)\Bigg((1-2n)\ell^{n}+\sum\limits_{j=1}^{n}\ell^{n-j}t_{j}^{2}\Bigg)^{2}.$$
Let $\alpha$ and $\beta$ be as before. Then we have $$t_{2n+1}^{2}-4\ell^{2n+1}=(\alpha^{2n+1}-\beta^{2n+1})^{2}$$ and $t_{1}^{2}-4\ell=(\alpha-\beta)^{2}$. Therefore we have $$\begin{split}
\alpha^{2n+1}-\beta^{2n+1} &=(\alpha-\beta)\Bigg(\sum\limits^{2n}_{j=0}
\alpha^{j}\beta^{2n-j}\Bigg) \\
&=(\alpha-\beta)\Bigg(\alpha^{n}\beta^{n}
+\sum\limits^{n}_{j=1}
\alpha^{n+j}\beta^{n-j}+\alpha^{n-j}
\beta^{n+j}\Bigg)\\
&=(\alpha-\beta)\Bigg((1-2n)\alpha^{n}\beta^{n}
+\sum\limits^{n}_{j=1}
(\alpha^{n+j}\beta^{n-j}
+2\alpha^{n}\beta^{n}+\alpha^{n-j}
\beta^{n+j})\Bigg)\\
&=(\alpha-\beta)\Bigg((1-2n)\alpha^{n}\beta^{n}
+\sum\limits^{n}_{j=1}
\alpha^{n-j}\beta^{n-j}
(\alpha^{j}+ \beta^{j})^{2}\Bigg)\\
&=(\alpha-\beta)\Bigg((1-2n)\ell^{n}
+\sum\limits^{n}_{j=1}
\ell^{n-j}t_{j}^{2}\Bigg)\\
\end{split}$$ Squaring both sides gives the equation.
We then just need to check the case for $n$ even. We first need the following lemma.
For all $n \ge 1$, we have $t_{2n}=t_{n}^{2}-2\ell^{n}$.
Let $\alpha$ and $\beta$ be as above. Then we have $$t_{2n}=\alpha^{2n}+\beta^{2n}=(\alpha^{n}+\beta^{n})^{2}-2\alpha^{n}\beta^{n}
=t_{n}^{2}-2\ell^{n}. \qedhere$$
We see from that if $n$ is odd, this is true. If $n$ is even, then we can show by induction and that if $n=2^{r}m$ with $m$ odd then $$t_{n}^{2}-4\ell^{n}=(t_{m}^{2}-4\ell^{m})\Bigg(\prod_{j=0}^{r-1}t_{2^{j}m}
\Bigg)^{2}. \qedhere$$
As $F_{n} \subset F(A[p^{\infty}])$, then it is unramified outside $\infty$, $p$ and $N_{A}$. We see by that the decomposition group of a place in $F$ dividing $\infty \cdot p \cdot N_{A}$ inside ${\Delta_{n}}$ is contained in a Borel. Furthermore, by and , the decomposition group of a place $\nu$ in $F$ dividing $N_{E}$ but not $p$ or $N_{A}$ such that $a_{\nu}(A)^{2}-4q_{\nu}$ is a square modulo $p$ inside $\Delta_{n}$ is contained in a Borel. Since any Borel intersects trivially with $A_{n}$ then these places must split completely in $F_{n}/L_{n}$.
We have an injection $$\mu:V_{n} {{\rightarrow}}E(F_{n}) \otimes {{\mathbb Q}}_{p}$$$$f \mapsto \sum\limits_{D}f(D) \cdot Q_{A,D}$$ where $Q_{A,D}$ are the higher modular points. Let $$S_{n}=\{P \in E(F_{n}):\text{ there exists a $k \ge 0$ such that $p^{k} \cdot P \in {{\mathbb Z}}_{p} G_{n} \cdot Q_{A,D}$}\}$$ be the saturated group generated by the higher modular points in $E(F_{n})$. This group contains all torsion points in $E(F_{n})$ and there exists a short exact sequence $$0{{\rightarrow}}E(F_{n})_{\text{tors}} {{\rightarrow}}S_{n} {{\rightarrow}}U_{n} {{\rightarrow}}0$$ where $U_{n}$ can be identified as a $G_{n}$-stable lattice in the image of $\mu$ which has no $A_{n}$-fixed elements. As seen in the proof of [@CW09 Theorem 24], if $E(F_{n})[p]=0$, we have $$|\operatorname{H}^{1}(A_{n},S_{n})|=|\operatorname{H}^{1}(A_{n},U_{n})|=p^{n}.$$ However, we have the following.
If $\overline{\rho}_{{{\mathbb Q}},E,p}$ is surjective then for all $n \ge 0 $, $E(F_{n})[p]=0$.
Let $K_{n}=F_{n} \cap {{\mathbb Q}}(E[p])$ and let $H=\operatorname{Gal}({{\mathbb Q}}(E[p])/K_{n}) \trianglelefteq \operatorname{GL}_{2}({{\mathbb F}}_{p})$. If $p \ge 5$, then either $H \supseteq \operatorname{SL}_{2}({{\mathbb F}}_{p})$ or $H \subseteq Z_{p}$ and if $p=3$, then either $H \supseteq \operatorname{SL}_{2}({{\mathbb F}}_{3})$, $H \subseteq Z_{3}$ or $H=Q_{8} \subset \operatorname{SL}_{2}({{\mathbb F}}_{3})$ by [@EA57 Theorem 4.9] where $Q_{8}$ is a quarternion group.
Let $\nu$ be a place of $F_{n}$ above $p$. As $p$ is a prime of good ordinary or multiplicative reduction with respect to $E$, if we let $I_{\nu}$ be the inertia subgroup of $G_{F_{n}}$ then $\overline{\rho}_{F_{n},E,p}(I_{\nu})$ contains the set of matrices of the form $(\begin{smallmatrix} * & 0 \\ 0 & 1 \end{smallmatrix})$. Therefore $H$ contains this set and so $H \supseteq \operatorname{SL}_{2}({{\mathbb F}}_{p})$. But then the mapping $\det:H {{\rightarrow}}{{\mathbb F}}_{p}^{\times}$ is surjective and has kernel $\operatorname{SL}_{2}({{\mathbb F}}_{p})$ meaning $H=\operatorname{GL}_{2}({{\mathbb F}}_{p})$. Therefore we must have $H=\operatorname{GL}_{2}({{\mathbb F}}_{p})$ and so $K_{n}={{\mathbb Q}}$. As $E({{\mathbb Q}})[p]=0$ then this means $E(F_{n})[p]=0$.
If we consider the natural inclusion of $S_{n}$ in $E(F_{n})$, then the cokernel $Y_{n}$ is a free ${{\mathbb Z}}$-module and we obtain a long exact sequence $$0 {{\rightarrow}}E(L_{n})_{\text{tors}} {{\rightarrow}}E(L_{n}) {{\rightarrow}}Y_{n}^{A_{n}} {{\rightarrow}}\operatorname{H}^{1}(A_{n},S_{n}) {{\rightarrow}}\operatorname{H}^{1}(A_{n},E(F_{n}))$$ where $Y_{n}^{A_{n}}$ has the same rank as $E(L_{n})$.
If we compose the last map with the inflation map we obtain $$\delta_{n}:\operatorname{H}^{1}(A_{n},S_{n}) {{\rightarrow}}\operatorname{H}^{1}(L_{n},E)$$ known as the derivation map. In particular, we have $$\Bigg(\frac{S_{n}}{p^{n}S_{n}}\Bigg)^{A_{n}} \cong \operatorname{H}^{1}(A_{n},S_{n}).$$ We thus call the image of $\delta_{n}$ the *derived classes of higher modular points.*
The image of $\delta_{n}$ is contained in $\Sh(E/L_{n})$.
We let $\eta$ be a lift of an element in the image of $\delta_{n}$ in the map $$\operatorname{H}^{1}(L_{n},E[m]) {{\rightarrow}}\operatorname{H}^{1}(L_{n},E)[m]$$ for a sufficiently large $m$. The extension $F_{n}/L_{n}$ is unramified at a place $\nu$ outside the set of places in $L_{n}$ above $N_{E}$, $p$ or $\infty$ and so the restriction of $\eta$ to $\operatorname{H}^{1}(L_{n,\nu},E[m])$ will lie in $\operatorname{H}^{1}_{f}(L_{n,\nu},E[m])$.
If $\nu$ is a place of $L_{n}$ lying above $\infty$, $p$ or $N_{A}$ or is a place that lies above $N_{E}$ but not above $\infty,$ $p$ or $N_{A}$, then shows that $\nu$ splits completely in the extension $F_{n}/L_{n}$. Then the restriction of $\eta$ to $\operatorname{H}^{1}(L_{n,\nu},E)[m]$ is trivial as it comes from the inflation $$\operatorname{H}^{1}(F_{n}/L_{n},E(F_{n})) {{\rightarrow}}\operatorname{H}^{1}(L_{n},E).$$ Hence, $\eta$ belongs to $\operatorname{Sel}^{m}(E/L_{n})$.
We therefore have the map $$\delta_{n}:\operatorname{H}^{1}(A_{n},S_{n}) {{\rightarrow}}\Sh(E/L_{n}).$$ However, if $Q_{A,D} \notin p \cdot E(F_{n})$ then $S_{n}^{B_{n}}=T_{n}^{B_{n}}$. Therefore $S_{n}\cong T_{n}$ by . Hence we can look at the cohomology with respect to the standard ${{\mathbb Z}}_{p}[{\Delta_{n}}]$-lattice in $V_{n}$.
We have $\operatorname{H}^{1}(A_{n},T_{n})={{\mathbb Z}}/p^{n}{{\mathbb Z}}$.
Identical to the proof of [@CW09 Lemma 28] which looks at ${{\mathbb Z}}[\Delta_{n}]$-modules.
We thus have two options. Firstly, if $\delta_{n}$ is not injective, then from the long exact sequence we must have the rank of $Y_{n}^{A_{n}}$ positive and hence so must $E(L_{n})$. Then $E(L_{n})$ will contribute a copy of ${{\mathbb Z}}/p^{n}{{\mathbb Z}}$ in $\operatorname{Sel}^{p^{n}}(E/L_{n})$ as $E(L_{n})[p^{n}]=0$.
If $\delta_{n}$ is injective, then $\Sh(E/L_{n})[p^{n}]$ must contain a cyclic subgroup of order $p^{n}$. Therefore, $\operatorname{Sel}^{p^{n}}(E/L_{n})$ must contain an element of order $p^{n}$ by lifting the image of $\delta_{n}$ from $\Sh(E/L_{n})[p^{n}]$.
We can look further at by taking semistable $A/{{\mathbb Q}}$ and assuming $\overline{\rho}_{{{\mathbb Q}},A,p}$ is surjective. We will require the following.
If we let $A/{{\mathbb Q}}$ be semistable and $\overline{\rho}_{{{\mathbb Q}},A,p}$ be surjective, then $\tau_{F,A,p}$ is surjective.
Let $K={{\mathbb Q}}(A[p]) \cap F$ and $H=\operatorname{Gal}({{\mathbb Q}}(A[p])/K) \trianglelefteq \operatorname{GL}_{2}({{\mathbb F}}_{p})$. As $A$ is semistable, all primes of $F$ lying above $p$ are of good or multiplicative reduction. Let $\nu$ be a place of $F$ above $p$ and $I_{\nu}$ be the inertia subgroup of $G_{F}$. Then by [@JPS72], $\overline{\rho}_{F,A,p}(I_{\nu})$ either contains the set $\{(\begin{smallmatrix} * & 0 \\ 0 & 1 \end{smallmatrix})\}$ or a non-split Cartan subgroup of $\operatorname{GL}_{2}({{\mathbb F}}_{p})$ depending on whether $\nu$ is a place of good ordinary or multiplicative reduction for the first case and good supersingular reduction in the second.
The first case gives $H=\operatorname{GL}_{2}({{\mathbb F}}_{p})$ as seen in the proof of . For the good supersingular reduction case, [@EA57 Theorem 4.9] shows that $H \supseteq \operatorname{SL}_{2}({{\mathbb F}}_{p})$ or $H \subseteq Z_{p}$ for $p>3$ and also $H$ could be the quarternion group $Q_{8}$ if $p=3$. Therefore as a non-split Cartan subgroup has order $p^{2}-1$, then for all $p \ge 3$, we have $H \supseteq \operatorname{SL}_{2}({{\mathbb F}}_{p})$. However, $\det:H {{\rightarrow}}{{\mathbb F}}_{p}^{\times}$ is surjective as $H$ contains a non-split Cartan subgroup giving $H=\operatorname{GL}_{2}({{\mathbb F}}_{p})$.
Therefore $H \cong \operatorname{Gal}(F(A[p])/F)$ meaning $\overline{\rho}_{F,A,p}$ is surjective. But $A$ is semistable which implies $\rho_{F,A,p}$ is surjective and hence $\tau_{F,A,p}$ is also.
Therefore when $A/{{\mathbb Q}}$ is semistable, we can reduce to the following.
Let $p>2$ be a prime. Let $E/{{\mathbb Q}}$ and $A/{{\mathbb Q}}$ be elliptic curves of conductor $N_{E}$ and $N_{A}$ respectively. Let $$\ F:= \left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
K_{N_{E}} & \text{if $p\nmid N_{E}$},\\
K_{\frac{N_{E}}{p}} & \text{if $p || N_{E}$}.
\end{array}
\right.$$ Assume that:
1. $A$ is semistable,
2. $E$ has either split multiplicative reduction at $p$ with $p \nmid \operatorname{ord}_{p}(\Delta_{E})$, non-split multiplicative reduction at $p$ or good ordinary non-anomalous reduction at $p$,
3. The degree of any isogeny of $A$ defined over ${{\mathbb Q}}$ is coprime to $N_{E}$,
4. $\overline{\rho}_{{{\mathbb Q}},A,p}$ is surjective,
5. $\overline{\rho}_{{{\mathbb Q}},E,p}$ is surjective,
6. Any prime $\ell$ of bad reduction of $E$ and good reduction of $A$ such that $\ell \neq p$ has $a_{\ell}(A)^{2}-4\ell$ square modulo $p$.
Then there exists an element of order $p^{n}$ in $\operatorname{Sel}^{p^{n}}(E/L_{n})$.
EXAMPLES
========
We now look at applying to a few examples. For information on specific elliptic curves, we obtained our data from [@lmfdb].
Let $$E:y^{2}+y=x^{3}-x^{2}-x-2$$ be the elliptic curve with Cremona label $143a1$ and $$A:y^{2}+y=x^{3}+x^{2}+9x+1$$ be the elliptic curve with Cremona label $35a1$. Then if we let $p=7$, then this is a prime of good ordinary non-anomalous reduction for $E$. We see that the only ${{\mathbb Q}}$-isogeny on $A$ is of degree $3$, which is coprime to $N_{E}$ and both $\overline{\rho}_{{{\mathbb Q}},A,7}$ and $\overline{\rho}_{{{\mathbb Q}},E,7}$ are surjective. Also, $$\begin{split}
a_{11}(A)^{2}-4 \cdot 11=-35 \equiv 0 \pmod{7}\\
a_{13}(A)^{2}-4 \cdot 13=-27 \equiv 1 \pmod{7}
\end{split}$$ which are both squares modulo $7$. Therefore by , there exists an element of order $7^{n}$ in $\operatorname{Sel}^{7^{n}}(E/L_{n})$ for all $n \ge 1$.
We also see that $E$ doesn’t necessarily have to be a semistable elliptic curve.
Let $$E:y^{2}+xy=x^{3}−x^{2}−5$$ be the elliptic curve with Cremona label $45a1$ and $$A:y^{2}+xy=x^{3}+x$$ be the elliptic curve with Cremona label $21a4$. Then if we let $p=5$, then this is a prime of non-split multiplicative reduction for $E$. We see that the only ${{\mathbb Q}}$-isogeny on $A$ is of degree $2$, $4$ or $8$, which are coprime to $N_{E}$ and both $\overline{\rho}_{{{\mathbb Q}},A,5}$ and $\overline{\rho}_{{{\mathbb Q}},E,5}$ are surjective. Also, $$a_{3}(A)^{2}-4 \cdot 3= -11 \equiv 4 \pmod{5}$$ which is a square modulo $5$. Therefore by , there exists an element of order $5^{n}$ in $\operatorname{Sel}^{5^{n}}(E/L_{n})$ for all $n \ge 1$.
Depending on the curves $E$ and $A$, we can vary the prime $p$ if it is of good ordinary non-anomalous reduction for $E$.
Let $$E:y^{2}+xy=x^{3}−3x+1$$ be the elliptic curve with Cremona label $34a1$ and $$A:y^{2}+y=x^{3}+x^{2}−3x+1$$ be the elliptic curve with Cremona label $37b3$. We know by [@BM72 Lemma 8.18] that $3$ is the only prime of good anomalous reduction for $E$. Therefore, we let $p>3$ be a prime of good ordinary reduction such that $p \equiv 1, 3 \pmod{8}$. We see that the only ${{\mathbb Q}}$-isogeny on $A$ is of degree $3$ or $9$, which are coprime to $N_{E}$ and both $\overline{\rho}_{{{\mathbb Q}},A,p}$ and $\overline{\rho}_{{{\mathbb Q}},E,p}$ are surjective. Also, $$\begin{split}
&a_{2}(A)^{2}-4 \cdot 2=-8 \\
&a_{17}(A)^{2}-4 \cdot 17=-32
\end{split}$$ which are square modulo $p$ as $p \equiv 1, 3 \pmod{8}$. Therefore by , there exists an element of order $p^{n}$ in $\operatorname{Sel}^{p^{n}}(E/L_{n})$ for all $n \ge 1$. The first such prime is $p=11$.
We can even vary the curves $E$ and $A$ if they both have prime conductor.
Let $E/{{\mathbb Q}}$ and $A/{{\mathbb Q}}$ be elliptic curves of prime conductor $p$ and $q$ respectively. We see from [@DW09 Proposition 2] that if $p$ is a prime of split multiplicative reduction for $E$ then $p \nmid \operatorname{ord}_{p}(\Delta_{E})$ and $\overline{\rho}_{{{\mathbb Q}},E,p}$ is surjective for all $p$. We also have that $\overline{\rho}_{{{\mathbb Q}},A,p}$ is surjective as $p \ge 11$. In particular, $A$ has no $p$-isogeny defined over ${{\mathbb Q}}$. Hence, by , $\operatorname{Sel}^{p^{n}}(E/L_{n})$ contains an element of order $p^{n}$ for all $p$ prime and $n \ge 1$.
We also show a specific example for $E$ with conductor $pq$ for $p$, $q$ prime such that $p \neq q$.
Let $a,b \in {{\mathbb Z}}$ such that at least one of $a$ or $b$ is not divisible by $3$ and $$a^{12}-9a^{8}b+27a^{4}b^{2}−27b^{3}$$ is not a square. Then by [@HJ12] there exists infinitely many $m \in {{\mathbb Z}}$ such that $$E_{m}:y^{2}+y=x^{3}+ax^{2}+bx+m$$ is an elliptic curve where $|\Delta_{E_{m}}|=pq.$ Here, $p$ is an odd prime and $q$ is either $1$ or an odd prime different from $p$. If we pick $m$ such that $p \ge 11$, then as $E_{m}$ is semistable, $\overline{\rho}_{{{\mathbb Q}},E_{m},p}$ is surjective. In particular, $p$ is a prime of multiplicative reduction such that $\operatorname{ord}_{p}(\Delta_{E_{m}})=1$.
Suppose there exists an elliptic curve $A/{{\mathbb Q}}$ of conductor $q$. Then there exists no ${{\mathbb Q}}$-isogeny of $A$ of degree $p$ or $q$ and $\overline{\rho}_{{{\mathbb Q}},A,p}$ is surjective as $p \ge 11$. Therefore, by , $\operatorname{Sel}^{p^{n}}(E_{m}/L_{n})$ contains an element of order $p^{n}$ for all $n \ge 1$.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'In this work, we propose a novel framework named Region-Aware Network (RANet), which learns the ability of anti-confusing in case of heavy occlusion, nearby person and symmetric appearance, for human pose estimation. Specifically, the proposed method addresses three key aspects, *i.e.*, data augmentation, feature learning and prediction fusion, respectively. First, we propose Parsing-based Data Augmentation (PDA) to generate abundant data that synthesizes confusing textures. Second, we not only propose a Feature Pyramid Stem (FPS) to learn stronger low-level features in lower stage; but also incorporate an Effective Region Extraction (ERE) module to excavate better target-specific features. Third, we introduce Cascade Voting Fusion (CVF) to explicitly exclude the inferior predictions and fuse the rest effective predictions for the final pose estimation. Extensive experimental results on two popular benchmarks, *i.e.* MPII and LSP, demonstrate the effectiveness of our method against the state-of-the-art competitors. Especially on easily-confusable joints, our method makes significant improvement.'
author:
- |
**Xuan Cao Yanhao Ge Ying Tai Wei Zhang**\
**Jian Li Chengjie Wang Jilin Li Feiyue Huang**\
Tencent Youtu Lab\
`{marscao, halege, yingtai, gavinwzhang}@tencent.com`\
`{swordli, jasoncjwang, jerolinli, garyhuang}@tencent.com`\
bibliography:
- 'ref.bib'
title: 'Anti-Confusing: Region-Aware Network for Human Pose Estimation'
---
Introduction
============
Human Pose Estimation (HPE) localizes human anatomical keypoints (joints), which plays an important role in a variety of high-level vision tasks, such as action recognition [@wang2013approach], human tracking [@xiao2018simple], human image synthesis [@ma2017pose], *etc*. The recent advances show that Deep Convolutional Neural Networks (DCNN) have achieved state-of-the-art performance [@zhang2019human; @sun2019deep; @tang2018deeply; @ke2018multi]. However, these networks can still be easily confused by three kinds of challenging cases: heavy occlusion, nearby person and symmetric appearance, which we term as *confusing textures*, as shown in Fig. \[fig\_confusing\].
Confusing textures in heavy occlusion and nearby person are self-explanatory, which have been widely studied and addressed in [@zhang2019human; @ke2018multi; @fieraru2018learning; @tang2018deeply]. However, symmetric appearance is resulted from the highly symmetric similarity, such as the shoes, sleeves, trousers and so on, which was rarely explored. We experimentally observe that the symmetric human appearance can easily confuse the network, especially in case of crossed arms and legs. To our best knowledge, it is the first work to identify the concept of symmetric appearance and discuss its influence on human pose estimation.
How to resolve the confusing textures is a core problem in human pose estimation. Typically, the previous works focus on three aspects to achieve anti-confusing: First, various kinds of data augmentation schemes are adopted, including scaling, rotating, flipping, image-synthesis with Motion Capture [@rogez2016mocap], joint-switch [@fieraru2018learning], keypoint-masking [@ke2018multi], *etc*. Second, effective feature learning is pivotal. For example, the popular hourglass model [@newell2016stacked] and its variants [@chen2017adversarial; @xiao2018simple; @zhang2019human; @yang2017learning; @tang2018quantized; @sun2019deep] stack different kinds of high-low-high sub-networks that effectively learn the high-level features for heatmap prediction. Third, adaptive prediction fusion on multiple candidate heatmaps or coordinates [@yang2017learning; @zhang2019human] is a key step to improve accuracy of final prediction. Despite the great success achieved by the above methods, none of these methods address the three aspects in a single framework simultaneously.
To address the above issues, we propose a novel framework, namely Region-Aware Network (RANet), as shown in Fig. \[fig\_pipeline\], which comprehensively addresses the three aspects for human pose estimation. First, to synthesize various kinds of confusing textures, we propose a *Parsing-based Data Augmentation* (PDA), which segments the body parts and mounts them on or around the current human’s joints. Second, different from the previous methods that focus on learning effective high-level features, we on one hand emphasize the important role of the low-level features, and thus propose a *Feature Pyramid Stem* (FPS) to excavate the input image under different resolutions; on the other hand emphasize the role of pixel region of human body, and hence propose an *Effective Region Extraction* (ERE) module to crop the effective region according to the bounding box estimated from the intermediate prediction, which greatly reduces the effect of background and extract more target-specific features. Finally, after getting multiple candidate predictions, we propose *Cascade Voting Fusion* (CVF) module to explicitly exclude the inferior predictions and merge the rest ones in a weighted manner as the final output. We evaluate our method on two representative benchmark datasets, *i.e.* MPII human pose dataset (MPII) [@andriluka20142d] and extended Leeds Sports Poses (LSP), and achieve state-of-the-art performance. Especially on easily-confusable joints, like elbow, wrist, knee and ankle, our method achieves significant improvement. In summary, the main contributions of this work are three-folds:
$\bullet$ We identify different kinds of confusing textures, and propose a novel parsing-based augmentation scheme, which forces the network to learn the ability of anti-confusing.
$\bullet$ We propose a feature pyramid stem module to learn stronger low-level features and an effective region extraction module to extract better target-specific features.
$\bullet$ We design a cascade voting fusion module that explicitly excludes the inferior prediction and merge the rest superior predictions as the final output, which is effective and can be easily applied on other multi-prediction frameworks.
\[fig\_confusing\]
![**Framework of our Region-Aware Network.** The architecture is based on stacked hourglass network [@newell2016stacked] with four novel modules, including Parsing-based Data Augmentation (Sec. \[sec:PDA\]) that exploits human semantic information; Feature Pyramid Stem (Sec. \[sec:FPS\]) for better low-level features and Effective Region Extraction (Sec. \[sec:ERE\]) for better target-specific features; and finally Cascaded Voting Fusion (Sec. \[sec:CVF\]) for more accurate joint prediction. []{data-label="fig_pipeline"}](figs/fig2_pipeline.jpg){width="95.00000%"}
Related Work
============
Previous DCNN based human pose estimation works can be roughly divided into two categories. The first group directly regresses the location coordinates of joints [@toshev2014deeppose; @yu2016deep], called regression-based methods. The second group predicts heatmaps followed by estimating joint locations according to the peak or integration response of heatmap [@wei2016convolutional; @newell2016stacked], termed heatmap-based methods. Our work is closely related to the second group while differing from three perspectives.
**Data Augmentation ** Conventional data augmentation methods on human pose estimation task [@newell2016stacked; @chen2017adversarial; @zhang2019human] mainly performs scaling, rotating and flipping, *etc* on the training images. Recently, PoseRefiner [@fieraru2018learning] mimics incorrect pose joints and refines them by cascaded network. MSR-net [@ke2018multi] introduces keypoint-masking to simulate the hard training samples. Different from the previous data augmentation strategies, we propose a novel parsing-based data augmentation scheme that taking advantage of the semantic segmentation for synthesizing various confusing situations.
**Feature Learning ** Most previous networks [@newell2016stacked; @xiao2018simple; @sun2019deep; @zhang2019human; @chen2017adversarial; @chu2016crf] focus on learning effective high-level features for heatmap prediction, which incorporates the hourglass-like structure that includes down-sampling for feature encoding and up-sampling for heatmap decoding. Typically, before entering the heatmap prediction sub-network, a rough stem module that converts the input image to smaller feature maps is adopted to reduce the complexity. For instance, stacked hourglass [@newell2016stacked] accepts input in resolution of $256\times256$ while generates feature map of $64\times64$ for heatmap prediction. Simple-baseline [@xiao2018simple] and HRNet [@sun2019deep] extract $64\times48$ low-resolution feature map for heatmap prediction from $256\times192$ high-resolution input image. However, the rough stem module may not make full use of the effective pixel-level information from the raw input images. In contrast, we on one hand propose a Feature Pyramid Stem module for learning stronger low-level feature; on the other hand propose an Effective Region Extraction module for better target-specific features.
**Prediction Fusion ** Prediction fusion strategy is a common solution to improve the hard joints in challenging cases. Zhang *et. al* [@zhang2019human] designs a Cascade Prediction Fusion (CPF) network that takes all heatmaps in different stages into considerations for final prediction. Yang *et. al* [@yang2017learning] concatenate coarse output heatmaps with raw input for further keypoints refinement. Compared with these methods, our method explicitly excludes the inferior candidate predictions by voting and gets more accurate results by merging the rest superior predictions.
Method
======
Parsing-based Data Augmentation {#sec:PDA}
-------------------------------
For common human pose estimation methods [@newell2016stacked; @xiao2018simple; @tang2018deeply; @sun2019deep; @zhang2019human], data augmentations on scale, rotation, flipping are usually applied. However, these augmentation methods are not strong enough to provide robustness against confusing textures. Here, we propose a novel augmentation scheme, as shown in Fig. \[fig\_parsing\_aug\] (Top). By firstly segments all of the training images $I_{train}$ through the state-of-the-art human parsing method $\boldsymbol{\mathcal{F}_{parsing}}$ [@liu2018devil; @gong2017look], then we can build a data pool $\mathbb{D}_{parsing}$ filled with various semantic body parts and background patches [@ke2018multi]. Finally, the body parts or patches from the data pool are properly mounted on the current person’s body to synthesize confusing textures.
As shown in Fig. \[fig\_parsing\_aug\] (a), Pose-Refiner [@yang2017learning] mimics hard joints by only manipulating keypoints’ location, like shifting or switching, which ignores the importance of augmentation on region pixel level. Instead, our method simulates the challenging cases by synthesizing the texture in pixel level according to the semantic body parts from a large collected data pool. MSA net [@ke2018multi] proposes a keypoint-masking strategy to move the cropped image patches, as shown in Fig. \[fig\_parsing\_aug\] (b). Compared to the keypoint-masking, except for the cropped background patch, our PDA mounts the segmented body parts with semantics. For example, the segmented shank patch will be mounted on or around keens/ankles in much higher probability. As a result, our training data consists of much stronger confusing texture which forces our network to learn better ability of anti-confusing.
![**Top: Illustration of parsing-based data augmentation.** We first apply human parsing on the training images to build a data pool filled with segmented body parts and cropped background patches, shown as the red arrow. Then the patches are *semantically* mounted on the training data, as the blue arrow illustrated, which may occlude the joints or appear around the joints. As the result, our PDA synthesizes confusing textures that are similar to the real cases, such as the nearby person parts in green circle and the occlusion in yellow circle. **Bottom: Comparisons with related works.** (a) Joint-switch from PoseRefiner [@fieraru2018learning]. (b) Keypoint-masking strategy in MSA net [@ke2018multi]. (c) Ours.[]{data-label="fig_parsing_aug"}](figs/fig3_parsing_data.jpg "fig:"){width="96.00000%"}\
\
Feature Pyramid Stem {#sec:FPS}
--------------------
Typically, feature maps in much lower resolution are passed through the heatmap prediction sub-network, such as $64\times64$ in stacked hourglass [@newell2016stacked] and $64\times48$ in simple baseline [@xiao2018simple]. In order to alleviate the information squeezing during converting the input image to the lower resolution feature map, we introduce a Feature Pyramid Stem (FPS) module to learn stronger low-level features, which includes multiple branches to extract and merge the features in different resolutions. Specifically, our FPS repeatedly performs the downsample process on different input resolutions until reaching the target feature resolution (*e.g.*, $64$). Partially inspired by HRNet [@sun2019deep], we further add malposed paths over different branches to merge the same-resolution features.
Given input image $I_{in}$ of size $W \times H \times 3$ that is cropped from $I_{ori}$ via the ground truth center and scale parameters for a specific human body, the proposed FPS consistses of $K$ branches to extract features. The input resolution for the $i^{th}$ branch is $1/(2^{i-1}) \times [W, H]$, $i\in[1,K]$. For example, the original downsample network in stacked-hourglass [@newell2016stacked] uses $256\times256$ as the input resolution and outputs heatmap in resolution of $64\times64$, in which the stride $\times2$ convolutional and max pooling layers are adopted. To match the lowest feature map resolution $64\times64$, we set $K=3$. The $1st$ branch keeps the same with the original downsample process adopted in [@newell2016stacked]. The $2nd$ branch accepts input resolution of $128\times128$ followed by the similar downsample process excluding the max pooling. The input resolution for the $3rd$ branch is $64\times64$ and stride $\times1$ convolutional layer is applied. Fig. \[fig\_pipeline\] illustrates our FPS, which could also be widely applied on other feature extraction networks.
Effective Region Extraction {#sec:ERE}
---------------------------
Due to the high degree of freedom in human pose configures, like squatting, up-right and lie-low, the limbs could reach to different scopes. Supposing $I_{in}$ to be with resolution of $256\times256$, the full body may occupy different region sizes. In some cases, the pixel region of body is very small compared to the input resolution, which makes the network to pay lots of attention on the useless background regions. For top-down human pose estimation [@papandreou2017towards; @jin2017towards], an extra detector is applied at first, and the previous work [@fang2017rmpe] has shown that the subtle deviation of bounding box could result in serious errors in pose estimation. Motivated by [@fang2017rmpe], we adopt the intermediate prediction $P_L$, from the lower stage hourglass module $\mathbf{HG_{L}}$, as a free detector to provide a more accurate and compact bounding box for the human body, which further helps the network to focus on the more effective human body region $I_{ROI}$ for better target-specific features. To keep the aspect ratio of cropped image, we resize the $I_{ROI}$ until the long side matches to $256$ and then set the resized $I_{ROI}$ as $\hat{I}_{in}$. As the blue-masked module shown in Fig. \[fig\_pipeline\], $\hat{I}_{in}$ passes through $\mathbf{FPS_{H}}$ module. The feature maps $F_{L}^{HG}$ and $F_{H}^{64}$ from $\mathbf{HG_{L}}$ and $\mathbf{FPS_{H}}$ are then merged as the input for the following higher-stage hourglass $\mathbf{HG_{H}}$, where $64$ indicates the resolution of feature map. It should be noted that the two FPS modules have exactly the same network structure but different parameters. Please refer to the Tab. \[tab\_algorithm\] for more details.
[r|ll]{}\
1:& **if** training == True\
2:& $\mathbb{D}_{parsing} = \boldsymbol{\mathcal{F}_{parsing}}(I_{train})$ & // Build patch data pool\
3:& $I_{ori}=\boldsymbol{\mathcal{F}_{aug}}(I_{train}, \mathbb{D}_{parsing})$ & // Augment training data\
4:& **if** testing == True\
5:& $I_{ori}=I_{test}$\
\
6:& $I_{in}^{256}=\boldsymbol{\mathcal{F}_{crop}}(I_{ori}, Center, Scale)$ & // Crop image by center and scale\
7:& $F_{L}^{64}=\mathbf{FPS_{L}}(I_{in}^{256}, I_{in}^{128}, I_{in}^{64})$ & // Get low-level feature\
8:& $H_{L}, F_{L}^{HG}=\mathbf{HG_{L}}(F_{L}^{64})$ & // Get heatmap and feature\
9:& $P_{L},V_{L}=\boldsymbol{\mathcal{F}_{Peak}}(\mathbf{CVF_{Heatmap}}(H_{L}))$ & // Get prediction and visibility\
10:& $Bbox=\boldsymbol{\mathcal{F}_{bounding}}(P_{L})$ & // Get bounding box\
11:& $\hat{I}_{in}^{256}=\boldsymbol{\mathcal{F}_{crop}}(I_{ori}, Bbox)$ & // Crop image by bounding box\
\
12:& $F_{H}^{64}=\mathbf{FPS_{H}}(\hat{I}_{in}^{256}, \hat{I}_{in}^{128}, \hat{I}_{in}^{64})$ & // Get low-level feature\
13:& $H_{H}=\mathbf{HG_{H}}(F_{H}^{64},F_{L}^{HG})$ & // Get heatmaps of higher-stage HG\
14:& $P_{H},V_{H}=\boldsymbol{\mathcal{F}_{Peak}}(\mathbf{CVF_{Heatmap}}(H_{H}))$ & // Get prediction and visibility\
\
15:& $\{P_{L}^{i},V_{L}^{i},P_{H}^{i},V_{H}^{i}\}=\boldsymbol{\mathcal{F}_{Infer}}(I_{ori}, Scale^{i}), i\in[1,6]$ & // Multiple inference in 6 scales\
16:& $P_{O}=\mathbf{CVF_{Coordinate}}(\{P_{L}^{i},V_{L}^{i},P_{H}^{i},V_{H}^{i}\})$ & // Coordinate fusion\
Cascade Voting Fusion {#sec:CVF}
---------------------
After the feature learning module, multiple predictions are estimated, from either multiple inferences in different scales [@chu2017multi; @yang2017learning; @tang2018deeply; @sun2019deep; @zhang2019human] or different stages [@newell2016stacked]. How to adaptively fuse these predictions is a key step for improving the accuracy of joints. Compared to the fusion method in [@zhang2019human], our proposed Cascade Voting Fusion explicitly excludes the inferior predictions and then fuses the rest superior predictions. Specifically, our CVF firstly performs fusion on heatmaps and then coordinates. As shown in Fig. \[fig\_pipeline\], both lower- and higher-stage hourglasses output multiple heatmap predictions, denoted as $H^{L}$ and $H^{H}$. During heatmap fusion, we fuse all heatmaps from each hourglass stage according to their weighted summation. Then we calculate the corresponding coordinate from the fused heatmap as $(x,y)_{joint} = \frac{3}{4}\times(x,y)_{peak} + \frac{1}{4}\times(x,y)_{secondary}$, and denote the peak value of heatmap as $v$, where $(x,y)_{peak}$ and $(x,y)_{secondary}$ are the coordinates of the maximal and secondary value in heatmap, respectively. During coordinate fusion, regarding to single body joint, *e.g.* left wrist, supposing there are totally $N$ candidate joint predictions, as shown in Fig. \[fig\_fusion\]. Then, we get the center of all candidate joints, and utilize the average distance from candidate joints to the center as $threshold = \frac{1}{N}\sum_{i=1}^{N}(\left \| (x,y)_{pre} - (x,y)_{center} \right \|_{L_2})$, which is further used for filtering the inferior joints, *i.e.*, we only keep $M$ joints whose distances to the center are smaller than the threshold: $$%\small
\label{eq_fusion}
(x,y)_{output} = \frac{1}{M}\sum_{i=1}^{M}(w_i\times(x_i,y_i)_{joint}), \quad s.t.\ distance_i < threshold \\$$ where $(x_i,y_i)_{joint}$ is the coordinate of $i$-th candidate, $(x,y)_{output}$ represents the final joint prediction, and $w_i = {v_i}/{\sum_{i=1}^{M}(v_i)}$. To get the complete joint predictions, the CVF is independently performed on each body joint in parallel. It should also be noted that our fusion strategy can be easily built on most multi-stage pose estimation frameworks.
Training Loss
-------------
The training loss is formulated as: $\left \| H_{pre} - H_{gt} \right \|_{L_2}$. The ground truth heatmap $H_{gt}$ is generated according to the Gaussian distribution as $H_{(x,y)}=e^{-{(x-\hat{x})^2 \times (y-\hat{y})^2}/{2\sigma^2}}$, where $(\hat{x},\hat{y})$ is the coordinate of the ground truth joint, and $\sigma$ represents the standard deviation that controls the energy distribution. Generally principle energy (about $99.73$%) is distributed in \[-$3\sigma$, +$3\sigma$\]. Obviously, larger $\sigma$ results in the larger radius of principle energy, which may let the network more easily learn the heatmap [@pfister2015flowing]. We add supervision with visibility by classifying joints into three categories: visible, occluded and outer. For visible joints, we set the heatmap with $\sigma=1$ as supervision. Occluded joints are more difficult to learn. In order to easily learn such hard joints, we set twice value $\sigma=2$ for the occluded joints. Finally, for outer joints, heatmap of all zeros is provided as supervision which instructs network to pay no attention on outer joints. By giving different kinds of heatmap supervision, the network pays different degrees of attention on learning the above three kinds of joints.
Experiments
===========
**Datasets and Data Augmentation ** We evaluate our method on two representative benchmark datasets including MPII human pose dataset (MPII) [@andriluka20142d] and extended Leeds Sports Poses (LSP) [@johnson2010clustered]. MPII consists of $25,000$ images with over $40,000$ annotated poses. We split training and validation sets following [@newell2016stacked]. The extended LSP dataset consists of $11,000$ training images from sport activities and $1,000$ images for testing. We augment the training data by randomly scaling in \[$0.75$, $1.25$\], rotation in \[$-60$, $+60$\] degree, horizontal flipping and color adjustment. As mentioned in section 3.1, we further apply Parsing-based Data Augmentation on the training image. For the wrong parsing results, we simply remove the misshapen parts in manual.
**Implementation Details ** The network is implemented on PyTorch with optimizer RMSProp. We train the network in $250$ epochs and batch size is $32$. The learning rate starts at $0.0005$ and decreases by $2$ times at $20^{th}$, $50^{th}$, $100^{th}$, $150^{th}$, $200^{th}$ epoch, respectively. We follow the common evaluation criteria, *i.e.*, Percentage Correct Keypoints (PCK) is utilized to evaluate results on LSP [@zhang2019human; @yang2017learning], and PCKh [@andriluka20142d] that normalizes the distance errors with respect to the size of head is leveraged for MPII. The input image $I_{in}$ is cropped according to the approximate human center and scale, and warped to size $256\times256$. The input image $\hat{I}_{in}$ is cropped according to the bounding box of ERE module. Following [@chu2017multi; @yang2017learning; @tang2018deeply; @sun2019deep; @zhang2019human], a testing procedure that adopts six different scales is performed with horizontal flipping. The CVF module merges the all predictions in six scales as the final output.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Head Sho. Elb. Wri. Hip Knee Ank. Total
----------------- --------------------------------- ------------ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------ ------ ------ ------ ------- ------ ------
Wei *et al.* CPM [@wei2016convolutional] CVPR’$16$ 97.8 95.0 88.7 84.0 88.4 82.8 79.4 88.5
Bulat *et al.* PHR [@bulat2016human] ECCV’$16$ 97.9 95.1 89.9 85.3 89.4 85.7 81.7 89.7
Newell *et al.* Hourglass [@newell2016stacked] ECCV’$16$ 98.2 96.3 91.2 87.1 90.1 87.4 83.6 90.9
Ning *et al.* KG-DFN [@ning2018knowledge] TMM’$17$ 98.1 96.3 92.2 87.8 90.6 87.6 82.7 91.2
Chu *et al.* HRUs [@chu2017multi] CVPR’$17$ 98.5 96.3 91.9 88.1 90.6 88.0 85.0 91.5
Chen *et al.* Adver-PN [@chen2017adversarial] ICCV’$17$ 98.1 96.5 92.5 88.5 90.2 89.6 86.0 91.9
Yang *et al.* PRMs [@yang2017learning] ICCV’$17$ 98.5 96.7 92.5 88.7 91.1 88.6 86.0 92.0
Xiao *et al.* SimpleBase [@xiao2018simple] ECCV’$18$ 98.5 96.6 91.9 87.6 91.1 88.1 84.1 91.5
Ke *et al.* MSR-net [@ke2018multi] ECCV’$18$ 98.5 96.8 92.7 88.4 90.6 89.4 86.3 92.1
Nie *et al.* PIL [@nie2018human] CVPR’$18$ 98.6 96.9 93.0 89.1 91.7 89.0 86.2 92.4
Tang *et al.* DLCM [@tang2018deeply] ECCV’$18$ 98.4 96.9 92.6 88.7 91.8 89.4 86.2 92.3
Sun *et al.* HRNet [@sun2019deep] CVPR’$19$ 98.6 96.9 92.8 89.0 91.5 89.0 85.7 92.3
Zhang *et al.* PGNN [@zhang2019human] arXiv’$19$ **[98.6]{} & 97.0 & 92.8 & 88.8 & 91.7 & 89.8 & 86.6 & 92.5\
Ours & RANet & & 98.5 & **[97.0]{} & **[93.4]{} & **[89.8]{} & **[92.0]{} & **[90.3]{} & **[87.6]{} & **[92.9]{}\
****************
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
: Performance comparisons on the MPII test set ([email protected])[]{data-label="tab_MPII_Test"}
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Head Sho. Elb. Wri. Hip Knee Ank. Total
------------------ ---------------------------------------- ------------ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------ ------ ------ ------ ------- ------ ------
Insafu. *et al.* Deepercut [@insafutdinov2016deepercut] ECCV’$16$ 97.4 92.7 87.5 84.4 91.5 89.9 87.2 90.1
Wei *et al.* CPM [@wei2016convolutional] CVPR’$16$ 97.8 92.5 87.0 83.9 91.5 90.8 89.9 90.5
Bulat *et al.* PHR [@bulat2016human] ECCV’$16$ 97.2 92.1 88.1 85.2 92.2 91.4 88.7 90.7
Chu *et al.* HRUs [@chu2017multi] CVPR’$17$ 98.1 93.7 89.3 86.9 93.4 94.0 92.5 92.6
Chen *et al.* Adver-PN [@chen2017adversarial] ICCV’$17$ 98.5 94.0 89.8 87.5 93.9 94.1 93.0 93.1
Yang *et al.* PRMs [@yang2017learning] ICCV’$17$ 98.3 94.5 92.2 88.9 94.4 95.0 93.7 93.9
Zhang *et al.* PGNN [@zhang2019human] arXiv’$19$ 98.4 94.8 92.0 89.4 94.4 94.8 93.8 94.0
Ours RANet **[98.5]{} & **[95.5]{} & **[93.8]{} & **[90.5]{} & **[95.1]{} & **[95.2]{} & **[94.5]{} & **[94.7]{}\
****************
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
: Performance comparisons on the LSP test set ([email protected])[]{data-label="tab_LSP_Test"}
Comparisons with State-of-the-Art Methods
-----------------------------------------
**Accuracy ** We submit our results on test set to MPII website[^1] and get the official evaluation shown in Tab. \[tab\_MPII\_Test\]. Our method achieves $92.9$% on PCKh@$0.5$, which is the highest performance on average. It is noteworthy that, for the joints on easily-confusable body parts, including elbow, wrist, knee and ankle, our method achieves significant improvement compared to the state of the arts. It proves the effectiveness on resolving confusing texture resulted from symmetric appearance. Tab. \[tab\_LSP\_Test\] shows our results on LSP test set. Following previous methods [@chu2017multi; @yang2017learning], we add the MPII training set to the extended LSP training set. Our method again outperforms the state-of-the-art methods and still maintains competitive advantages on some hard joints.
**Visualize ** In Fig. \[fig\_more\_result\], we visualize pose estimation of DLCM [^2] [@tang2018deeply] and our model. The DLCM model is confused by heavy occlusion, nearby person and symmetric appearance. Our model successfully resolves such confusing texture in the three challenging situations. As shown in *cols.* $1$, the wrists are occluded and very limited hand/arm textures are exposed. The proposed Effective Region Extraction module helps the network to see more details, and makes it possible for the following modules to learn the looming cues. Interfered by the nearby person, as shown in *cols.* $2$, the DLCM model predicts ankles on other person incorrectly, while our Parsing-based Data Augmentation forces the network to learn the ability of anti-confusing for nearby body parts. In addition, the proposed Cascade Voting Fusion module excludes the incorrect prediction to some extent and improves the final prediction. When the symmetric similarity meets image degradation or cluttered background, in *cols.* $3$, it’s more difficult to distinguish the symmetric joints. In such cases, our Feature Pyramid Stem module learns stronger low-level feature from the input image and provides more useful information for final heatmap prediction. More results are available in supplementary material.
![**Qualitative results in the MPII dataset**. **Top**: DLCM [@tang2018deeply]. **Bottom**: Ours.[]{data-label="fig_more_result"}](figs/fig4_more_result.jpg){width="90.00000%"}
Ablation Study
--------------
To investigate the effectiveness of each modules in RANet, we conduct ablative analysis on the validation set of MPII dataset. We adopt stacked-hourglass as backbone and achieve PCKh@$0.5$ with $88.97$% by performing Multi-Scale and Flipping (M.S.F.) in inference as the method (a) in Tab. \[tab\_ablation\_study\].
**PDA ** To evaluate the contribution of Parsing-based Data Augmentation, we compare the result without and with PDA, as the methods (a) and (b). The PDA brings significant improvement on accuracy by 1.14%. Although a little manual labour is necessary to remove misshapen parsing results, such one-off cost is worthy to the significant improvement. And this scheme could be widely adopted by other similar tasks.
**FPS ** Compared to the single branch in original stacked-hourglass network [@newell2016stacked], we further add Feature Pyramid Stem module that contains extra branches to learn low-level features in different resolutions, as method (c). The stronger low-level feature yields $0.35$% improvement. It’s noteworthy that our FPS module add only $1.96$% extra parameters compared with original hourglass [@newell2016stacked].
**ERE ** We compare performance without and with Effective Region Extraction module, as methods (c) and (d). Although the individual ERE module brings modest improvement with $0.23$%, it is very helpful for the following fusion and it doesn’t increase network parameters.
**CVF ** To study the effectiveness of Cascade Voting Fusion module, we conduct two experiments as methods (e) and (f). In (e), we add CVF on basis of (c) excluding ERE module, and the CVF makes $0.6$% increment on accuracy. In (f), the ERE is included, so the CVF fuses more candidate predictions. Consequently we achieve $1.06$% improvement by adding both ERE and CVF. In addition, we study the influence of different $threshold$ on the pose prediction accuracy, as shown in Fig. \[fig\_differentThres\]. We denote the average distance from candidate to their center as mean threshold. Larger or smaller thresholds than the mean threshold bring worse results. For a extreme large threshold which covers all candidates, which means the inferior candidates are not be excluded, we achieve [email protected] with 91.24 which drops 0.28% from that in mean threshold.
[2]{}
M.S.F PDA FPS ERE CVF PCKh
--- ------- ----- ----- ----- ----- -------
a 88.97
b 90.11
c 90.46
d 90.69
e 91.06
f 91.52
: Ablative analysis on MPII validation set[]{data-label="tab_ablation_study"}
![Illustration of voting fusion[]{data-label="fig_fusion"}](figs/fig5_fusion.png){width="45.00000%"}
![Performance under different thresholds[]{data-label="fig_differentThres"}](figs/fig6_differentThres.png){width="45.00000%"}
![Statistic analysis on each body joint[]{data-label="fig_mean_std"}](figs/fig7_mean_std.jpg){width="48.00000%"}
**Statistic Analysis ** We further study the statistic distribution of prediction errors among hourglass [@newell2016stacked], DLCM [@tang2018deeply] and ours, as shown in Fig. \[fig\_mean\_std\]. We utilize the size of head as the normalized distance which is the same with that in calculation of PCKh [@andriluka20142d]. Specifically $d_{norm}=0.6\times\sqrt{W_{bboxh}^2 + H_{bboxh}^2}$, where $W_{bboxh}$ and $H_{bboxh}$ are the width and height of head’s bounding box respectively. We calculate the horizontal and vertical errors of joints by absolute value: $x_{err} = \frac{\left \| x_{pre} - x_{gt} \right \|_{L1}}{d_{norm}}$, $y_{err} = \frac{\left \| x_{pre} - x_{gt} \right \|_{L1}}{d_{norm}}$. The center and radius of ellipse represent the mean and variance of prediction errors. Based on quantitative comparison, our method achieves smaller mean error over all joints and variance on most joints than DLCM [@tang2018deeply]. Moreover, there are some interesting conclusions: ($1$) The joints of limbs generally have larger mean and variance of errors, especially the wrists and ankles, which proves higher difficulty degree of predicting such “hard joints”. ($2$) Most joints have larger variance in horizontal coordinate error which indicates that it’s more difficult for prediction in horizontal direction. However, the joint of head top has much larger variance error in vertical direction. ($3$) On every joint, the advances of methods steady move the center close to the zero, but the three methods still share very similar ellipse shape.
Conclusion
==========
In this work, we propose Region-Aware Network (RANet) to effectively resolve the confusing texture in single person pose estimation. Experimental results have demonstrated the effectiveness of our approach. The success stems from Parsing-based Data Augmentation scheme and three novel modules, *i.e.*, Feature Pyramid Stem (FPS), Effective Region Extraction (ERE) and Cascade Voting Fusion (CVF). FPS reinforce feature learning in lower stage which provides more useful information for the following heatmap prediction. ERE detect human body for free and extract the uttermost pixel region which help the network to see more details. CVF exclude the inferior predictions and adaptively fuse the rest superior prediction for more accurate pose estimation. In the future, we plan to extend our works on multiple person pose estimation and pose tracking in frame sequence.
[^1]: <http://human-pose.mpi-inf.mpg.de/#evaluation>
[^2]: <http://www.ece.northwestern.edu/~wtt450/project/ECCV18_DLCM/>
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'In this note we provide a simple explanation of the recent finding of anisotropy in electromagnetic (EM) propagation claimed by Nodland and Ralston. We consider, as a possible origin of such effect, the effective coupling between EM fields and some tiny background torsion field. The coupling is obtained after integrating out charged fermions, it is gauge invariant and does not require the introduction of any new physics.'
author:
- |
Antonio Dobado\
Departamento de Física Teórica\
Universidad Complutense de Madrid\
28040 Madrid, Spain\
and\
Antonio L. Maroto\
Departamento de Física Teórica\
Universidad Autónoma de Madrid\
28049 Madrid, Spain
title: Primordial torsion fields as an explanation of the anisotropy in cosmological electromagnetic propagation
---
epsf
0.83 true cm
In a recent paper Nodland and Ralston [@[1]] have reported on a systematic rotation of the plane of polarization of electromagnetic radiation coming from distant radio galaxies, even after Faraday rotation is extracted. Providing there is not any hidden systematic bias in the data or in their analysis, this finding could indicate the presence of some anisotropic background $s^{\mu}$ over large cosmological scales. The authors of [@[1]] claim that this effect can be described by a term in the electromagnetic lagrangian given by $$\begin{aligned}
(\Lambda_s^{-1}/4)\epsilon^{\mu\nu\alpha\beta}F_{\mu\nu}A_{\alpha}s_{\beta}\end{aligned}$$ where $A_{\mu}$ is the electromagnetic potential, $F_{\mu\nu}=\partial_{\mu}A_{\nu}-\partial_{\nu}A_{\mu}$, $\Lambda_s^{-1}$ is a constant of the order of $10^{-32}eV$ in natural units and $s_{\mu}=(0,\vec{s})$ is some phenomenological vector like parameter with constant unit $\vec{s}$. From their analysis of $71$ distant galaxies $(z>0.3)$, they found $\vec{s}=(decl,R.A.)=(0^o \pm 20^o,21 \pm 2 hrs)$.
From the point of view of the physical origin of $s_{\mu}$, the most natural assumption seems to be to consider it as a dynamical vector field. However, as it was discussed in [@[1]], the main problem of that explanation is that the lagrangian above is not gauge invariant, unless $s_\mu$ is always constant, which is quite unnatural for a dynamical field, or it is the gradient of some scalar field $\phi$, $s_{\mu}=\partial_{\mu}\phi$. In this last case, new physics containing this field must be introduced.
After the publication of [@[1]] there have been several criticisms to the analysis of the data [@crtic] and responses to them [@resp]. In any case, the purpose of this paper is to point out that, provided the effect exists, there is a simple interpretation of the lagrangian above within the framework of standard quantum electrodynamics (QED) and classical gravity. In this interpretation, $s_{\mu}$ is understood as the pseudotrace of the torsion field and gauge invariance is preserved without the introduction of any new scalar field $\phi$. In order to show that, we consider the following simple model to describe the present state of the observable universe. We assume a flat space-time with a classical background torsion field $T^{\mu\nu\alpha}$ (although our results can be generalized to the case when curvature is present in a straightforward way). The mathematical origin of this tensor is the following: consider a pseudo-Riemannian space-time manifold with metric tensor $g_{\mu\nu}$. As usual, in order to define the parallel transport of vectors, we should introduce a new object, an affine connection, whose components are $\hat \Gamma^{\lambda}_{\;\;\mu\nu}$. Such an arbitrary connection is in principle independent of the metric. However if we want the lengths and angles of vectors to be invariant under parallel transport, it is needed that the connection is metric, that is: $$\begin{aligned}
(\hat\nabla_\lambda g)_{\mu\nu}=
\partial_\lambda g_{\mu\nu}-\hat\Gamma^{\kappa}_{\lambda\mu}g_{\kappa\nu}-
\hat\Gamma^{\kappa}_{\lambda\nu}g_{\kappa\mu}=0\end{aligned}$$ where $\hat\nabla$ is the corresponding covariant derivative. This condition allows us to find the following general form for this kind of connections: $$\begin{aligned}
\hat \Gamma^{\lambda}_{\;\;\mu\nu}=\Gamma^{\lambda}_{\;\;\mu\nu}
+\frac{1}{2}\left(T_{\nu\;\;\mu}^{\;\lambda}+T_{\mu\;\;\nu}^{\;\lambda}-
T_{\;\;\mu\nu}^{\lambda}\right)
\label{torchr}\end{aligned}$$ where the antisymmetric part, $T_{\;\;\mu\nu}^{\lambda}=\hat\Gamma_{\;\;\mu\nu}^{\lambda}
-\hat\Gamma_{\;\;\nu\mu}^{\lambda}$ is known as the torsion tensor and $\Gamma^{\lambda}_{\;\;\mu\nu}$ are the usual Christoffel symbols that can be obtained from the metric tensor. In absence of torsion, any metric connection reduces to the Levi-Civita one, given by the Christoffel symbols. This was the connection considered by Einstein in his formulation of General Relativity. However nowadays the modern theories of gravity consider the metric tensor and the connection as independent entities and therefore torsion appears in a natural way.
By means of the Einstein Equivalence Principle, it is possible to find the minimal lagrangian for a fermion interacting with a background gravitational field with torsion [@[3]], then it is easy to show that only the axial pseudo-trace vector-field $S_{\beta}=\epsilon_{\mu\nu\alpha\beta}T^{\mu\nu\alpha}$ appears in the minimal coupling. When there is also a background electromagnetic field and no curvature, the lagrangian describing the electrodynamics of different charged fermions $\Psi_i$ is given by $$\begin{aligned}
{\cal
L}=-\frac{1}{4}F_{\mu\nu}F^{\mu\nu}+\sum_{i}\overline\Psi_i(i{\not{\!{\!D}}}_i - m_i
-\frac{1}{8}\gamma_5 {\not{\!{\!S}}})\Psi_i\end{aligned}$$ where $D^{\mu}_i=\partial^{\mu}-ieQ_iA^{\mu}$ with $m_i$ and $Q_i$ being the mass and the electric charge of the corresponding fermionic field. Now it is immediate to integrate out the fermionic fields to find the effective action for the electromagnetic field propagating in the torsion classical background: $$\begin{aligned}
e^{iS_{eff}[A,S]}=\int [d\Psi][ d\overline \Psi] e^{i\int d^4x {\cal L}}
\label{effa}\end{aligned}$$ where $\Psi$ denotes all the fermion fields. By using standard manipulations, it is possible to write: $$\begin{aligned}
S_{eff}[A,S]&=&-\int d^4x\left(\frac{1}{4}F_{\mu\nu}F^{\mu\nu}\right)
+i\sum_i {\mbox{Tr}}\log(i{\not{\!{\!D}}}_i - m_i
-\frac{1}{8}\gamma_5 {\not{\!{\!S}}})\end{aligned}$$ which can be developed as: $$\begin{aligned}
S_{eff}[A,S]=-\int d^4x\left(\frac{1}{4}F_{\mu\nu}F^{\mu\nu}\right)
+i\sum_i\sum_{k=1}^{\infty}
\frac{(-1)^k}{k}{\mbox{Tr}}\left[(i{\not{\!{\!\partial}}}-m_i)^{-1}\left(eQ_i
-\frac{1}{8}{\not{\!{\!S}}}\gamma_5\right)\right]^k
\nonumber \\\end{aligned}$$ Computing the functional traces by using dimensional regularization with $D=4-\epsilon$, it is possible to obtain: $$\begin{aligned}
S_{eff}[A,S]&=&-\int d^4x\left(\frac{1}{4}F_{\mu\nu}F^{\mu\nu}\right)
\nonumber \\
&-&\sum_i\frac{e^2Q_i^2m_i^2}{2}
\int d\tilde q \;d\tilde p\; dx\; dy\; dz\;e^{ip(y-x)}
e^{iq(z-x)}\Gamma(3-D/2)\nonumber\\
&\times&\int_0^1dx_1\int_0^{x_1}dx_2\frac{i}{16\pi^2}\epsilon^{\mu\nu\rho\sigma}
\left(A_\nu^yA_\rho^z S_\sigma^x(p_\mu x_1+q_\mu x_2)\right.
\nonumber \\&+&\left.
A_\mu^yA_\rho^z S_\sigma^x(p_\nu( x_1-1)+q_\nu x_2)+
A_\mu^yA_\nu^z S_\sigma^x(p_\rho (x_1-1)+q_\rho(x_2-1))\right)\nonumber\\
&\times& F(p,q,x_1,x_2;m_i)
+{{\cal O}}(S^2)+{{\cal O}}(A^3)
\label{ae}\end{aligned}$$ with $$\begin{aligned}
F(p,q,x_1,x_2;m_i)=\left(-m_i^2+p^2(x_1-x_1^2)
+2pq(x_2-2x_1x_2)+q^2(x_2-x_2^2)\right)^{-1}\end{aligned}$$ where $d\tilde p=d^D p \mu^{\epsilon}/{(2\pi)^D}$ and ${{\cal O}}(S^2)$, ${{\cal O}}(A^3)$ denote terms with two or more torsion fields and three or more photon fields respectively. As can be easily seen, this contribution to the effective action is finite. Therefore it is possible to expand the function $F$ in powers of ${\cal K}^2/m_i^2$, where ${\cal K}$ denotes generically the external momenta. To lowest order we find: $$\begin{aligned}
F(p,q,x_1,x_2;m_i)=-\frac{1}{m_i^2}\left(1
+{{\cal O}}\left(\frac{{\cal K}^2}{m_i^2}\right)\right)\end{aligned}$$ In this way, we can perform explicitly the integrals in the Feynman parameters $x_1$ and $x_2$ in (\[ae\]) order by order, so that we obtain a local expansion for the effective lagrangian, whose lowest order is given by: $$\begin{aligned}
{\cal
L}_{eff}=-\frac{1}{4}F_{\mu\nu}F^{\mu\nu}
-\frac{\alpha}{24\pi}\left(\sum_i Q^2_i\right)
\epsilon^{\mu\nu\alpha\beta}F_{\mu\nu}A_{\alpha}S_{\beta}+hdt
\label{eff}\end{aligned}$$ where $\alpha$ is fine structure constant and $hdt$ stands for the higher derivative terms coming from the higher orders in the expansion of the function $F$. At this point it is important to stress that, as far as this model is not anomalous [@[4]], the effective action defined in (\[effa\]) is gauge invariant. The higher derivative terms in (\[eff\]) can be neglected at long distances, but are needed to preserve the gauge invariance of the whole effective lagrangian. Note that, as discussed above, the second term in the r.h.s. of (\[eff\]) alone is not gauge invariant unless $S_\mu$ were the gradient of some new scalar function [@[2]].
Thus from the Feynman diagram in Fig.1 we have found the appropriate term in the lagrangian in an invariant manner without the introduction of any new scalar field $\phi$, as can be observed by the simple identification $$\begin{aligned}
\Lambda_s^{-1}s_{\mu}=-\frac{\alpha }{6\pi }\left(\sum_i Q^2_i\right)S_{\mu}\end{aligned}$$ For example, by considering the matter content of the Standard Model we have $\sum_i
Q^2_i=N_f(1+N_c(4/9+1/9))$ which for three families $(N_f=3)$ and three colors ($N_c=3$) equals $8$. Thus by assuming an space-like $S_{\mu}$ field ($S_{\mu}=(0, \vec{S})$), the required module for $\vec{S}$ to explain the polarization effect observed by Nodland and Ralston should be something about $10^{-30}eV$.
Concerning the origin of the torsion field, as commented before, in most of theories of gravitation the affine connection and the vielbein (which is related with the metric tensor), are considered as independent entities and thus torsion appears in a natural way. If the description provided here for the Nodland and Ralston effect were appropriate, it could be the first indication of the presence of torsion at cosmological scales. From the point of view of a quantum field theory for torsion, this probably requires that the $S_\mu$ field is masless or having a vacuum expectation value. This could be in contradiction with the usual assumptions of low-energy effective quantum gravity in which the torsion field is supposed to have a mass of the order of Planck mass [@[5]]. In spite of that and provided that this new effect is confirmed, we really believe that this is the most economical explanation of the finding by Nodland-Ralston since it does not require the introduction of new fields, apart from those appearing in the Standard Model and our current description of classical gravity.
We are grateful to B. Nodland for his comments to the preliminary version of this paper. This work has been supported in part by the Ministerio de Educación y Ciencia (Spain) (CICYT AEN96-1634).
B. Nodland and J.P. Ralston, [*Phys. Rev. Lett.*]{} [**78**]{} 3043, (1997)
D.J. Eisenstein and E.F. Bunn, astro-ph/9704247; S.M. Carroll and G.B. Field, astro-ph/9704263; J.P. Leahy, astro-ph/9704285; J.F.C. Wardle, R.A. Perley and M.H. Cohen, astro-ph/9705142; T.J. Loredo, E.E. Flanagan and I.M. Wasserman, astro-ph/9706258 B. Nodland, J.P. Ralston, astro-ph/9705190; astro-ph/9706126 F. W. Hehl, P. von der Heyde, G. D. Kerlick and J. M. Nester, [*Rev. Mod. Phys.*]{} [**48**]{}, (1976), 393 A. Dobado and A.L. Maroto, [*Phys. Rev.*]{} [**D54**]{} (1996) 5185 V. De Sabbata and M. Gasperini, [*Phys. Lett.*]{} [**83A**]{}, 115 (1981) S.M. Carroll and G.B. Field, [*Phys. Rev. D*]{} [**50**]{} (1994) 3867; R. T. Hammond, [*Phys. Rev. D*]{} [**52**]{} (1995) 6918
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.